🚀 go-pugleaf

Simon Beesley wrote:
> 
> That would be a reasonable reply if Delphi were a new product. But with a 
> product which is over 12 years old and has had a remarkably good help system 
> up to now, as an explanation this is exceptionally lame, not to say 
> downright feeble. I think an apology -- and an honest admission that 
> CodeGear have screwed up very badly indeed -- would be in order.

Well, coming from a D7->BDS2006->RAD2007 background, I would
hazard my opinion is well informed (if not a bit biased) to
say that Borland *dropped* the ball on the help system in BDS2006.
Further to exacerbate my frustration is that with D2007,
they used an entirely different help system (which further
obsoletes anything BDS2006 has to offer (*read: WASTE OF MONEY)).
While the help system D2007 is an 'improvement' (loosely spoken),
it still way below D7's standard.

This of course is blamed on the conversion process.  I mean, *who*
created this conversion process and the tools used?  Borland?
Codegear?   So if the conversion process fubar'd the help system,
it is the process that is blamed. Not the people behind it.
After all, "mistakes were made" pretty much sums up the
necessary rebuttal.

That said, at this point we, as users, need results so is it
  necessary to blame people or find people to blame?  The most pro-active
way of solving this problem is the fix the problem.[How's that for
stating the obvious?]  Blaming people won't solve the issue,
right?  CG is now pro-actively (with only a blog as evidence and
a help update) solving the problem.   But I (and I don't
speak for everyone) believe I needed a decent (close to D7's
level of competence) set of documentation "yesterday".

Of course, one can always return to D7 for Pascal specific
details.  What about IDE specifics?  I believe b.p.d.ide.general?

How long has D2007 been out?  How's the documentation now
compared to when it first appeared?


Edmund