Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
GNOME GUI

Inprise's Kylix To Be Opened? & Gnome Alliance 121

Posted by Hemos from the cool-beans dept.
captaindelphi writes "ZDNet has an interesting article on Kylix that can be found here. While it is short on the details it makes for some interesting news! "Inprise Corp. will announce, at Comdex in Las Vegas this week, plans to release the source code of its Kylix Linux rapid application development tool to the GNOME Foundation" " That's an interesting twist - releasing the code to the Gnome Foundation - but the addition of a lot of Gnome support to Kylix will stir things up as well.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Inprise's Kylix To Be Opened? More

Inprise's Kylix To Be Opened?

Comments Filter:
  • I asked the same question back in 7th grade math, and I'll probably get slapped verbally, like I did then. What the heck is a Widget?

    Is it the sent of system dialog boxes, like file, open, etc? Is it the cute little icons in the corners of windows for Maximize, Minimize, Restore, Close?

    Mike Warot, Hoosier

  • The article also mentions that Kylix will integrate with bonobo. Perhaps this means that they support QT *and* GTK. The VCL/CLX libraries can be bound to any underlying widget system. Another month of programming and, voila, new widget bindings. And if they change CLX to support GTK, then since the Kylix IDE is written using CLX, Kylix itself will be a GNOME app! Here is a section from Borland's Kylix faq: "Is Kylix an Open Source project? While the Kylix project itself is not being developed in a community Open Source model, it is a top requirement that developers be able to use Kylix to develop both GPL Open Source, and proprietary applications. The details of the Kylix open source project are currently under development and will be announced at a later date. The Kylix development team believes strongly in the value of open source and free software (in the FSF sense) and aims to support GPL application development as a clear option in Kylix." Notice the clause that specifies "in the FSF sense". Well, since the FSF doesn't recognize Qt as free software, then it could be argued that Kylix no longer depends on Qt. Either way, we should know by Christmas. I'll take a copy of Kylix in my stocking anytime.
  • Ah Jesus, what are you on? :) Of course I can make a GPL program and sell it to my buddies for $10k, but why the hell would they pay that price when they could get it legally from elsewhere for the price of a blank CD?

    Of course, you're right about the GPL not prohibiting sales, but in a real world, basing a business on that idea is futile. You WILL agree with this, and therefore, you WILL agree that my saying "You can't combine Open Source with selling the same product for thousands of dollars" is indeed NOT "dead wrong".

    *sound of me resting my case* ;)

    --
  • Linux Journal [linuxjournal.com] recently took a poll and KDE [kde.org] is currently the most popular desktop, even though people predicted the death of KDE with the announcement of the GNOME Foundation in August. KDE is still under strong development and the recently released KDE2 looks promising.

    GNOME was started with the express purpose of replacing (killing) KDE, not very admirable goals to begin with. This has been backed up time and time again with the Stallman's attacks against KDE. How can we expect them to work with the entire Linux community's interests at heart when they have been motivated by these petty feuds in the past?

  • You can't combine Open Source (which is a protected term, mind you) with selling the same product for thousands of dollars

    There is nothing mutually exclusive about Open Source and charging for the software... For one, you can capitalize on the fact that the vast majority of people wouldn't know what to do with a source tarball if one it them in the face. People want vendor-certified officially-supported pre-compiled software, and they'll pay dearly for that...

    Say I write a useful GPL utility for Linux. I make the .tar.gz freely available to whoever wants it. But I charge a nominal fee for downloading an .rpm or a .deb; the price might reflect e.g. similarly capable Windows shareware. If people don't want to pay, they are free to figure out how to compile the thing themselves. But do not underestimate the number of consumers who would rather spend a quick $20 than do battle with your configure script... (note also that only my &quotblessed&quot binaries are eligible for tech support/bug tracking...).

  • Thanks for that info. If Kylix can really "morph" into a GTK app, or any other toolkit, that would be seriously cool :)

    Anyway, Qt is GPL now, so if FSF still doesn't recognize Qt as free software, they have a problem I guess ;)
    --
  • That sounds good. Been using delphi since v2, and looking forward to kylix. I'm also curious obout the clx which (if like delphi vcl) should be quite amazing themselves.
  • For those interested in a genuine GPL'd project to provide an IDE for a Pascal compiler, check out The Lazarus Project [freepascal.org].

    One of the reasons we are doing this is because Borland is intending to make Kylix a closed-source compiler and IDE. This is also being done as a cross-platform project (supporting both Windows and Linux through the GTK).

    For my $0.02, I think this is mainly a lot of buzz words and steam to create the impression that they are GPL-friendly. There are some Borland-sponsored projects, such as the JEDI project which incorporate quite a bit of GPL'd code.

    I think that Kylix will be a fantastic tool for people who want to implement a Linux-based application platform with closed-source software (using Linux as the OS... instead of MS-Windows or something else). This should be encouraged in the sense that it does promote the use of Linux as a general platform and will get Linux into "the real world(tm)". For the GNU/Linux purist, however, Kylix will never be GPL'd or free as in speech (such as an RMS-inspired completely free computer system without any closed-source software whatsoever), except as a piece of abandonware from the ruins of Borland. This won't happen soon, if ever.
  • How so? AFAIK Kylix supports KDE/Qt natively, and this whole release-it-to-them-thing is just a cheap way to get GNOME-support, too!
  • There is nothing mutually exclusive about Open Source and charging for the software... For one, you can capitalize on the fact that the vast majority of people wouldn't know what to do with a source tarball if one it them in the face.


    I choose to believe that software developers would know how to install a program, even if it is NOT shrink-wrapped :)


    Say I write a useful GPL utility for Linux. I make the .tar.gz freely available to whoever wants it. But I charge a nominal fee for downloading an .rpm or a .deb



    And the next day, I figure out how to compile your tar.gz, and I make my own set of binary packages which I hand out freely over the net, and CheapBytes even start selling your software on $2 CDs. You'd quite possibly regret basing your business on the sales of that particular piece of software (which Borland arguably is with Kylix)...
    --

  • Early stuff on Kylix makes much of its CLX (component library for X)

    The 'X' in CLX is for "cross-platform", not "X Windows.

    it seems they want to lock us into a single window manager

    Kylix will not lock people into a single window manager.

    -- CP

  • Even in the impossible turn of events that Kylix be GLPed, KDE would benifit significantly more than GNOME, because Kylix is based on Qt and not GTK, and written in C++, not C -- Talk of opening it up for GNOME ;)
    There have been a few responses to other parts of your post so I'll stick to the "written in C++" part. I use Delphi (through 3 versions now) and I have attended a recent Borland Developer's conference. The Delphi IDE is written in Object Pascal (OP) and developed in the Delphi IDE. Most of the included libraries (the VCL/CLX) are written in OP (some of the database stuff is in C++). I'm not sure about the compiler, it might be written in C++ (or C).

    I only attended a few of the many Kylix sessions at the Borland Developer's conference so I could be wrong but, its my understanding that Kylix is also written in OP. There will be a thin library that will sit between the the Visual CLX library (Object Pascal) and the Qt widgets (C++). As I understood it, this thin library could theoretically allow other programming languages access to the Qt widgets.

  • Yup if you yell I WILL agree. I don't think so the key here is to add value to your product so that buying it from you becomes a better option. For example if a company had a database that they sell for megabucks and at the same time are giving away a certain level of support for this product for free. Now say they see the light and GPL the database. Now you are right no one would pay for the official copy of the database unless for example the support was priced on the free copies in such a way that it make more sense to buy a copy or if say paid support is cheaper for people who buy the software. Or say you throw in tools and information for free to people to who buy it. Or say you produce such a great product and GPL it and provide such great service that people are willing to pay for it in order to encourage this kind of thing. It is called quality and yes it can be done. It is called support. Yes you would have to work very hard and be really good to make it work but I think this is a good thing.
  • that was a troll BTW... didn't you notice the constipation in monkeys part?
  • CLX has been open source for 15 years, and it is available here [sunsite.org.uk]. CLX is the CommonLisp X interface, a widely used low-level toolkit for interfacing Lisp programs to X11.

    This is, incidentally, the first Google result that pops up for CLX. I wish vendors would at least do a websearch before picking a name for a product. In this case, it's particularly confusing because both CLX and Borland's toolkit are about interfacing programs to window systems.

    As for the announcement itself, let's wait and see what actually happens. This could be little more than the source code Microsoft includes with MSDN, which is largely useless to anybody who hasn't also bought their product.

  • 2. C or C++ may be great for writing device drivers and filters, but for doing database apps? C'mon! Delphi's way of doing databases gives you the same easy programming as some of the crappy database-oriented scripting languages (paradox, powerbuilder) with fully compiled (and optimized) native code.

    Actually, I'm a C++ developer, and we do quite a bit of DB access from our C++ code. To be quite honest, the Borland Database Engine (which is the only thing I can think of to which you might be referring) is quite possibly the worst DB interface I've ever used. The idea is nice, but is a slow, HUGE hog. In our Builder apps, we rolled our own ODBC and OCI classes, written entirely in C++, that work quite well. We even use the OCI stuff under Linux, so we have a usable, portable, C++ database API. It's quite nice.

    Don't get me wrong. I started with Delphi, and, realizing that not many people are gonna want Object Pascal programmers (thought there are a few), quickly switched to C++ as soon as Builder was available. Now I code in the same language, no matter which OS I'm using.
  • The BDE is shit, even Borland recognizes that.

    I remember reading somewhere, in one of the many "Kylix is coming!" articles, that CLX will include a new, sane db library.

    That is about the only thing Delphi/C++Builder screwed up on. Hopefully Borland will come through on their promise and make the CLX db lib small, fast, and usable.
  • I just got back from a mini-Borcon not too long ago, and I was under the impression that as far as licenscing goes:

    IDE/Compiler: Probably a proprietary license. They didn't seem too interested in releasing the source to the compiler or the IDE.

    GUI apps: Trying their hardest w/ the licenscing and source distribution to a) make sure the libraries remain standard and under Borland's control, and b) the end-user can still release their programs under the GPL if they wish.

    Kernel apps: Use GCC. Delphi/CPPB are for GUI. While you could (probably) use them for command line tools, you stand a snowball's chance in hell of getting your Delphi/CPBB program included in the kernel. They don't want to go in the kernel. They want a standard set of widgets that users can hook into and write programs for.


    I was very impressed w/ the Kylix demo. In fact, w/ themes, you have more control over the GUI than you do in Windows. It is very slick. DB support is pretty solid (they configured and compiled a sample database viewer from scratch in under three minutes). I know the developers working w/ Nevrona to design the new Borland internet components (derived from Winshoes) and they're shaping up nicely (they are open source, but probably not GPL). In fact, in the whole presentation, I only saw three bugs: 1 IDE AV, 1 diagram tab that wasn't ported yet, and a case-sensitivity problem (unit named Unit1, saved in unit1.pas).

    As far as this being a coup, maybe your avg. Linux user won't jump on this but you can bet IT shops will. Borland's JBuilder is already #1 Java IDE and VB is losing market share to Delphi. Delphi is going cross-platform (they seemed to suggest Mac as being the next target when rattling off about Qt support). Speaking of Qt, there was even talk of purchasing TrollTech in the not-so-distant future.

    The primary reason Windows is #1 is because of software availability. Software is available because Windows has better dev tools than *n?x. The way I see it, Kylix is good news for everybody.
    ---
  • Do you even know what a monkey is? and do you spank it regularly?
  • you should now better than that... a spell checker will knot pick up those kind of errors
  • RMS stepped up and made a gesture of goodwill, publically issuing a legal forgiveness for any infringements on FSF copyrights they might have commited

    But KDE used no FSF code. There was nothing for Stallman to forgive. I have a hard time believing that he didn't know it. It would be like me making an announcement to the world at large that I forgave RMS for beating me as a child. He didn't do it, I know he didn't do it, and he would be fully justified in getting angry over my announcement. The situation is no different. Stallman accused KDE of illegal activities then forgave them for it.

    No, it was always intended to be free. However, the licensing it was offered under was inconsistent - KDE code was released under the GPL, yet depended on the QT libraries released under the QPL, a license which is not compatible with the GPL.

    None of this made KDE unfree, any more than djcpp is unfree because it depends on closed Window libraries. Every byte of KDE code was and is 100% Free Software by the commonly accepted definition of Free Software. It was 100% free to use. 100% free to copy. 100% free to redistribute. 100% free to modify. 100% free to distribute modifications. That it linked with Qt may have been problematic, but in way diminished its Free-ness.

    There's a reason there is a GTKStep but no QTStep.

    I will forgive :-) you for your ignorance. I, myself, personally, wrote StepStyle, a Qt widget theme based on the NeXT look and feel. Mosfet wrote KStep, a Qt widget theme based on the NeXT look and feel. That's two! Look before you leap.

    Forget about writing KDE code if you don't subscribe to the C++ religion also.

    It's not a religion, it's a coding preference. I'm not losing sleep over the lack of a Babbage wrapper for Qt. I'll let the Babbage guys worry about it. If they want a Babbage wrapper, it's up to them to write it. This is Open Source (Free Software for those of you living in Rio Linda), so no one is going to hold your hand. Go do it yourself. Just like in the GTK+ world (or do you think those language wrappers miraculously fall out of the sky). Trolltech has enough to do without hiring 100 new developers to port the interface to a 100 different languages.
  • With regards to KDE: Kylix will first appear for KDE, the reason Borland is giving the source to the Gnome Foundation is to try to make Kylix ready for Gnome development also.

    And as a user, you can as always mix KDE and Gnome apps. They won't look exactly the same, though.

  • ...for people to quit saying this or that is "desperately" needed. Why do I say this? Look at your comment. It implies that there's nothing in the way of RAD tools for Linux.

    There are already RAD tools out for Linux.

    JBuilder.
    Forte.
    VisualAge Java.
    Visual TCL.
    BigForth/Minos.
    Phoenix Basic.
    XBasic.
    (And many others out there- I just remember these off the top of my head.)

    Yes, Delphi/C++ Builder would be MOST welcome as an addition to the Linux community's available options. One, that if Delphi came available, I'd buy a copy- I'm a Delphi fan, after all...

    Does Linux "desperately" need RAD tools? No. It HAS them already.
  • This is oftopic, but anyway.

    A widget is a graphical thingy. A button is a widget. So is a Text edit box, or a checkbox, a list box, etc. So if you have ever made a gui, most of the things that you threw around were widgets.

    Here's the jargon file entry:

    widget: n. 1. A meta-thing. Used to stand for a real object in didactic examples (especially database tutorials). Legend has it that the original widgets were holders for buggy whips. "But suppose the parts list for a widget has 52 entries...."

    2. [poss. evoking `window gadget'] A user interface object in X graphical user interfaces.
  • Ok, I'm answering my own question....

    According to the glossary at Red-Hat, it's "A standardized on-screen representation of a control that may be manipulated by the user. Scroll bars, buttons, and text boxes are all examples of widgets"

    Ok, so why should a different widget (control) cause any OS problems? It worst it should cause confusion with the user, and/or crash the application.

    Mike Warot, Hoosier

  • Re:Pay Attention! (Score:3)

    by Halo1 ( 136547 ) on Monday November 13, 2000 @06:05AM (#627411)
    Combine it with the Free Pascal Compiler [freepascal.org] and you should have a complete open source solution (iff the Kylix IDE indeed gets open sourced)

    --

  • Kylix has been announced [borland.com] by Borland as one of their top new commercial products and they put quite a lot of their resources into it so it is pretty much impossible to release it all free (whatever free means).

    However, in the past, Borland has prooved their will to focus on the needs of the Linux and also Open Source community by

    • asking [cnn.com] the communities themselves for their needs
    • using the answers to help develop Kylix project components
    • releasing parts of their work (C++ compiler) as free software
    • being the first company which is putting many resources into a Linux RAD tool - which is urgently needed but is also a business risk: Who knows if we, the free / Open Source / Linux people, will buy it?

    It would be really unfair to trash Borland just because they try to make money out of software development or because they don't release it all as free. Instead we should be happy for every part they might possibly release as free.

    (I'm not working for Borland nor do I have any releation to them or something - except for being their customer.)

  • Kylix Libraries (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    The libraries for Kylix will be open-sourced
  • Why not ?

    They could go the troll tech way and release under GPL AND a commercial licence, as run times need to embed VCL objects if you are developping a GPL program then you can go for the GPL version if you want to develop a closed source program, fine ! then you need the Commercial version I fnd this very fair, and wouldn't hesitate a second to buy a commercial version if I was in the later case. Borland IDE are EXCELLENT ! and worth the money you put in them.

  • How nice to see another Bischoff that has nothing to do (I hope) with pro wrestling! Rick Bischoff

  • Well, since the FSF doesn't recognize Qt as free software

    The FSF has recognized Qt as free software since 1999 and after Qt 2.2 was released under GPL this fall, the FSF has not had any problems concerning it's license.
  • Kylix is an IDE, not a compiler.

    Huh? Kylix is the code name for the entire project. Kylix is not just an IDE.

    If you've used any of Borland's similar products (Delphi or C++Builder), you'd know that the IDE is pretty well integrated with the compiler; this isn't a simple "shell out to a command-line compiler" operation.

    Besides, any outside compiler/linker/etc would be clueless about handling the supplementary files used by Delphi/C++Builder (form files, for example).

    -- CP
  • Okay, it's a short comment, but it should be modded up a bit more. It's from a Borland developer, and it actually answers a great deal of the questions asked in other posts to this story.

    CLX - that's basically the VCL, right (give or take)? Will this be dual-licensed, or just GPL?
  • they will come. -- Honestly, I would like to see this become both a profitable adventure for Borland -- and a flame free application development fest for the Linux world.
  • See this is the problem we are not talking about the same thing you are talking about savvy geeks who know that they do not need to have their handheld and do not care if their is anything behind it. I ,and I suspect the other posters, are talking about managers who don't know C from Perl the kind of people who really make these purchases . This simple fact is these people will pay through the nose for support and will in many cases do *anything* to ensure that they will have a phone number to call and someone on the other end who has the same piece of software running and acces to a great big database of info on that software. For example at the last place I worked they had a intranet server running IIS. I was allowed to mirror it on a Debian box with Apache while the M$ box kept crashing every couple of days down for a average of 10 to 20 minutes my mirror had uptime of about 200 days when I left and AFAIK is still up and running. The still would not switch. Why? "Well when it does go down who is going to support it?" You see it did not matter that I had been supporting it and kicking the IIS boxes ass for over 200 days it only mattered to them that they had a phone number and someone to call when the M$ bo went down. This is typical. These are PHBs not geeks. This is why you are wrong.
  • So is there going to be two IDE's, one for KDE name Kylix and one for Gnome named Gylix? ;)

  • Don't try to say that Free Pascal is the same thing, because it isn't.
    I tried the Free Pascal compiler about a year ago (Win32 version 0.99.10) and I was not impressed. It took forever to compile (over a minute for a small console program). Even worse, the generated executable was 5 times the size of the one generated by Delphi! I didn't profile the generated code, so I can't comment on how fast it was.
  • This seems fair to me. In fact their intention is to do exactly thing as troll tech with QT. I would have prefered if they had open sourced the IDE and the compiler too, but this is better than nothing and would probably contribute to bring VCL in the center of free software development.
  • Jbuilder 4 Foundation has recently been released, and can be downloaded here:

    http://www.inprise.com/jbuilder/founda tio n/ [inprise.com]
  • Kylix is comprised of a Compiler, a class library (CLX), and an IDE built upon that class library.

    So what if CLX is Open Sourced, VCL has always been available in source form. You might still have to shell out $500 (or thereabouts) to buy the Pro version. If so this would be business as Usual.

    Fine by me as a shareholder and a Developer that will happily shell out $3K for the all singing all dancing version.

    If they OS the IDE, then even better we get the chance to see many languages hosted into the Delphi IDE.

    IMO, I don't think they will OpenSource the Compiler. But I would be standing in that long line to see that source code, I mean have you seen that thing chew through code, it runs like a scalded cat!

    As for people who say they wouldn't buy it unless it was free ... hmmmm !!!!

  • Java: JBuilder (by Borland), Forte, VisualAge Java

    Have you ever *tried* Phoenix Basic?! Yuck!

    It's pointless posting a long of list of tools that *claim* to be RAD tools. Except for the Java tools you listed - which do not compile to native code, BTW - I am not aware of any one working RAD tool on Linux.
  • Down the tubes? Really? Looked at their financials [borland.com] lately?
  • 2000-11-09 15:32:41 "Inprise" now back to "Borland" again (articles,tech) (rejected)

    Oh! Is poor little Alex feeling rejected?

    __________________


  • I say we are getting something. I don't care if it's free, nor I don't care it's close source but we have to stop wanting free open source stuff order to be able to get more of what we want. No I don't want to start paying for everything I get under Linux, but I just want to be able to have more companies and more software make it to this platform. With more apps comes games with more games come more users. We will still have open source apps and so on.

    I want Linux to not just to be for the programs/nerds but I also want it to be for normal every day people as well. It hurts to see my friend computer with Windows ME crash but he don't know no better, rebooting or hitting the power button is normal to him. Hell for a nice Windows OS(Windows 2K) that don't crash alot cost over $200. I will be one of those people that will pay for some software to make the community better then what it is. I will pay for games and apps if that's what it takes to get companies to start developing for this platform. That's all I have to say, yes I'm open up to be flamed now. So go right ahead... I just said what was on my mind that's all.

  • Amen (Score:1)

    by Malor ( 3658 )
    Delphi is most certainly worth paying for. While I didn't upgrade to the later versions (they were mostly going in a direction that didn't appeal to me), I spent quite a bit of money on it through version 3.

    I plan to drop $$$ on this one the instant it ships. I have no argument against paying for good software .. and Delphi is GREAT software. If they can do even 75% as well under Linux as they did under Windows, it'll be worth every penny.

    Linux needs this kind of app desperately, and I urge any of you with the financial wherewithal to pay for it as well, if it suits your needs.

    For the windows version, $700 was entirely reasonable. The tool is amazing. I consider the $99 version to be an absolute steal.

  • Problem is, GNOME's proprietary CORBA extensions do make it harder than necessary to interact with other ORBs.

  • What is Kylix? (Score:5)

    by fm6 ( 162816 ) on Monday November 13, 2000 @04:16PM (#627432) Homepage Journal
    Disclaimer: Like DaBudda, I work for Borland.

    Secondary disclaimer: I can't prove I work for Borland, but in a couple days it will be a moot point.

    Two issues at hand: (a) What's is Kylix? (b) Will Kylix be Open Source? I can't answer these in detail, because I actually take my nondisclosure agreement seriously, even a few days before the info goes public. (For me, it's not so much a legal issue as an ethical issue.) But I think I can clear a few things up.

    What is Kylix? The answer to that keeps changing. When I was hired (early this year), there was no product called Kylix, and no plans for one. What we had "Project Kylix" (complete with T shirt), a scheme to extend the Delphi/C++Builder product line into the Linux world. This project went through many changes, but at that time, the basic idea was to port various development apps, including the IDE and compiler, to Linux. A cross platform version of the VCL (Visual Component Library; the cross platform version is now called CLX) would also be written. Existing software would be extended to support CLX (in addition to the VCL), but the new Linux software would support CLX only.

    Sidebar: this strategy is meant to leverage a little known fact: there is a lot of Delphi and C++Builder code out there. (This is no suprise to thousands of programmers who use these products every day. But the rest of the world -- including me, before I came here -- is under the delusion the Delphi and C++Builder are more or less dead. Running the VCL Scanner [inprise.com] will demonstrate how untrue this is.) CLX is designed to minimize the cost of modifying Windows-VCL software so that it becomes Windows-Linux-CLX software.

    Now, I'm not giving anything away when I disclose that there has been a slight change in plans. There will actually be a product called Kylix. (All the name recognition was too good to pass up.) I'm gonna honor my NDA and withhold the specifics of this product. But any intelligent person should be able to figure out what "Kylix" will be. The rest of you will know later this week.

    Now, the open source issue. I can't disclose specifics, but Borland's strategy should be obvious. On the one hand, we need to contribute to the Free (RMS "Free", not Budweiser "Free") software pool -- this is enlightened self-interest. On the other hand, we don't sell hardware, and our revenues from consulting are limited. If we can't keep some of our source private, we have no income. Again, an intelligent person should be able to figure out what we plan to give away.

    One complication is that we've unwittingly involved ourselves in the KDE versus GNOME wars. Kylix was never conceived as a desktop-specific product. Unfortunately, the decision to base CLX on Qt was interpreted in some quarters as an alignment with the KDE camp. (Possibly the abortive merger with Corel, which is very KDE-involved, also contributed.) With Sun et al. leaping on the GNOME bandwagon, this Looks Bad. So upper management is making the most of Kylix's interoperability with GNOME, and our possible plans to provide future GNOME support. (And, of course, minimizing future plans for KDE support!) Which, together with our limited open-sourcing, seems to have been lept upon and overblown by ZDNet.

    __________________

  • Without any great fanfare (and the only public announcement that I know of was on the Borland newsgroups hosted on their own servers), the Inprise Corporation very quietly acknowledged the underwhelming acceptance of the name "Inprise", and officially changed the name of the corporation to "Borland". This happened around the end of October.
  • I think you might be missing the point of the GPL.

    IANAL but I understood the GPL allowed charging for binaries. I thought that it simply insisted that source code for the software be made available to the customer on demand, ie available to people who paid for it.

    Not to say that you can't give it away to anyone, but the GPL only INSISTS on giving source code to at LEAST paying customers. So even if the whole system was GPL, they could still charge you in the first place before they needed to give you the code.

    (But of course under the GPL, I could buy a copy and then redistribute to all my friends for nothing).

  • Are they intending to make money on the Object Pascal compiler alone?

  • Does that mean free as in beer? (Score:3)

    by deefer ( 82630 ) on Monday November 13, 2000 @05:40AM (#627436) Homepage
    Because, despite making tools that frankly kick anything MS had delivered for developing in Windows, Borland still are going down the tubes, IMHO.
    And it's a shame. Ever used Delphi or C++ Builder? They rock. None of this pissing about with message pumps or maps, just get in there and _write your code_. If you want to do low down and nasty stuff, you can, with a minimum of effort. And the compiler spits out some very tight code. MS stole some Borland people a while back, but Borland still have a keen competitive edge.BR I thought Kylix was about to resurrect Borland's finances, but if they release this as free beer, it will be great for the OSS people, but suicide for Borland. Don't get me wrong, I love free beer as much as the next man, but I _would_ shell out for Kylix as I trust Borland to bring some serious quality tools to Linux. And the ease of use of Delphi / C++ Builder will bring many, many Win32 programmers across. The Bearded Gurus amongst you may not want this, but even a Win32 coder brings another pair of eyes to see those bugs...

    Strong data typing is for those with weak minds.

  • Well if MS "swiped anything cool" from a GPLed application, wouldn't that mean that the MS app would need to be GPLed as well?

    Also, if the Java language became GPLed, would that mean that any java programs would need to be GPL also (after all, arn't all java programs linked to the main java classes and essentially derivative works??)

  • I don't think KDE is dying. Just because the news Kylix will open the source to GNOME, then KDE is dying. Smart conclusion, hah? There are a lot of KDE developer out there who doesn't care about this desktop war bullshit, GNOME foundation etc. And what are they doing? Keep producing outstanding codes and products that thousands of peoples using and adoring it for FREE. And guess what? these users don't even care about FSF or GPL licences. What really matter for them, KDE is out there and you can get it for free as a beer. And I believe will continue that way no matter happen to GNOME projects. But off course there are those some trolls who just don't have any contributions to anything important and keep their dreaming that KDE is doomed. Keep trying...
  • Actually Borlan's Kylix works with both and first it supported KDE.
  • GNOME is attractive to Inprise/Borland because of some of the design decisions that were made for the GNOME component model. Inprise/Borland have been big proponents of CORBA for a long time (just take a look at their web site), and Bonobo's use of CORBA makes it very attractive.

    CORBA as used by GNOME is C-only (ORBit doesn't support other languages). So this probably makes it attractive to masochists (implementing OO interfaces in C is hardly "fun"). But not necessarily to Borland.

    I think the KDE project will have to start looking long and hard at how to make KParts more attractive to developers.

    Kparts isn't a CORBA replacement, DCOP is. And I think it already is attractive to developers, though I would have been happier if they stuck with Mico.

  • This announcement does not mean that Kylix will be released under an Open Source approved license. As far as I can tell, it simply is an effort by Borland to make Kylix interoperable with GNOME. This is a Good Thing(TM) but not the coup d'état that you may think it is.
  • From the FAQ (quoted from you):Kylix open source project are currently under development and will be announced at a later date
    From the article: will announce, at Comdex in Las Vegas this week, plans to release the source code of its Kylix

    What here dont you understand?

  • Calm down.
    It will work on both.
    Or, at least, that's what they say...

    M.

  • CORBA as used by GNOME is C-only (ORBit doesn't support other languages). So this probably makes it attractive to masochists (implementing OO interfaces in C is hardly "fun"). But not necessarily to Borland

    I'm not sure how to put this, but bollocks!

    You're obviously unaware of the ORBit Python and Perl bindings or you wouldn't make such a crazy claim. You should really look before you FUD.

    Secondly implementing OO interfaces in C makes a lot of sense. GObject is a very nice model for programming - it avoids many of the issues with C++.

  • Not being a Linux programmer (or more than a causal user), what does this mean for those using the KDE desktop (or others)? Will Kylix apps not run with KDE, only GNOME? Or will it simply mean they won't "look right" under KDE?

  • From Borland: a definate maybe? (Score:4)

    by blirp ( 147278 ) on Monday November 13, 2000 @05:40AM (#627446)
    Looking at the Kylix FAQ [borland.com] there are som interesting points, seemingly contradictory...

    Under Is Kylix an Open Source project?, Borland states "The details of the Kylix open source project are currently under development and will be announced at a later date."

    But under How will Kylix be priced?, there's the usual "ranges between $99 and $799 for the standard to professional editions and up to $2,500 for the Enterprise editions"

    So this means, yes, no, maybe, and perhaps later?

    Believe it when I see it, perhaps...

    M.

  • They got a financial injection from M$ (probably because they wanted to show some competitors in the compiler field to the DoJ, but I forgive M$ that for once), which now owns 10%

  • Oh really? (Score:3)

    by Ledge Kindred ( 82988 ) on Monday November 13, 2000 @05:42AM (#627448)
    I find this rather hard to swallow considering Kylix is supposed to be a very much commercial product and the compiler likely contains all sorts of "proprietary intellectual property" developed by Borland/Inprise over the last decade or so of compiler development. I'd think they'd want to keep all that stuff closed, if only to keep MS from swiping anything cool from it and using it in their own products, not to mention this is one of their few actual product lines anymore and giving it away would be kind of silly relative to their bottom line.

    -=-=-=-=-

  • Hey look, Kylix itself could be free (core level libraries & compiler), Borland already has a free c++ compiler. But if you need a good visual IDE, drag and drop form design + additional goodies you need to pay. That's very fare.
  • Seriously! Kylix is written with Qt. Of course it can be run under GNOME, and sure adding support for GNOME projects is a plus, but the environment itself IS a Qt application, and looks very much like an average (albeit complex) KDE application.

    Claiming it will be opened up for GNOME is just a petty combination of two of the most popular buzz words these days; Open Source, and GNOME.

    Having said that, of course an Open Source Kylix would be fantastic. However, it's just not going to happen. You can't combine Open Source (which is a protected term, mind you) with selling the same product for thousands of dollars, as they still claim they will (and deserve to, IMO). I think the best case is we'll end up with a quasi-"open source" "Kylix Lite", and the "source" part will probably be the bundled example programs, with the "open" part being that the file permissions is set to 777 ;)

    Even in the impossible turn of events that Kylix be GLPed, KDE would benifit significantly more than GNOME, because Kylix is based on Qt and not GTK, and written in C++, not C -- Talk of opening it up for GNOME ;)

    --
  • Will this mean for the future that Borland Delphi will be available for Linux as well?

    Holding my breath!

  • Why would a widget (control) cause an OS crash? Only an idiot would build graphics into the kernel. I assume the folks that put together the windowing environments for Linux are smarter than that. (At least I hope so). You should be able to NUKE the video card, and still telnet (or SSH) into the box and get work done (perhaps telling it to kill -9 X, and start it over again).

    Am I wrong, has Linux also did the performance over reliablilty tradeoff with video drivers?

    Mike Warot, Hoosier

  • The Truth (Score:5)

    by daBuddha ( 135756 ) on Monday November 13, 2000 @06:28AM (#627453) Homepage
    I work at Borland. In fact, I've been working on these very issues for the company. The CLX libraries will be open-sourced (GPL) and made available with a free (little f) compiler for developing open-source (GPL) applications. The entire IDE will not be open-sourced, and commercial developers will be able to distribute applications under a commercial license. Kylix will support both KDE and GNOME, and Borland intends to support both desktops as much as possible. After all, it's about choice, isn't it?
  • The ZDNet article's headline claims that Kylix is being Open Sourced. The article body, however, does not substantiate that claim. It just says that the source is being released to the GNOME developers.

    First off, there's nothing in the article itself to indicate that GNOME will be free to do anything with the code except look at it and maybe make a few changes to improve interoperability with GNOME.

    Secondly, this isn't anything radically new. Borland has always sold the source for Delphi's component library. They haven't kept it locked up where nobody on the outside could see it

    While this is news (they're now developing strong support for GNOME as well as KDE), it's not necessarily so earth-shattering as the headline might make you think.

  • Re:Juzt buzz (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    If GNOME people have any kind of consistency or self-respect they will reject Kylix because of its KDE/Qt associations. You can't accept non-free software just because it's cool.

    I look forward to a proclamation from RMS urging GNOMEs to reject this blatant attempt to pollute the free software movement with this quasi-open product. Shame, Borland!
  • Opening Kylix sounds like a good idea, but to me it is worth the money to keep it developed and advancing. We would all like things to be free, but the team creating this tool I've been drooling for since hearing about it needs $$$. Although I am sure there are ways of making money off of open source products, borland isn't one of those.

    Also I would be concerned for the overall compatablility of the product. I've been using delphi for 5 years now and love it. Kylix is something I've been looking foward to. I want to develop in linux but really don't have the time to learn all the lower level items in linux. I also am not the biggest C fan. (Note that I have nothing against C/C++, I just prefer pascal) This is a way for me and many other programmers to create more software for linux. Adding support for gnome is a good Idea and will be curious how they actually implement it.

    Overall I see Kylix as a good thing for linux, whether I pay for it or not.
  • GNOME is attractive to Inprise/Borland because of some of the design decisions that were made for the GNOME component model. Inprise/Borland have been big proponents of CORBA for a long time (just take a look at their web site), and Bonobo's use of CORBA makes it very attractive. I think the KDE project will have to start looking long and hard at how to make KParts more attractive to developers. I get the feeling that this was a factor in Sun's decision to target OpenOffice at GNOME rather than KDE in spite of StarOffice's KDE integration features.
  • Open source is not a legally protected term (by trademark law, or anything else). It was ruled to be too descriptive.

    --

  • Whoops, sorry, I should have checked before I posted!

    As it says that it is a WIP and Kylix isn't an actual product name I wonder if they are going to stick with the familiar Windows platform names.

    It seems to me that they are hedging their bets, they don't want to risk the established names of their xBuilder and Delphi product lines just yet.

  • Interestingly, the linked article says nothing about open source other than the title. I'm hoping our Borland employee here has the right story.

    I have a couple of points:

    1. The Free Pascal Compiler is a fully functional object pascal compiler which compiles for multiple OSs and architectures already. If the CLX libraries are open sourced, then (with some tweaking) you have a fully open source way to compile apps. You don't get the pretty IDE, but the Lazarus project has one in the works. And Borland's IDE is well worth the money.

    If you're the type that hates IDEs, then download the free compiler and libraries and go. No big *freaking* deal.

    2. C or C++ may be great for writing device drivers and filters, but for doing database apps? C'mon! Delphi's way of doing databases gives you the same easy programming as some of the crappy database-oriented scripting languages (paradox, powerbuilder) with fully compiled (and optimized) native code.

    Isn't the attitude that "my tool is best" or "my os is best" the Microsoft way? Didn't we used to hate that?
  • This intranet had about 4000 users. You are right they did not know how to run it. I did not either but I did know how to run the box I was. This is my point in spite of all this a PHB will *still* pay for support. After all if they reason if someone really knew how to do this and could do it with free (as in beer and speech) software why would anyone pay M$ for their stuff therefore it must be a fluke (one of the really said this to me) They simply can not admit that their worldview is wrong.
  • I don't know the lines-per-minute I was getting, but a couple years ago when I was last using Delphi heavily, I do know that the build time was never longer than three or four seconds for even a moderately complex project. And I was on a relatively slow machine!

    Delphi is the most amazing piece of technology I've seen in Windows. I remain amazed, years later, that it didn't take over the world.

    Maybe it will under Linux?
  • Borland already gives away the C++ compiler and linker from their C++ Builder package. They also include the full source code to their Visual Component Library (VCL) with both Delphi and C++ Builder.

    In the future, it wouldn't surprise me at all if they (1) release the Object Pascal compiler for free, and (2) make the VCL source code available for free. These moves do not hurt their prime products, which are the Delphi and C++ development suites, including form and property editors and an IDE which integrates the VCL and compilers. That's what people want Delphi/Kylix for. They don't just want raw compilers.

    Personally, I would love for Borland to give away their Object Pascal compiler, both for Windows and Linux. What a masterpiece it is! It would get a huge following among amateur programmers, because of its speed and ease of use. Don't try to say that Free Pascal is the same thing, because it isn't. The big advantage of Object Pascal is that it compiles darn near instantaneously on any machine. I'm talking over a million lines per minutes on a halfway decent machine from two years ago.

  • Can you prove it does NOT cause constipation in monkeys?

    You sir do not provide a reference claiming his view false and you are very rude towards him, therefore I say you are the troll my freind.

    Please back your claim and post a reference to either this a) causing the runs in monkeys b) causing normal digestive funcations in monkeys.

    Do you even know what a monkey is?


  • On what do you base the comment "It's from a Borland developer," If it is based off of the fact that he says he is a Borland developer I got some real estate you might want to take a looke at? Come on....

  • >You can't combine Open Source with selling the same product for thousands of dollars
    And what about Redhat, Mandrake, SuSE or Corel distros ? They're selled in boxed, and they can also be fetched gratis. Distros are the best example free software can be selled. Just ship a manual along with the CDs in the box.
    Imagine someone selling boxes with, for example, a Gimp CD and a prettifully printed book. It would be buyed.

    If you don't believe me, look at the impressing number of 3D Studio or MS-Office books you can buy. People are not always willing to buy the software if it cost too much, but help and informations about how to use software is always appreciated.
    Now, if you want to sell really expensive software, you must sell software destined to customers who can afford it, for example airport management software. And you'd better offer an impressive support and nearly perfect software quality.

  • &gtWell, since the FSF doesn't recognize Qt as free software
    Qt is free software in the eyes of the FSF since the QPL (Qt 2.0.0). I can prove it by providing this link [gnu.org]. Texto: "This is a non-copyleft free software license which is incompatible with the GNU GPL." This means:

    1. Qt is free software; and
    2. Compatibility with GPL is not derogatory for a Free Software License.

    And furthermore Qt is available on a closed-source license for proprietary development, QPL and GPL, at the most convenient option, for open-source development.

    >then it could be argued that Kylix no longer depends on Qt
    "Kylix" does depends on Qt. Borland announced that Kylix will support GNOME, not that Kylix will be recoded from scratch to be GNOME-based.

  • they will reject Kylix because of its KDE/Qt associations. You can't accept non-free software just because it's cool.

    Both KDE and Qt are 101% Free (as in RMS). KDE has been Free since day one. Qt has been Free for over a year. Face it, KDE/Qt is both Kool and Free. It may not fit into your world view, but then again, reality doesn't give a fig what your world view is.

  • >Like arrogantly granting forgiveness for using code that they, in fact, did not use?
    Worse than that. Like arrogantly telling the KDE team to beg forgiveness for using two miserable old bit of code present in a secondary program (kmidi, IIRC).

  • Inprise renames itself to Borland, Silicon Graphics renames itself to SGI... all we need now is for Compaq to rename itself to DEC.
  • So why do you even bother to post?

    Oh, and yes, I did notice the last sentence.
  • You forgot the important part:
    to the GNOME Foundation.

    Meaning, IBM will see it, you and I won't, maybe?.

    M.

  • If it's open or closed. As a developer, I just want it! Soonest. I've used Builder from ver 1.0 and Visual C++ from 2.0. Builder is better! Easier to use, and therefore faster to develop with. Linux desperately needs a RAD tool, and Kylix would be perfect for that.
  • Borprise have made some really terrible mistakes in the past now it seems they want to lock us into a single window manager currently hyped with a lot of vapour promises.

    Which window manager is that? BlackBox, Windowmaker, enlightenment, sawfish, xvfm, xvfm2 or any of the others? Which window manager do you mean and how are they tying us to it? Hmm?
    Molog

    So Linus, what are we doing tonight?

  • > can't believe they've decided to tie things to one window manager in particular

    Bzt wrong. They haven't. Get a bit of context already before leaping to conclusions.

    Borland has stated several times that Kylix will run and work under both KDE and Gnome, and will be capable of producing apps that run and work under both Gnome and KDE.

    Thier bias up to now has, if anything, been the other way; towards KDE. Borland stated that they did not wish to take sides in any way, but came to realise that thier gui code must be based upon an exisiting or new gui toolset. They therefor chose Qt, ie KDE's widget set. Yes, in version 1, GUI apps written in Kylix will use QT. Not Gnome's libs.

    As someone who had been avidly waiting for Kylix and readling lots about it, today's news is suprising, both as it shows a swing towards Gnome, and as I fully expected Kylix to be a commerical app.

    The other poster may be correct - perhaps just the code for the *IDE* will be GPL'd, with the OP (and later the C++) compilers staying closed source. Either way, Borland is making big concesions to the open-source world.
    1. Go to Borland's homepage [borland.com]
    2. Click the Kylix link
    3. Click the FAQ link
    4. Read

    Short version: Kylix is Delphi for Linux.
    Borland already has Interbase on Linux, Open Source and the works.

    M.

  • It says that Kylix will become open source. Kylix is an IDE, not a compiler.

    So the question is... are there any good free compilers for Linux? ;)

  • In related news, Inprise is changing its name back to Borland [cnet.com]. Of course, for some reason:
    • 2000-11-09 15:32:41 "Inprise" now back to "Borland" again (articles,tech) (rejected)

    Alex Bischoff
    ---

  • You may be right on many of the things in this post but the statement "You can't combine Open Source (which is a protected term, mind you)with selling the same product for thousands of dollars," is dead wrong. There is *nothing* in the GPL or the definition of Open Source that prevents you from selling a GPLed product for however much you can get people to pay for it. It is about free as in speech not beer. Now granted since once you sell it to them you have to give them the source and can't prevent it from giving it to anyone they want to it may be rather hard to get someone to pay big bucks for it. Now you may be right in that they would not want to get into this game in fact I think you are but repeat after me. You can sell a GPLed product for all the money you can get people to pay for it. There is *nothing* in the GPL that prevents you from selling the software. This is important. If more people got this fact it would be easier to get PHBs to understand that you can sell it the key is making people want to pay for it and I for one think there are many ways you can do that.
  • Considering that Kylix uses the Qt library for its GUI, and paid good money to Trolltech for services to boot, it's a safe bet to say that it will look as good (or slightly better) under KDE than under GNOME.

    Of course, if this GNOME announcement is genuine and not just a spin, then Kylix will be able to use both Qt and GTK+, and it will look great on both desktops (or none at all) at the same time.
  • You can't combine Open Source (which is a protected term, mind you) with selling the same product for thousands of dollars, as they still claim they will (and deserve to, IMO).

    Bzzzzzzt!

    Although it doesn't look like that's what Borland will be doing, there is nothing in the GPL to prevent anyone from selling GPL'd software.

    What's more, there is nothing in the GPL allowing the source to be passed around without charge. What the GPL does require is that if you sell it, you must make the source available to the purchaser. Which isn't the same as waiving copyright.

    Free speech and free beer are totally orthogonal. We're all familiar with
    • closed both (MS),
    • open both (Linux),
    • and closed-source freeware (StarOffice 5.2).
    Why does it come as a surprise to remember that up until the 80s commercial software was almost always shipped with source?
  • Stallman has more than once extended the proverbial olive branch to the KDE team

    You mean like declaring KDE distributors to be illegal? Like arrogantly granting forgiveness for using code that they, in fact, did not use?

    Even though they finally, relunctantly, took the steps needed to make their software free

    Their software always was free. It met every definition of the OSD, and every definition of FS stated in the GNU pages. Everyone always had from day one the explicit permission to use, distribute and modify KDE source code. The only thing that changed RMS' mind about the criminal status of folks like me (who gave a copy of KDE to their friend (it would be wrong to deny them if they asked)) was done by Trolltech in their triple-licensing. The KDE core team had nothing to do with it.

  • Since my previous post, LinuxToday has put up an article contradicting the ZDNet article. [linuxprogramming.com] Alas, it also appears to provide official Borland contradiction to one of my statements, referring to "the decision to include support for the GNOME desktop environment where previously support was to be limited to the K Desktop Environment." I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. My (extremely unofficial) speculation is that management intends to beef up support for GNOME-specific features in future release. It most assuredly does not mean that running Kylix -- or Kylix apps -- under GNOME has every presented any special problems. I can cite specific experiences to the contrary, on my own Helix GNOME desktop. Or I could, if I hadn't signed that NDA.

    __________________

  • JBuilder or Kylix (Score:3)

    by Per Abrahamsen ( 1397 ) on Monday November 13, 2000 @05:53AM (#627504) Homepage
    Kylix is their port of C++Builder/Delphi. JBuilder is their Java deveopment environment.

    The article mention Kylix briefly in the beginning, but the rest of the aricle is about JBuilder. It is unclear what part of "open source" and "Gnome intergration" refers to which product.

  • Kettles of fish... (Score:3)

    by Xibby ( 232218 ) <zibby+slashdot@ringworld.org> on Monday November 13, 2000 @05:56AM (#627506) Homepage Journal
    The article states that they will be releasing the code to the GNOME Foundation. They will also be joining the GNOME Foundation. This is a completely different than releasing the code to the general public, under a Free license like the GPL.

    So members of the GNOME Foundation can now all to easily build GNOME and it's applications agnist libiaries that are not under the LGPL.. Yeah, sounds like a great idea.

    Really, it sounds like Borland/Inprise trying to get some press attention before/durring the show. See? Look we're good. We're releasing the source [to the chosen few who we deem worthy] so that applications can be rapidly developed [and we can get you to pay licensing fees in a market where there were none]. Yup, those marketing people sure know what they're doing, but they're happy to let you think of them as mindless drones.

Slashdot Top Deals

If entropy is increasing, where is it coming from?

Close