Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!pacbell.com!ucsd!qualcom.qualcomm.com!cancun.qualcomm.com!rdippold
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: Re: Borland
Message-ID: <1991Mar27.211639.282@qualcomm.com>
Date: 27 Mar 91 21:16:39 GMT
References: <27645@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> <1991Mar26.212334.3100@sj.ate.slb.com>
Sender: news@qualcomm.com
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Lines: 20

In article <1991Mar26.212334.3100@sj.ate.slb.com> poffen@SunOS (Russ Poffenberger) writes:
>In article <27645@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> jdb@reef.cis.ufl.edu (Brian K. W. Hook) writes:
>>
>>Is it just me or is Borland royally shafting C developers?  I mean, we have
>>TP for Windows (which INCLUDES Windows classes!), we have TP 6.0 with
>>ObjectVision, and we have ObjectVision....all include GUI classes.  And now
>>we have BC++, which is highly popular, with NO GUI classes built in.  I
>>feel like we're getting ripped.
>>
>>Then again, maybe I just don't want to code in Pascal and am whining....
>>
>
>Well, considering that uSoft's alternative costs twice as much, it is not a bad
>deal.

Especially when you can take the money you would have paid Borland for those
classes and get a real Windows class library.  There are pleny of them out
there.  I imagine that's why they weren't included...  If you want them
you can get them, and Borland didn't want to stomp on any of those companies
if they didn't have to.