Let's talk about Borland and Ms's different attitudes towards bugs ~

When discussing bug fixing problems with Delphi 6 SP1 (http://www.delphibbs.com/delphibbs/dispq.asp? Lid = 648516). I mentioned "strongly recommend that Borland generate hotfix for its own products, rather than letting everyone wait for server pack". Then I discussed Borland and Ms's different attitudes with y9y. Or we can look at the difference between MS and Borland today from another perspective:

==============================

Y9y agrees with some of bugware's ideas about patching, largely out of Borland and the way of thinking that some of our programmers have developed. -- Everything must be the best. This is indeed true. However, Borland and Ms seem to have forgotten one thing over the years, that is, commercial operations.

In addition to providing users with the fastest correction, Hotfix reflects a company's response speed to user requirements to a greater extent. You are not afraid of making mistakes when you program, but do not make users feel that they are facing errors, but no one has responded to the incident. Ms is now paying more and more attention to the feedback/response speed to user information. Borland continues to embrace the old ideas ......

I am still telling my colleagues about Borland's SP1. My colleague said with a straight eye: Only Borland will tell the user that you should not use SP1. Please use the original disk to restore it to Delphi. If it is Ms, they will immediately release the server pack of Server Pack 1.

This is different.

Ms's practice is to take responsibility for this error by itself. They always try to solve the user's problem as quickly as possible. Borland's practice is to take responsibility for this error by users, borland asks you to solve these problems by yourself. What Borland wants to do is to tell you how to solve them and wait ......

More and more people are wondering why Delphi is always the best player. These experts are not afraid to modify the source code of RTL/VCL/... and then compile it into DCU and put it into Lib. They are even happy to do so. Experts of Delphi will install one patch after another for Delphi and publish the patch method to more people. There is no need to worry about when Borland releases the next patch. -- Oh, my God, think about how close this is to Linux! But has anyone ever wondered whether Linux is not a commercial product, and Borland Delphi is! Delphi must be an expert and a common user!

In the last year I used Delphi, I did not dare to rewrite those source codes. I did not dare to do this until I interpret it many times. -- After all, these codes are written n times higher than I do. I still feel uneasy about modifying them so far!

As long as the new version of Delphi is released, there may be no "Fatal bug ". The saying "because the current bug is not fatal" is actually the word and nationality. -- You know, bugs are not fatal, but the loss of every bit of business image is fatal!

A more appropriate analogy is as follows:
Ms is a studio and a factory. You can look down on the workers, but you cannot use anything from the factory.
Borland is a temple in Delphi. You will fear everyone in the temple, but you will never go into the temple.