Borland Builder studio 2006

This is a discussion on Borland Builder studio 2006 within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; I know this is around now, but should i get it because it is more updated than the two IDEs ...

  1. #1
    Its hard... But im here swgh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,475

    Borland Builder studio 2006

    I know this is around now, but should i get it because it is more updated than the two IDEs i have which are DevC++ 4.992 and MSCVC++2003.net.

    Is it ok to keep my two IDE's and not waste money on Borlands new gem?
    I am worried I may be missing out on new features

  2. #2
    Registered User jlou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,088
    If you have VC++ 2003, what more do you need?

  3. #3
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,438
    > If you have VC++ 2003, what more do you need?

    VC++ 2005?

    Borland Builder Studio 2006 is a better option to VS 2003. I messed with it for a couple of days and I was very impressed. Particularly the IDE. My opinion is it surpasses by far VS 2005. But the thing most people complain about the Borland Builder series is the compiler. It seems Borland keeps insisting on not supporting some pretty straightforward ISO C++ that most other compilers do. But I wouldn't know first hand. I just toyed with it for a couple of days.

    Regardless, the Builder 2006 or MSVC++ 2005 are far better options that VC++ 2003.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  4. #4
    Registered User jlou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,088
    What specifically was impressive about the Borland IDE that is more important than the compiler issues?

    What specifically about VC++ 2005 is worth paying for the standard version if you already own 2003?

  5. #5
    The Right Honourable psychopath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Where circles begin.
    Posts
    1,070
    Quote Originally Posted by jlou
    What specifically about VC++ 2005 is worth paying for the standard version
    Nothing. That's why most people have the express edition.
    Memorial University of Newfoundland
    Computer Science

    Mac and OpenGL evangelist.

  6. #6
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,438
    > What specifically was impressive about the Borland IDE that is more important than the compiler issues?

    It's not compiler issues. It's not that Borland's compiler is useless. It's as good as any other implementation. If you want we can start a debate on compilers adherence to the standard on another thread. And you will be in dismay at the fact... no compiler is fully compliant. So... it's all in how you want to code your code.

    > What specifically about VC++ 2005 is worth paying for the standard version if you already own 2003?

    Echo psychopath. But if I were to name two features that the payed MSVS 2005 brings that really are a major improvement over the payed 2003 version that would be:

    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  7. #7
    Registered User jlou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,088
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F.
    > What specifically was impressive about the Borland IDE that is more important than the compiler issues?

    It's not compiler issues. It's not that Borland's compiler is useless. It's as good as any other implementation. If you want we can start a debate on compilers adherence to the standard on another thread. And you will be in dismay at the fact... no compiler is fully compliant. So... it's all in how you want to code your code.
    I don't understand what you are saying here, or how it applies to the conversation. You basically said yourself that the knock against Borland is that its compiler is not as compliant as other modern compilers. That is a reason to use VC++ 2003 over Borland. My question was and still is, what specific things about the Borland IDE are enough to outweigh the advantage that VC++ 2003 has in compiler compliance?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F.
    > What specifically about VC++ 2005 is worth paying for the standard version if you already own 2003?

    Echo psychopath. But if I were to name two features that the payed MSVS 2005 brings that really are a major improvement over the payed 2003 version that would be:

    So if one was considering the use of VC++ 2003 for free (because they already own it) or purchasing VC++ 2005, you would recommend spending the money on 2005 simply for those features?

    Of course the express edition of 2005 is an option. The OP was asking whether money should be spent (or wasted) on the new Borland IDE so I'd expect that it wouldn't be difficult to download and try the Express IDE if he or she was so inclined. Actually paying for something in order to try it is usually a big enough obstacle to warrant research into whether it would be worth the money.

    By the way, mine were honest questions. Feel free to simply answer them rather than infer sarcasm or hostility.

  8. #8
    The Right Honourable psychopath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Where circles begin.
    Posts
    1,070
    Quote Originally Posted by jlou
    Feel free to simply answer them rather than infer sarcasm or hostility.
    Sarcasm and hostility is more fun.
    Memorial University of Newfoundland
    Computer Science

    Mac and OpenGL evangelist.

  9. #9
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,438
    > So if one was considering the use of VC++ 2003 for free (because they already own it) or purchasing VC++ 2005, you would recommend spending the money on 2005 simply for those features?

    No. I was only comparing payed versions. "[...] if I were to name two features that the payed MSVS 2005 brings that really are a major improvement over the payed 2003 version [...]"


    > I don't understand what you are saying here, or how it applies to the conversation. You basically said yourself that the knock against Borland is that its compiler is not as compliant as other modern compilers. That is a reason to use VC++ 2003 over Borland.

    Why?
    Surely a better adherence to the ISO guidelines is a necessity if one wants to develop portable code. But it really mattters little if that is not the case. It then becomes mostly a matter of taste. I don't kow what's the OP aims. All I know is that he basically asks for a comparison between C++ Builder 2006 and VS C++ 2003.

    And what I said was that the IDE is better. Borland Builder as a RAD tool for windows development is superior to MS 2003 in my opinion. It's faster to design and develop with. However there's compiler considerations. I named what I heard. That was the scope of my reply.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  10. #10
    Registered User jlou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,088
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F.
    > So if one was considering the use of VC++ 2003 for free (because they already own it) or purchasing VC++ 2005, you would recommend spending the money on 2005 simply for those features?

    No. I was only comparing payed versions. "[...] if I were to name two features that the payed MSVS 2005 brings that really are a major improvement over the payed 2003 version [...]"
    The OP already owns 2003. Therefore there would have to be sufficient benefits to 2005 to warrant purchasing it.

    As for the rest of your reply, I don't know how to put it more simply. The OP wants to know whether he or she should pay for Borland when he already has VC++ 2003 and Dev-C++.

    A less compliant compiler is an actual, specific reason to not pay for Borland 2006. You suggested that Borland was the better option. That means that you think that something about Borland makes it better than VC++ 2003, and is enough to outweigh the compiler benefit and the extra cost (unless you just missed the extra cost part). To best assist the OP with the question at hand, I would just like you to clarify what specifically you are referring to. If "the IDE is better" and "it's faster to design and develop with" after messing with it for a couple of days is all you've got, that's fine. That wouldn't convince me, though, which is why I'm trying to get you to expand on your statements to better answer the question.

  11. #11
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,438
    I really don't feel like I have to justify my answer more than I already did jlou. If anyone agrees they surely will pick from where I left since I made it perfectly clear my experience with Borland was very limited. I thought that would work as a good disclaimer. Obviously not.

    Regardless, sticking to Visual Studio 2003 is a bad option. Payed or not. It's been replaced by 2005 and you can't expect Microsoft to provide any support for 2003 for much longer.

    I'm done with this thread.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  12. #12
    Anti-Poster
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    1,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F.
    I've used both of these. Are they worth paying for? Depends. For my hobby programming, no; the express version works just fine. For professional programming, absolutely. The refactoring features alone are wonderful.
    If I did your homework for you, then you might pass your class without learning how to write a program like this. Then you might graduate and get your degree without learning how to write a program like this. You might become a professional programmer without knowing how to write a program like this. Someday you might work on a project with me without knowing how to write a program like this. Then I would have to do you serious bodily harm. - Jack Klein

  13. #13
    Registered User jlou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,088
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F.
    I really don't feel like I have to justify my answer more than I already did jlou. If anyone agrees they surely will pick from where I left since I made it perfectly clear my experience with Borland was very limited. I thought that would work as a good disclaimer. Obviously not.

    Regardless, sticking to Visual Studio 2003 is a bad option. Payed or not. It's been replaced by 2005 and you can't expect Microsoft to provide any support for 2003 for much longer.

    I'm done with this thread.
    Like I said before, that's fine. I'm just trying to get more information out there for the OP. I haven't heard of a good reason to spend money on a switch to Borland. Personally, I expect 2003 to be in widespread use for at least a few more years, especially considering how many people still use 6.0. So that's where I'd make my decision.

  14. #14
    Its hard... But im here swgh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,475
    Hey I did not want to begin a debate on the issue. I have read all your replys and I thank you all for your time in answering my question. I think I will stick with 2003 for now, see where development takes me, and if need be, I may get 2005 as it seems ( based on Mario's advice ) to be a much better IDE and compiler system than Borland. I am in no way dissing borland, as they have made some fine products along the years. Esecially the C language which i had when i was at school.

    Again, sorry to begin such a heated debate between Mario and Jlou.

    Thanks for your replys.

  15. #15
    Registered User Rennor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    45
    Borland has allways been superior when it comes to developing Microsoft Windows desktop applications. It's "more RAD" than MS tools have been. Ofcourse user experience will change this; the tool you use becomes more efficient in your hands by using it.

    BCB++ 3.0 back in its glory days was not recommended for complex and large windows applications since it struck itself into host of compiler related problems and bugs, can't recall exactly what but our corporation moved to MS VC because of those problems. It is only my belief that Borland learned from those mistakes they did. I'd love to try out Borland once again, but now we are too deep in whole range from VC++6.0 to VC++.Net 2005. (though we're also using Borland CodeWright)


    I would like to suggest you try Borland out what you can for free and make up your own decision.
    Or do as you say and stick with 2003 or get 2005.
    My opinion is all these three are good choices, what is best for you depends on you.


    I like to see competition, it's very healthy. Borland has allways been stirring the pot with unique approach and added good share to today software development.

Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. more then 100errors in header
    By hallo007 in forum Windows Programming
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 05-13-2007, 08:26 AM
  2. We Got _DEBUG Errors
    By Tonto in forum Windows Programming
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-22-2006, 04:45 PM
  3. C++ std routines
    By siavoshkc in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 07-28-2006, 12:13 AM
  4. load gif into program
    By willc0de4food in forum Windows Programming
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 01-11-2006, 09:43 AM
  5. Learning OpenGL
    By HQSneaker in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-06-2004, 08:57 AM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21