🚀 go-pugleaf

gary@resumix.portal.com (Gary Lin) writes:
>What I really want to know is why doesn't Borland port QPro over
>to UNIX/X?  Lotus already has a product (albeit sucks!) on UNIX and
>is locking up the market.
>If they can do a Windows version, they can do X.

Cause we'd all play nethack and never get any work done.

-- 
The Wailer at the Gates of Dawn              | banshee@cats.UCSC.EDU       |
Just who ARE you calling a FROOFROO Head?    |                             |
DoD#0667  "Just a friend of the beast."      | banshee@ucscb.UCSC.EDU      |
2,3,5,7,13,17,19,31,61,89,107,127,521,607....| banshee@ucscb.BITNET        |

> "Borland is Stupid"

Thanks a lot! 
I'm not sure if I have something nice to say about you?


-- 
--
Peter Weyzen      /  "Some day my log will have
phw@borland.com  /    something to say" -Log Lady

phw@genghis.borland.com (Peter Weyzen) writes:

>> "Borland is Stupid"

>Thanks a lot! 
>I'm not sure if I have something nice to say about you?


Yeah?  Well, Borland isn't our customer just yet.  Ha!

I don't see any Borland suits at trade shows pushing anything except
goofy buttons that no one wants.  Then again, what are you waiting for?

Microsoft to finish NT on MIPS and Alpha, so I can run Excel and blow
the socks off QPro?  Okay, so who cares if Lotus ported 1-2-3 for IBM
mainframes, but at least they know they can do it on a non-PC system.

Then again, I just MIGHT be still upset at Borland for selling me
SPRINT as the greatest word-processor since sliced bread.  Grrrrrrr!!

					Gary Lin
					gary@resumix.portal.com

gary@resumix.portal.com (Gary M. Lin) writes:
>I don't see any Borland suits at trade shows pushing anything except
>goofy buttons that no one wants.  Then again, what are you waiting for?
We don't wear suits -- well only gorilla suits anyhow.

>Microsoft to finish NT on MIPS and Alpha, so I can run Excel and blow
>the socks off QPro?  Okay, so who cares if Lotus ported 1-2-3 for IBM
>mainframes, but at least they know they can do it on a non-PC system.
NT - plegm-T -- porting to more than one processor family; what a concept!
I say port to nextstep!  (Thats how I'm hoping to get the developers kit
anyhow).

>Then again, I just MIGHT be still upset at Borland for selling me
>SPRINT as the greatest word-processor since sliced bread.  Grrrrrrr!!
Yeah but what other word processor will allow you to write the prime sieve
in its macro language?

-- 
The Wailer at the Gates of Dawn              | banshee@cats.UCSC.EDU       |
Just who ARE you calling a FROOFROO Head?    |                             |
DoD#0667  "Just a friend of the beast."      | banshee@ucscb.UCSC.EDU      |
2,3,5,7,13,17,19,31,61,89,107,127,521,607....| banshee@ucscb.BITNET        |

I agree with Mr. Lin, Borland is stupid for just sitting around
waiting for something new to clone or buy from another vendor.
How-bout unleashing some of that talent and taking on the Unix 
Spreadsheet market.

Here is how you could do it and quickly.

1.  Yer only real competition is Access 20/20 
    Lotus under Unix Sucks and so does Lotus's unix expertise 

2.  Support both Ascii terminals and X flavors.

3.  Let the user customise everything, print drivers, term defs.
    Or just provide a ton of them.  Access rules here, WP for unix
    is another king in this area.

4.  Provide a reasonable ascii graphics package as well as a high end
    x terminal graph pack.

5.  Charge real money for real support.  Big sites are accustomed
    to quality support and are willing to pay for it.  Lotus hasnt
    caught on yet.  They charge $99.00 for a year, I wouldnt even let 
    my dog crap on the piece of paper that Lotus calls a support
    contract.

6.  If you decide to create a unix package, dont make it so
    dos like that it does not work.  Just make it work and
    make the files and macros compatible.               

7.  Add changes to the package on a regular basis and let
    all customers with support contracts have access to patches
    and updates.   

There is a terrific opportunity out there for Borland.
If Borland really is stupid they will reply with something
like "well folks we are waiting to see who wins the desktop
wars" - yeah right Windows NT vs Unix, 

While most people are stupid as well as spoiled to take a 50mhx 486 and     
put a single user OS like windows on the box and really think they
have something are ignorant to the fact that they have just wasted
$5000.00 or whatever price they just payed.

Unix in reality lets you put 50 users on that box with a alittle
more RAM and dumb ascii terminals.  As the owner of a small business
I find it quite nice to be able to cut my costs way down.  I think   
this is a good place to rant that the Computer Industry covers this
up quite well with thier OS tradewars.  Hiding the fact that all the
want to do is sell everyone a box and a crummy toy OS.

BORLAND - take notice - this is where you can win.  A small to medium
size company could really beat the economics with your products,
Dumb Terminals. Multiuser OS, RAM, Cheap 486 (hell get a second one for   
redundancy)  

Lets cost it out - Sorry I dont have a spreadsheet on my news machine.

UNIX                        $1295.00 Unlimited USers
486/50 with 8 megs          $4000.00
Ram - 72 additional megs    $2520.00
50 Wyse Terminals @300 ea   $15,000.00 
50 Right to use licenses    $15,000.00  
   Quattro Pro for Unix
   Guess 300 per user
50 Serial Ports $90 per user  $4500.00
========================================

Add it up yourself.

Now cost out 50 desktop machines and software
Ill even throw in windows for free.

Do you now see the market?  in a bad economy
with the right advertising, product positioning
and numbers in had it would be clear to any buyer
that money can be saved.   

We did office automation here for over 1200 homes office
employees using Unix.  When we started this 8 years
ago a fully loaded IBM PC was 5000 dollars not including
software.  Our latest revison to the systems serves
the same number of users from two large Sun servers
The system for 1200 people cost under $200,000 dollars.


(we already had the terminals)

So is Borland Stupid for just sitting aroung.

Lotus is stupid and they are in the game, next question please

-- 
===============================================================================
John Allen  - Network Executive                   E-mail: jallen@standard.com
Network Services                               Telephone: (503) 243-6189
Standard Insurance, Portland Oregon                  FAX: (503) 321-3313

banshee@cats.ucsc.edu (Wailer at the Gates of Dawn) writes:

>gary@resumix.portal.com (Gary M. Lin) writes:
>>I don't see any Borland suits at trade shows pushing anything except
>>goofy buttons that no one wants.  Then again, what are you waiting for?
>We don't wear suits -- well only gorilla suits anyhow.

Yes, of course your hairyness.

>>Microsoft to finish NT on MIPS and Alpha, so I can run Excel and blow
>>the socks off QPro?  Okay, so who cares if Lotus ported 1-2-3 for IBM
>>mainframes, but at least they know they can do it on a non-PC system.
>NT - plegm-T -- porting to more than one processor family; what a concept!
>I say port to nextstep!  (Thats how I'm hoping to get the developers kit
>anyhow).

But then NeXTStep won't work with YOUR graphics board will it now?

>>Then again, I just MIGHT be still upset at Borland for selling me
>>SPRINT as the greatest word-processor since sliced bread.  Grrrrrrr!!
>Yeah but what other word processor will allow you to write the prime sieve
>in its macro language?

Did I buy it because it's a programmer's shell?  Nooooooo.  I was BADLY
mistaken it was much better word processor.  Ha! Damned thing won't even
do WYSIWYG..  The current issue of ComputerWorld says Borland lacks a real
word processor.  I'll betcha they'll write one and CHARGE me $75 to
upgrade to it then, and throw in some outdated game while they're at it.

But will it read Quattro files?  Nooooooo.

>-- 
>The Wailer at the Gates of Dawn              | banshee@cats.UCSC.EDU       |
>Just who ARE you calling a FROOFROO Head?    |                             |
>DoD#0667  "Just a friend of the beast."      | banshee@ucscb.UCSC.EDU      |
>2,3,5,7,13,17,19,31,61,89,107,127,521,607....| banshee@ucscb.BITNET        |

Yes, you are a FROOFROO head.  Get real.

						Gary M. Lin
						gary@resumix.portal.com