🚀 go-pugleaf

I called Borland with this exact question.  The main difference
between the Turbo and the Borland is the Turbo C++ can only build
either DOS (if you get Turbo C++ for DOS) or Windows (if you get
Turbo C++ for Windows.)  The Borland C++ can build both Windows
and DOS applications.

Additionally, the Turbo C++ has a built-in assembler, the Borland
C++ has asm.

The guy also said the Borland has a Profiler.

The Borland has the same documentation as the Turbo, with a few
additional documents.

He said the disk space required for Turbo C++ for windows is 22MB and for
Borland C++ is 55MB.

I ended up getting the Borland C++.  It uses only 42MB on my disk.
 
In article <1993Jan21.175238.23743@cbfsb.cb.att.com>, kkuehl@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (Kevin Kuehl) writes:
|> 
|> Could someone please explain to me the difference between Turbo C++ and
|> Borland C++?  I see there is about a $200 price difference and wonder
|> what I get for the extra $200.  Also, do you thing the extra $200 is worth
|> is for non-production programming?  I will be using is mostly just to
|> write small programs to keep my skills sharp and try new things.
|> 
|> Thanks a bunch,
|> -- 
|> 
|> Kevin Kuehl			AT&T Bell Labs
|> kevin.r.kuehl@att.com		Indian Hill
|> att!ihlpm!kkuehl		Naperville, IL

-- 
---
Daniel R. Jahn                  jahn@dg-rtp.dg.com
                             ...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!jahn