I remember the screaming and howling when Bush fired US Attorneys. Democrats were falling all over themselves in anger. It was front page news for the NY Times, CNN, MSNBC, etc. Now Obama has fired an Inspector General two days after he exposed possible corruption by an Obama supporter, Kevin Johnson. And this is front page news on the NY Times, CNN and MSNBC. Oh wait...there's not. But I'm sure they'll get around to it. Maybe? Possibly? Eventually?
Apparently there is no shame at all in the media. They aren't even pretending to be the watchdog of government anymore.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Friday, May 22, 2009
Quick Takes
"We need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it's like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it's like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old." - Barack Obama
"Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly." - Leviticus 19:15
This is another example of Obama's shallowness. He appeals to feelings, not REAL fairness. He wants to divide us by saying that anyone who insists upon complete neutrality and justice on the bench is somehow being heartless to the groups he mentions above. He (and his followers on the left) can then accuse anyone who opposes him as being heartless and mean-spirited. What's sad is that the strategy is so transparent and phony, and yet it actually seems to work.
If Obama had so much empathy for poor African-Americans, perhaps he can explain why his administration buried a report on how well charter schools in DC were doing so that he could shut them down as a political payback to his supporters in the teachers unions, who care nothing for the children they have just condemned to failed public schools. So no, Obama is utterly uninterested in even being consistent with his comments above. Logically then, one must ask why he made this comment? The answer is, of course, that he's speaking in a language that is meant to mean something to his supporters. He's saying he is going to nominate a judge who will help him return political favors to his constituencies in ACORN, Unions, Gay-rights groups etc, by casting them as the victims that need 'empathy' from the bench.
I guess I'm just old-fashioned, but I would rather see cases decided based upon the law, and leave the empathy and compassion to those we elect to WRITE the laws. This is how we also should be exposing bad law. If people are hurt by decisions the public thinks are unfair, we get our elected representatives to change the law. We do NOT empower judges to change it from the bench! Or at least, in a sane world, that's how it would be.
And that's the vent...
"Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly." - Leviticus 19:15
This is another example of Obama's shallowness. He appeals to feelings, not REAL fairness. He wants to divide us by saying that anyone who insists upon complete neutrality and justice on the bench is somehow being heartless to the groups he mentions above. He (and his followers on the left) can then accuse anyone who opposes him as being heartless and mean-spirited. What's sad is that the strategy is so transparent and phony, and yet it actually seems to work.
If Obama had so much empathy for poor African-Americans, perhaps he can explain why his administration buried a report on how well charter schools in DC were doing so that he could shut them down as a political payback to his supporters in the teachers unions, who care nothing for the children they have just condemned to failed public schools. So no, Obama is utterly uninterested in even being consistent with his comments above. Logically then, one must ask why he made this comment? The answer is, of course, that he's speaking in a language that is meant to mean something to his supporters. He's saying he is going to nominate a judge who will help him return political favors to his constituencies in ACORN, Unions, Gay-rights groups etc, by casting them as the victims that need 'empathy' from the bench.
I guess I'm just old-fashioned, but I would rather see cases decided based upon the law, and leave the empathy and compassion to those we elect to WRITE the laws. This is how we also should be exposing bad law. If people are hurt by decisions the public thinks are unfair, we get our elected representatives to change the law. We do NOT empower judges to change it from the bench! Or at least, in a sane world, that's how it would be.
And that's the vent...
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
George R.R. Martin is no Tolkien
It is interesting to see the reviews of George R.R. Martin's works, calling him an "American Tolkien".
It is hard to fathom why someone would make this comparison. Both authors wrote very verbose fantasy fiction. That's where the comparison ends, unfortunately for Martin.
Tolkien's books were deep and theological, with profound truths and an underlying spiritual theme that was in harmony with his Catholic faith. Martin's Song of Ice and Fire series, is certainly large in scope, and features a rich tapestry of characters, but I see no redeeming 'big picture' in his stories. It strikes me as having more in common with the Sopranos TV series than it does Tolkien's Epic. He creates a lot of characters, creates reasons for conflict, and have them start doing each other in. That's Martin's world, a world in which there is very little in the way of true nobility or selflessness.
This doesn't mean I can't enjoy the story that IS there, but the combination of foul language, explicit graphic sex (most of it would be fairly described as rape or prostitution), and lack of any overarching morality simply make this an epic 'adult' soap opera, and not an Epic on par with Lord of the Rings. For this, Tolkien has no peer in ANY nationality. To match Tolkien you need layers, and Martin's story has no layers.
Back to the content for a moment, I tend to skim the more graphic sexual content. It adds little to nothing to the story and seems to be Martin's attempt to kowtow to whatever we call an 'adult' audience. I have to enjoy Martin's works IN SPITE of some of his content, in much the same way as we may enjoy a movie in spite of some scenes we have would rather have not been included.
If nothing else, Martin's works serve to remind us of the base evil inherent in humanity, and there are very few people one could call good, nor do his characters provide any kind of model anyone should want to be like. His storylines are dark and oppressive, and although he is a fine writer, I would never call this an uplifting or inspirational work.
If you want to read the fantasy equivalent of the Sopranos...pick up Song of Ice and Fire and watch the betrayal and murder begin.
And that's my vent.
It is hard to fathom why someone would make this comparison. Both authors wrote very verbose fantasy fiction. That's where the comparison ends, unfortunately for Martin.
Tolkien's books were deep and theological, with profound truths and an underlying spiritual theme that was in harmony with his Catholic faith. Martin's Song of Ice and Fire series, is certainly large in scope, and features a rich tapestry of characters, but I see no redeeming 'big picture' in his stories. It strikes me as having more in common with the Sopranos TV series than it does Tolkien's Epic. He creates a lot of characters, creates reasons for conflict, and have them start doing each other in. That's Martin's world, a world in which there is very little in the way of true nobility or selflessness.
This doesn't mean I can't enjoy the story that IS there, but the combination of foul language, explicit graphic sex (most of it would be fairly described as rape or prostitution), and lack of any overarching morality simply make this an epic 'adult' soap opera, and not an Epic on par with Lord of the Rings. For this, Tolkien has no peer in ANY nationality. To match Tolkien you need layers, and Martin's story has no layers.
Back to the content for a moment, I tend to skim the more graphic sexual content. It adds little to nothing to the story and seems to be Martin's attempt to kowtow to whatever we call an 'adult' audience. I have to enjoy Martin's works IN SPITE of some of his content, in much the same way as we may enjoy a movie in spite of some scenes we have would rather have not been included.
If nothing else, Martin's works serve to remind us of the base evil inherent in humanity, and there are very few people one could call good, nor do his characters provide any kind of model anyone should want to be like. His storylines are dark and oppressive, and although he is a fine writer, I would never call this an uplifting or inspirational work.
If you want to read the fantasy equivalent of the Sopranos...pick up Song of Ice and Fire and watch the betrayal and murder begin.
And that's my vent.
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Why I won't rent Movies using Apple TV or XBox Live
In spite of the slick demo we got from Steve Jobs last week, this is why neither I nor anyone else should rent movies from Apple or Microsoft right now:
First, it's too restrictive. Having only 24 hours to watch a movie once you hit play is going to kill it right there. People have lives. Sometimes that means that you cannot sit down and watch a movie straight through. It also gets you on the 'oops' factor. Hit "Play Now" even just to verify the download is okay and ready to go, and you've just started your 24 hour clock. Better budget some time or kiss the money goodbye, pal!
Second, it's not portable. Oh yes, I heard what Jobs said. I can move movies from iTunes or Apple TV to my iPod Touch. Great. Unfortunately, I cannot have my cake and eat it too. If I rent an HD version of the video, then I cannot copy it to my iPod. However, if I rent the DVD version, I cannot watch it in High Definition. This stinks. A license to rent a movie should cover that movie in whatever resolution/device I want to see it. I should not have to rent a movie twice in order to see it at its best on both devices.
Third, how is this in any way superior to NetFlix? I've seen Netflix's demise written of many times by supposedly respectable reporters. But how could this be when you drop from 1080p HD quality movies to 720p movies, you lose things like lossless audio, all the extras, and of course the fact that you can keep the movie AS LONG AS YOU DARN WELL LIKE with NetFlix for no extra charge, and go through movies as quickly or as slowly as you like?
All this, for the convenience of immediate downloads. Now don't get me wrong, I love instant gratification, but knowing that my purchase is not portable in its best formats, only is good for 24 hours once someone even STARTS it, and loses many of the best features of high definition video just doesn't do it for me.
Even if you're not a High Definition lover and you're fine with DVD quality movies, what about that stupid 24 hour limit? It's just not happening. Apple TV and XBox Marketplace video rentals do not compete properly with NetFlix until they find a way to extend the rental period past 24 hours. Heck, even the 'old' days of Blockbuster you could rent for 3 days and watch as many times as you liked during that period. Is it me, or are we going BACKWARDS?
Clearly the Movie Industry is behind these limits, and they are still trying to accomplish their financial goals by clubbing us over the heads with their property rights. And then they wonder why they aren't making any money and why piracy is so rampant.
Clue to the Movie Studios: Stop treating us so poorly, and you will get more of our money. It really IS that simple. And as far as Apple's shiny new Apple TV, in my opinion, it's just sugar coated pill that masks the continued ugliness of the behavior of movie studios, trying to manipulate us all.
Randy
First, it's too restrictive. Having only 24 hours to watch a movie once you hit play is going to kill it right there. People have lives. Sometimes that means that you cannot sit down and watch a movie straight through. It also gets you on the 'oops' factor. Hit "Play Now" even just to verify the download is okay and ready to go, and you've just started your 24 hour clock. Better budget some time or kiss the money goodbye, pal!
Second, it's not portable. Oh yes, I heard what Jobs said. I can move movies from iTunes or Apple TV to my iPod Touch. Great. Unfortunately, I cannot have my cake and eat it too. If I rent an HD version of the video, then I cannot copy it to my iPod. However, if I rent the DVD version, I cannot watch it in High Definition. This stinks. A license to rent a movie should cover that movie in whatever resolution/device I want to see it. I should not have to rent a movie twice in order to see it at its best on both devices.
Third, how is this in any way superior to NetFlix? I've seen Netflix's demise written of many times by supposedly respectable reporters. But how could this be when you drop from 1080p HD quality movies to 720p movies, you lose things like lossless audio, all the extras, and of course the fact that you can keep the movie AS LONG AS YOU DARN WELL LIKE with NetFlix for no extra charge, and go through movies as quickly or as slowly as you like?
All this, for the convenience of immediate downloads. Now don't get me wrong, I love instant gratification, but knowing that my purchase is not portable in its best formats, only is good for 24 hours once someone even STARTS it, and loses many of the best features of high definition video just doesn't do it for me.
Even if you're not a High Definition lover and you're fine with DVD quality movies, what about that stupid 24 hour limit? It's just not happening. Apple TV and XBox Marketplace video rentals do not compete properly with NetFlix until they find a way to extend the rental period past 24 hours. Heck, even the 'old' days of Blockbuster you could rent for 3 days and watch as many times as you liked during that period. Is it me, or are we going BACKWARDS?
Clearly the Movie Industry is behind these limits, and they are still trying to accomplish their financial goals by clubbing us over the heads with their property rights. And then they wonder why they aren't making any money and why piracy is so rampant.
Clue to the Movie Studios: Stop treating us so poorly, and you will get more of our money. It really IS that simple. And as far as Apple's shiny new Apple TV, in my opinion, it's just sugar coated pill that masks the continued ugliness of the behavior of movie studios, trying to manipulate us all.
Randy
Friday, January 04, 2008
So, Warner goes Blu...
So the Blu-ray fanboys are screaming and throwing confetti, and thumbing their noses childishly at the HD DVD fanboys.
I don't care particularly. I have an XBox 360 and an HD DVD drive. Not too big of an investment. I can buy a Blu-Ray player.
The only thing that frosts me is the degree of BS being spewed about the reasons for the outcome. For anyone to say with a straight face that "the consumers have decided" just makes me roll my eyes. The "consumers" didn't really have a choice? Did I have a choice to buy Disney HD DVD or Blu-Ray movies? No. Did I have a choice to buy HD DVD or Blu-Ray Universal movies? NO! It came down to studios. The STUDIOS decided which format would win, and not the consumer. No? Well, if you reverse the studios, is the outcome different? You bet. Sony, Disney and Fox are a huge block, and with Warner being neutral that is a huge gap to overcome, even for Paramount and Universal. Disney alone is scary huge. So yeah, the fact that the Blu-Ray fanboys are crying victory immediately on the heels of the Warner announcement is just more evidence that the Studios Decide, not the customer.
It can be truly said that the Blu-Ray sales were outpacing the HD DVD sales, however, again, this is a function of answering the question: "Which format has the movies I want?" Content IS King, and the Sony/Disney/Fox (and now Warner) block is just an insurmountable obstacle.
Then the Blu-Ray fanboys will say "the best technical format won". Again: BS. Not because you are wrong, but because technical merit had NOTHING to do with this. VHS beat Beta without winning on technical merit. Microsoft pounds Apple without technical merit. Only high-end videophiles who like to show off their systems and keep leapfrogging their buddies with 'the next big thing' are the people that care about this. The average consumer doesn't see any difference between the formats, because for all intents and purposes, there isn't any.
Now, why the blu-bots are so fanatic for Sony, I just don't understand. We're dealing here with a company that put rootkits on our CD's to copy protect them. We're dealing with a company that still requires DRM on their music. Warner just announced they are selling their music library on amazon at TWICE the bitrate with NO DRM. Where's Sony on this issue? NOWHERE. Same for Disney music. I can buy the latest Disney Enchanted soundtrack from iTunes, with DRM at 128K, or I can go jump in a lake. Sony is very protectionist with their content. They support region coding, they support harsh measures for DRM, proprietary formats, and high prices. Sony has NEVER been interested in what's best for the consumer. So while other content owners dump DRM and bump up their bit rates, Sony sits there and looks arrogantly down on us. "Let them eat 128k DRM cake". And yet these blu-ray obsessed fans act like Sony loves them. It's beyond unreal.
Sony owning motion picture studios and music labels is Sony's way of fixing the Betamax debacle. Get some content, sit on it and make it clear that hell will freeze over before it gets released on the other format, and wait it out. It's part of a process called "tying", that got Microsoft in so much trouble. Oddly, the people who hate Microsoft for such practices see nothing wrong with Sony using its software (music/movies) content to push a hard format (Blu-Ray/PS3).
So, Blu-Ray is victorious. Whoopee. BD player manufacturers can now stop worrying about dropping the prices of their players and movie companies can set disc prices at whatever they want. When Blu-Ray players put out a solid version of their BD software and a reasonably priced player, I'll buy one and follow along with all the other sheep who really have no choice in the matter. After all, what can I do? The Studios have decided what's good for me, and if I want to enjoy their content at home, it's this or a long download.
After all of the above, some might say I'm a bitter HD DVD owner. Not really. I'm more annoyed at the BS being delivered as as the REASON for the win. Just admit these facts, and we can move on with our lives:
1. Blu-Ray won because it had the better Studio Support
2. The customer picked Studios, and not 'technical formats'
3. Sony's acquisition of music and movie content has given them a stronger hand than they otherwise would have as a format backer.
4. Sony will give us portable DRM-free content when hell freezes over.
Just admit the above facts, blu-fans, and we'll move with our lives as blu-ray disc owners with one format (which is not a terrible thing, in the end).
Randy
I don't care particularly. I have an XBox 360 and an HD DVD drive. Not too big of an investment. I can buy a Blu-Ray player.
The only thing that frosts me is the degree of BS being spewed about the reasons for the outcome. For anyone to say with a straight face that "the consumers have decided" just makes me roll my eyes. The "consumers" didn't really have a choice? Did I have a choice to buy Disney HD DVD or Blu-Ray movies? No. Did I have a choice to buy HD DVD or Blu-Ray Universal movies? NO! It came down to studios. The STUDIOS decided which format would win, and not the consumer. No? Well, if you reverse the studios, is the outcome different? You bet. Sony, Disney and Fox are a huge block, and with Warner being neutral that is a huge gap to overcome, even for Paramount and Universal. Disney alone is scary huge. So yeah, the fact that the Blu-Ray fanboys are crying victory immediately on the heels of the Warner announcement is just more evidence that the Studios Decide, not the customer.
It can be truly said that the Blu-Ray sales were outpacing the HD DVD sales, however, again, this is a function of answering the question: "Which format has the movies I want?" Content IS King, and the Sony/Disney/Fox (and now Warner) block is just an insurmountable obstacle.
Then the Blu-Ray fanboys will say "the best technical format won". Again: BS. Not because you are wrong, but because technical merit had NOTHING to do with this. VHS beat Beta without winning on technical merit. Microsoft pounds Apple without technical merit. Only high-end videophiles who like to show off their systems and keep leapfrogging their buddies with 'the next big thing' are the people that care about this. The average consumer doesn't see any difference between the formats, because for all intents and purposes, there isn't any.
Now, why the blu-bots are so fanatic for Sony, I just don't understand. We're dealing here with a company that put rootkits on our CD's to copy protect them. We're dealing with a company that still requires DRM on their music. Warner just announced they are selling their music library on amazon at TWICE the bitrate with NO DRM. Where's Sony on this issue? NOWHERE. Same for Disney music. I can buy the latest Disney Enchanted soundtrack from iTunes, with DRM at 128K, or I can go jump in a lake. Sony is very protectionist with their content. They support region coding, they support harsh measures for DRM, proprietary formats, and high prices. Sony has NEVER been interested in what's best for the consumer. So while other content owners dump DRM and bump up their bit rates, Sony sits there and looks arrogantly down on us. "Let them eat 128k DRM cake". And yet these blu-ray obsessed fans act like Sony loves them. It's beyond unreal.
Sony owning motion picture studios and music labels is Sony's way of fixing the Betamax debacle. Get some content, sit on it and make it clear that hell will freeze over before it gets released on the other format, and wait it out. It's part of a process called "tying", that got Microsoft in so much trouble. Oddly, the people who hate Microsoft for such practices see nothing wrong with Sony using its software (music/movies) content to push a hard format (Blu-Ray/PS3).
So, Blu-Ray is victorious. Whoopee. BD player manufacturers can now stop worrying about dropping the prices of their players and movie companies can set disc prices at whatever they want. When Blu-Ray players put out a solid version of their BD software and a reasonably priced player, I'll buy one and follow along with all the other sheep who really have no choice in the matter. After all, what can I do? The Studios have decided what's good for me, and if I want to enjoy their content at home, it's this or a long download.
After all of the above, some might say I'm a bitter HD DVD owner. Not really. I'm more annoyed at the BS being delivered as as the REASON for the win. Just admit these facts, and we can move on with our lives:
1. Blu-Ray won because it had the better Studio Support
2. The customer picked Studios, and not 'technical formats'
3. Sony's acquisition of music and movie content has given them a stronger hand than they otherwise would have as a format backer.
4. Sony will give us portable DRM-free content when hell freezes over.
Just admit the above facts, blu-fans, and we'll move with our lives as blu-ray disc owners with one format (which is not a terrible thing, in the end).
Randy
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Delphi 2007 - The Soul of Delphi returns!
A Brief History of Time
The road has been a little rocky for Delphi developers the last few years. Since Delphi 7 shipped, it has seemed that our beloved product has been trying to find its place in the world. In doing so, perhaps the biggest problem was trying to be all things to all people. It's like trying to catch several frisbees at the same time: more often than not, you catch none.
So we had Delphi 8, the first .Net (only) Delphi release which everyone would rather forget (although one would say some valuable lessons were learned). Then Delphi 2005 came out, which was about as ambitious as I've seen the product get, trying to support C#, Delphi and even VB.NET in a limited fashion, adding in ALM tools, and becoming a huge lumbering IDE that you PRAYED would not crash, because of the ensuing long wait in starting it back up! BDS2006 restored my faith in the ability of the Delphi team to stabilize the product and improve its performance, and oh yes, welcome C++ back to the party.
Although BDS2006 is a rather solid product, it still started slower than Delphi 7, has the same HTML help system as before, and just didn't make the case for abandoning D7 for many Delphi coders who felt it wasn't compelling enough to upgrade.
Many people have griped in the newsgroups that they don't need C#, or C++, or even Delphi.Net. They just want to keep writing their Delphi Win32 apps. They like the idea of the refactoring engine and other IDE enhancements, but didn't want the full weight of BDS2006 for features they wouldn't even use. BDS2006 was overkill for them.
I'll ring in and say that while I sympathize with these points, I've been pretty darned productive with BDS2006. I installed my favorite add-ins (Modelmaker Code Explorer and GExperts are my two favorites), and happily worked on and maintained new and old code bases alike written in the different languages. I've even brought in some old C++ projects and felt right at home maintaining and debugging them from within a single IDE.
But a lot of people really wanted just 'a better Delphi'. No .NET, no ALM, etc. So rather than just hold off and release another 'all things to all people' release, CodeGear delivers first on its promise that they are "where developers matter" by giving the Delphi Win32 people a release just for them. C# groupies go home. There's nothing to see here!
Now, I have been specifically given permission by Codegear to share my thoughts regarding Delphi 2007, aka Spacely, as a Field Tester, an act that (again) shows that Delphi is under 'new management', willing to do things a little differently than has historically been done under Borland management.
So, what excites me about Delphi 2007?
First of all, it's faster. Not since Delphi 7 have I seen the product boot up and be as responsive across the board as it is now. This may seem like a small thing, but often it's not one or two BIG things that make a difference, it is the accumulaton of little things. I'm the kind of person who doesn't like to wait on my IDE. I don't like waiting for compiles. I hate when it when the IDE flickers and flashes its way from Edit to Debug mode. I hate having time to go make coffee while it starts up. Basically, I want to be able to get code from my brain to my project as fast as possible. Delphi 2007 sheds the weight of extra language personalities and hums up faster (and with a prettier, more Delphi splash screen to boot). I particularly notice that there are major improvements to the transition from edit to debug. The IDE is less flickery/flashy, less annoying, and quicker as a result.
Second, it's COMPATIBLE. I admit it: I'm Captain Add-In. I don't care how good Delphi is, it can always be made better by enterprising add-in developers. This time, I was able to load BDS2006 versions of popular add-ins like Castalia and Modelmaker Code Explorer without having to wait for updates of those products to be released to match the latest Delphi. Why? Because this is a 'non-breaking version'. That means that for the first time (unless I've forgotten some point release somewhere), Delphi BPL's, DCU's and DCP's are binary compatible from Delphi 2006 to Delphi 2007. Whew. If you're the kind of person who DREADS having to rebuild all your components from source, breathe a sigh of relief. YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT!
Here is my [pre-release] screenshot of my running Delphi 2007, add-ins and all, to prove I'm not kidding --
Then there are just SOME of the "little things" that just keep adding up to make my development experience better:
- The ability to set a breakpoint on the call stack directly in the debugger.
- The ability to enable/disable breakpoints in a toolbar button without going to the options dialog
- The ability to type in ANY PORTION of a component name in the tool palette. Want to see all your "edit" controls? Type 'Edit' and you see TEdit, TIWEdit, TAdvEdit, TcxEdit, etc. It doesn't matter how it starts or how it ends. Find your components FAST. (See image for an example of "combo" as a filter)
- The ability to save projects as 'favorites' on the home screen so they are always there.
- Lightning fast project loading
I'll add more to this space about the new "VCL for the Web" with AJAX support, and other things that are cool in D2007 in the next few days...but for now suffice it to say that this is the best/fastest Delphi I've used in a long time, and yes, that includes Delphi 7. It's pretty much a must-have upgrade for all you guys living in Delphi 5-7 land.
The road has been a little rocky for Delphi developers the last few years. Since Delphi 7 shipped, it has seemed that our beloved product has been trying to find its place in the world. In doing so, perhaps the biggest problem was trying to be all things to all people. It's like trying to catch several frisbees at the same time: more often than not, you catch none.
So we had Delphi 8, the first .Net (only) Delphi release which everyone would rather forget (although one would say some valuable lessons were learned). Then Delphi 2005 came out, which was about as ambitious as I've seen the product get, trying to support C#, Delphi and even VB.NET in a limited fashion, adding in ALM tools, and becoming a huge lumbering IDE that you PRAYED would not crash, because of the ensuing long wait in starting it back up! BDS2006 restored my faith in the ability of the Delphi team to stabilize the product and improve its performance, and oh yes, welcome C++ back to the party.
Although BDS2006 is a rather solid product, it still started slower than Delphi 7, has the same HTML help system as before, and just didn't make the case for abandoning D7 for many Delphi coders who felt it wasn't compelling enough to upgrade.
Many people have griped in the newsgroups that they don't need C#, or C++, or even Delphi.Net. They just want to keep writing their Delphi Win32 apps. They like the idea of the refactoring engine and other IDE enhancements, but didn't want the full weight of BDS2006 for features they wouldn't even use. BDS2006 was overkill for them.
I'll ring in and say that while I sympathize with these points, I've been pretty darned productive with BDS2006. I installed my favorite add-ins (Modelmaker Code Explorer and GExperts are my two favorites), and happily worked on and maintained new and old code bases alike written in the different languages. I've even brought in some old C++ projects and felt right at home maintaining and debugging them from within a single IDE.
But a lot of people really wanted just 'a better Delphi'. No .NET, no ALM, etc. So rather than just hold off and release another 'all things to all people' release, CodeGear delivers first on its promise that they are "where developers matter" by giving the Delphi Win32 people a release just for them. C# groupies go home. There's nothing to see here!
Now, I have been specifically given permission by Codegear to share my thoughts regarding Delphi 2007, aka Spacely, as a Field Tester, an act that (again) shows that Delphi is under 'new management', willing to do things a little differently than has historically been done under Borland management.
So, what excites me about Delphi 2007?
First of all, it's faster. Not since Delphi 7 have I seen the product boot up and be as responsive across the board as it is now. This may seem like a small thing, but often it's not one or two BIG things that make a difference, it is the accumulaton of little things. I'm the kind of person who doesn't like to wait on my IDE. I don't like waiting for compiles. I hate when it when the IDE flickers and flashes its way from Edit to Debug mode. I hate having time to go make coffee while it starts up. Basically, I want to be able to get code from my brain to my project as fast as possible. Delphi 2007 sheds the weight of extra language personalities and hums up faster (and with a prettier, more Delphi splash screen to boot). I particularly notice that there are major improvements to the transition from edit to debug. The IDE is less flickery/flashy, less annoying, and quicker as a result.
Second, it's COMPATIBLE. I admit it: I'm Captain Add-In. I don't care how good Delphi is, it can always be made better by enterprising add-in developers. This time, I was able to load BDS2006 versions of popular add-ins like Castalia and Modelmaker Code Explorer without having to wait for updates of those products to be released to match the latest Delphi. Why? Because this is a 'non-breaking version'. That means that for the first time (unless I've forgotten some point release somewhere), Delphi BPL's, DCU's and DCP's are binary compatible from Delphi 2006 to Delphi 2007. Whew. If you're the kind of person who DREADS having to rebuild all your components from source, breathe a sigh of relief. YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT!
Here is my [pre-release] screenshot of my running Delphi 2007, add-ins and all, to prove I'm not kidding --
Then there are just SOME of the "little things" that just keep adding up to make my development experience better:
- The ability to set a breakpoint on the call stack directly in the debugger.
- The ability to enable/disable breakpoints in a toolbar button without going to the options dialog
- The ability to type in ANY PORTION of a component name in the tool palette. Want to see all your "edit" controls? Type 'Edit' and you see TEdit, TIWEdit, TAdvEdit, TcxEdit, etc. It doesn't matter how it starts or how it ends. Find your components FAST. (See image for an example of "combo" as a filter)
- The ability to save projects as 'favorites' on the home screen so they are always there.
- Lightning fast project loading
I'll add more to this space about the new "VCL for the Web" with AJAX support, and other things that are cool in D2007 in the next few days...but for now suffice it to say that this is the best/fastest Delphi I've used in a long time, and yes, that includes Delphi 7. It's pretty much a must-have upgrade for all you guys living in Delphi 5-7 land.
Tuesday, March 21, 2006
Long live dts!
If blogging had been around 10 years ago, I would have vented regularly about the fact that DVD's were often not including dts digital audio.
Although Dolby Labs has engaged in some of the must logic-contorting spin I've ever seen, I don't know any serious audiophile who doesn't agree that dts provides a superior sound. Common sense would dictate that less compression equals a better reproduction of sound. But Dolby tries to argue that their magic hocus pocus voodoo manages to squeeze superior sound into less space. That, along with their historical deals to make themselves a 'standard' has resulted in DVD after DVD being dished out with only Dolby Digital 5.1 sound. That doesn't even include the fact that I've never seen an over-the-air or satellite broadcast in dts. It's all DD5.1.
So, whenever a DVD I want to see has dts, I cheer the fact that the format is not dead and there are publishers who understand that it is the 'premium' choice for audio. For example, the Lord of the Rings theatrical releases on DVD came only with DD5.1. However, the Extended Editions came with both DD5.1 and dts sound! Hurray! On the dark side (pun intended), George Lucas thinks that using digital film is the way to go, and yet when it comes to audio, he's totally in the pocket of Dolby Labs. No version of Star Wars or Indiana Jones movies comes with dts sound. This firmly places the Lucas DVD's into the "inferior" camp, in my book.
And now I see that the Chronicles of Narnia DVD will have dts (based upon this screenshot of the box front and back Link here ). YAY!! Yet another reason to look forward to this DVD.
Long live dts!!
Although Dolby Labs has engaged in some of the must logic-contorting spin I've ever seen, I don't know any serious audiophile who doesn't agree that dts provides a superior sound. Common sense would dictate that less compression equals a better reproduction of sound. But Dolby tries to argue that their magic hocus pocus voodoo manages to squeeze superior sound into less space. That, along with their historical deals to make themselves a 'standard' has resulted in DVD after DVD being dished out with only Dolby Digital 5.1 sound. That doesn't even include the fact that I've never seen an over-the-air or satellite broadcast in dts. It's all DD5.1.
So, whenever a DVD I want to see has dts, I cheer the fact that the format is not dead and there are publishers who understand that it is the 'premium' choice for audio. For example, the Lord of the Rings theatrical releases on DVD came only with DD5.1. However, the Extended Editions came with both DD5.1 and dts sound! Hurray! On the dark side (pun intended), George Lucas thinks that using digital film is the way to go, and yet when it comes to audio, he's totally in the pocket of Dolby Labs. No version of Star Wars or Indiana Jones movies comes with dts sound. This firmly places the Lucas DVD's into the "inferior" camp, in my book.
And now I see that the Chronicles of Narnia DVD will have dts (based upon this screenshot of the box front and back Link here ). YAY!! Yet another reason to look forward to this DVD.
Long live dts!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
