77 comments
Comment actions Permalink

JBuilder3 was nice, but with next versions it became worse.

Dave Griffith schrieb:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/22/jbuilder_eclipse/

It couldn't have happened to a lovelier product.

--Dave Griffith

0
Comment actions Permalink

Dave Griffith wrote:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/22/jbuilder_eclipse/

It couldn't have happened to a lovelier product.

--Dave Griffith


We weren't out to 'kill' them. Competition is good. Unfortunately, they
just didn't compete very hard.

--
Rob Harwood
Software Developer
JetBrains Inc.
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

0
Comment actions Permalink

In article <d4ba7v$q19$1@is.intellij.net>,
"Rob Harwood (JetBrains)" <rob.harwood@jetbrains.com> wrote:

Dave Griffith wrote:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/22/jbuilder_eclipse/

It couldn't have happened to a lovelier product.

--Dave Griffith


We weren't out to 'kill' them. Competition is good. Unfortunately, they
just didn't compete very hard.


I honestly think they would have done better, and been better
competition if they also sold their product for $500, with sales for
$250 every year.

Charging $1-3k for the version that understood version control and jar
files was not a way to get real buy-in.

Scott

0
Comment actions Permalink

They killed themselves. The poduct was too costly to survive; its as simple as that.

A few years ago, I was sitting in my office, thinking of shelling out the money for JBuilder Enterprise (I had about two days left on the trial). To be honest, if something increases your productivity that much, then you should make back the money you spend on it.

Someone sent me a link to the IntelliJ website, and after trying it, I realised that I would make the money back a hell of a lot faster with a better product (better and cheaper).

JBuilder just doesn't have enough benefits over IDEA and Eclipse, to make it worth buying anymore.

They obviously believe that dumping it on Eclipse, will save them on the development costs, get them a bit of rabid OS exposure, and still allow them to charge a fat wodge for the Enterprise version.

I wonder if the Eclipse crowd will bite?

0
Comment actions Permalink

Hello Dave,

DG> It couldn't have happened to a lovelier product.

two, please :)

--
Alexey Efimov, Java Developer
Tops BI
http://www.topsbi.ru


0
Comment actions Permalink

I hope JetBrains does not go this route. Keep up the good work. Give us tools:

Bueno, Bonito, Y Barato

That is spanish for good, beutiful, and cheap.

Always remember your place of origin JB. I think you are all smart. Just
listen to us the customers and help us out at a bargain price.

Thanks.

In article <d4ba7v$q19$1@is.intellij.net>,
"Rob Harwood (JetBrains)" <rob.harwood@jetbrains.com> wrote:

>> Dave Griffith wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/22/jbuilder_eclipse/
>>>
>>> It couldn't have happened to a lovelier product.
>>>
>>> --Dave Griffith
>>>
>> We weren't out to 'kill' them. Competition is good. Unfortunately,
>> they just didn't compete very hard.
>>

I honestly think they would have done better, and been better
competition if they also sold their product for $500, with sales for
$250 every year.

Charging $1-3k for the version that understood version control and jar
files was not a way to get real buy-in.

Scott




0
Comment actions Permalink

The same thing actually happened somehow to Together.

As soon Borland had acquired TogetherSoft the further development of Together Control Center didn't go anywhere except fixing some long waiting bugs, sold as enhancements. No really innovative intelligent features/enhancements, which IntelliJ provides with every new relase. The main efforts went into the Eclipse plug-in version of Together, which did not provide the same feature set as the original product, so this was not an option for us.

Each year we spend a fortune on a maintenance contract, from which we could buy another 10 IDEA licenses per year easily.

I think Borland may have a general problem though, as you can see the same problems in any of their IDEs. We developed desktop applications with their Delphi IDE. Now having sometimes to switch from IntelliJ back to Delphi to fix some bugs in an older application, shows how far advanced IntelliJ was and is. In comparison Delphi lacks many of the "intelligent" features found in IntelliJ, I think our version even hasn't line numbering. Admittedly, our Delphi version is some years old (Delphi 6), but the following versions weren't much better, when checking the trial editions. The upgrade prices of the enterprise version were so extraodinary high that we never saw a benefit in upgrading.

So, as the JBuilder strategy can be seen in the other Borland IDEs too, it could well be that JBuilder is not the only product that may fall off the cliff.

Thomas Gülden
Munich, Germany

0
Comment actions Permalink

Dave Griffith wrote:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/22/jbuilder_eclipse/

It couldn't have happened to a lovelier product.

--Dave Griffith


I'm waiting and hoping for IDEA to be open sourced too.

In the long run i'm sure it will be a necessity, to prevent IDEA from
being overrun by Eclipse.

/Kreiger



Attachment(s):
signature.asc
0
Comment actions Permalink

Are you serious?

Let me see if there are parallels. Linux vs Windows is a good example. Linux
is eclipse and Windows is Idea. Why is it that Microsoft has not open source
Windows? I still think Windows will have many great features that Linux lacks.
I admit Windows is expensive but the features are great. If they just borrowed
the pricing model from JB they would be in a much better place.

I think many people believe on the premise that open source is much better.
That the sheer number of programmers will crush the competition. We should
be looking at total cost of ownership. I don't care if someone gives me a
free IDE if I don't have the feature I need. I much rather have a complete
IDE that fills my needs and simply works. If I have to spend 500 dollars
to gain peace of mind, then that is worth it.

Untimately it comes down to hard work and wit. This is true for both OS and
CS projects. If managers are stupid, then your production direction will
go nowhere. If developers are lazy, then your stuff won't get done. As long
as JB is a hustler, they will keep me as a customer.

Dave Griffith wrote:

>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/22/jbuilder_eclipse/
>>
>> It couldn't have happened to a lovelier product.
>>
>> --Dave Griffith
>>

I'm waiting and hoping for IDEA to be open sourced too.

In the long run i'm sure it will be a necessity, to prevent IDEA from
being overrun by Eclipse.

/Kreiger




0
Comment actions Permalink

Rodrigo Gomez wrote:

Are you serious?


Very. I have no doubts that Eclipse will some day surpass IDEA, unless
IDEA does something about it. However, that day is still far off.

Let me see if there are parallels. Linux vs Windows is a good example.


I do not think it is a good example. I think it is an irrelevant strawman.

/Kreiger



Attachment(s):
signature.asc
0
Comment actions Permalink

I'm waiting and hoping for IDEA to be open sourced too.

Why would they do that? They'd go out of business over night.

+In the long run i'm sure it will be a necessity, to prevent IDEA from
being overrun by Eclipse.+

Eclipse already has more features than IDEA. But they are so poorly packaged that I find the whole application pretty much unusable. Having hundreds of programmers working on a single project just produces more results, not better ones.

0
Comment actions Permalink

I'm waiting and hoping for IDEA to be open sourced too.

Why would they do that? They'd go out of business over night.


How? Open-source does not mean free. They could charge for IDEA and only
distribute source code to customers.



0
Comment actions Permalink

So what the purpose of going OS then?
-


Maxim Shafirov
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

>> I'm waiting and hoping for IDEA to be open sourced too.
>>
>> Why would they do that? They'd go out of business over night.
>>

How? Open-source does not mean free. They could charge for IDEA and
only distribute source code to customers.



0
Comment actions Permalink

Maxim Shafirov (JetBrains) wrote:

So what the purpose of going OS then?


Well, for one it would mean i could fix the little things that bother me
that you might never get around to fixing.

It would mean that i could send patches with fixes to you.

It would mean users of the subversion plugin could fix the bugs that
plague them without having to wait for you.

I'm sure many IDEA users would love to have the source.

/Kreiger



Attachment(s):
signature.asc
0
Comment actions Permalink

Yes, exactly.

Maxim Shafirov (JetBrains) wrote:

>> So what the purpose of going OS then?
>>

Well, for one it would mean i could fix the little things that bother
me that you might never get around to fixing.

It would mean that i could send patches with fixes to you.

It would mean users of the subversion plugin could fix the bugs that
plague them without having to wait for you.

I'm sure many IDEA users would love to have the source.

/Kreiger




0
Comment actions Permalink

Dave Griffith wrote:

>>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/22/jbuilder_eclipse/
>>
>>It couldn't have happened to a lovelier product.
>>
>>--Dave Griffith


I'm waiting and hoping for IDEA to be open sourced too.

While I'm 'waiting'/(using and enjoying IDEA), I hope the contrary.

In the long run i'm sure it will be a necessity, to prevent IDEA from
being overrun by Eclipse.

Not true. The only thing required in order to keep IDEA in the run is
for JetBrains to innovate, not to opensource.

Ahmed.
P.S. After a few years, 96% of the opensource projects are
'abandonware'. Not so with commercial ones.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Ahmed Mohombe wrote:

While I'm 'waiting'/(using and enjoying IDEA), I hope the contrary.

I'm also using and enjoying IDEA. However, i still fully expect Eclipse
or another open source project to some day surpass IDEA.

Not true. The only thing required in order to keep IDEA in the run is
for JetBrains to innovate, not to opensource.

The only thing required to kill IDEA is one innovative open source
competitor. Eclipse is not yet it.

Ahmed.
P.S. After a few years, 96% of the opensource projects are
'abandonware'. Not so with commercial ones.


This is an irrelevant strawman.
Also, please do not confuse open source with non-commercial.

/Kreiger



Attachment(s):
signature.asc
0
Comment actions Permalink

Christoffer

>
>It would mean users of the subversion plugin could fix the bugs that
>plague them without having to wait for you.
>
>I'm sure many IDEA users would love to have the source.
>

>

The plugins sources are already available, in the ideaXXXX-dev.zip file.

Alain

0
Comment actions Permalink

Alain Ravet wrote:

The plugins sources are already available, in the ideaXXXX-dev.zip file.


Yes, i know. I mean the source for the whole of IDEA. The subversion
plugin example might have been a bad one.

/Kreiger



Attachment(s):
signature.asc
0
Comment actions Permalink

+
Well, for one it would mean i could fix the little things that bother me that you might never get around to fixing.
+

Open Source Myth #1.

The reality is that customers essentially never fix bugs(*). That's because in most cases fixing a bug isn't worth the immense effort of understanding, building, and testing a product. What active open source customers actually do is add features. That's the real payoff (and it can be enormous), as it gets users creativity engaged. An adequately designed (and documented, cough, cough) plugin system can get you the same results, though, without open-sourcing the base code.

+
It would mean users of the subversion plugin could fix the bugs that plague them without having to wait for you.
+

I've read the subversion plugin source, have a good working knowlege of IDEA internals, and am, by some measures, an above average programmer. I would no more try to fix the bugs in it than I would try rebuild an internal combustion engine using only my eyebrows.

--Dave Griffith

(*)Yes, there are counterexamples. InspectionGadgets, an open-source project with something like 100,000 daily users (all of them java developers) has had a grand total of ten bug fixes submitted, by a four separate submitters.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Pick another example:

How about open office vs microsoft office?


Rodrigo Gomez wrote:

>> Are you serious?
>>

Very. I have no doubts that Eclipse will some day surpass IDEA, unless
IDEA does something about it. However, that day is still far off.

>> Let me see if there are parallels. Linux vs Windows is a good
>> example.
>>

I do not think it is a good example. I think it is an irrelevant
strawman.

/Kreiger




0
Comment actions Permalink

I am an IDEA user but I don't have the time to fix bugs that I dislike.

I code for a company. From my company's prespective, my code is open source
and anyone can change it. But they don't because they rely on me to fix it.
That is why I get paid. They are my customers. So imagine I tell them, "my
code is OS you can go and fix your own bugs if they trouble you so much".
Lol, I would get fired for this.


Maxim Shafirov (JetBrains) wrote:

>> So what the purpose of going OS then?
>>

Well, for one it would mean i could fix the little things that bother
me that you might never get around to fixing.

It would mean that i could send patches with fixes to you.

It would mean users of the subversion plugin could fix the bugs that
plague them without having to wait for you.

I'm sure many IDEA users would love to have the source.

/Kreiger




0
Comment actions Permalink

Christoffer "Kreiger" Hammarström wrote:

I'm also using and enjoying IDEA. However, i still fully expect Eclipse
or another open source project to some day surpass IDEA.


And when Eclipse surpasses IDEA, I can switch to Eclipse and continue
having a superior development experience. However, until that happens I
will continue using IDEA and trust that JetBrains knows what they are doing.

Ciao,
Gordon

--
Gordon Tyler (Software Developer)
Quest Software <http://www.quest.com/>
260 King Street East, Toronto, Ontario M5A 4L5, Canada
Voice: (416) 933-5046 | Fax: (416) 933-5001

0
Comment actions Permalink

Gordon Tyler wrote:

And when Eclipse surpasses IDEA, I can switch to Eclipse and continue
having a superior development experience.


Exactly my point.

However, until that happens I will continue using IDEA and trust that
JetBrains knows what they are doing.


I'm just saying that i think they'll someday need to open source IDEA to
remain competitive. Since they know what they are doing, i think this is
what is going to happen.

/Kreiger

0
Comment actions Permalink

Dave Griffith wrote:

Open Source Myth #1.

The reality is that customers essentially never fix bugs(*). That's
because in most cases fixing a bug isn't worth the immense effort of
understanding, building, and testing a product. What active open
source customers actually do is add features. That's the real payoff
(and it can be enormous), as it gets users creativity engaged. An
adequately designed (and documented, cough, cough) plugin system can
get you the same results, though, without open-sourcing the base
code.


The point isn't that i would. The point is that i could.

I could tweak things to my liking, and not ever release a scrap of it to
Jetbrains if i didn't want to. Maybe i could share my tweaks with other
users.
In using and enjoying IDEA i've only ever really missed one thing:
Having the source available.

/Kreiger

0
Comment actions Permalink

Rodrigo Gomez wrote:

I am an IDEA user but I don't have the time to fix bugs that I dislike.
I code for a company. From my company's prespective, my code is open
source and anyone can change it. But they don't because they rely on me
to fix it. That is why I get paid. They are my customers. So imagine I
tell them, "my code is OS you can go and fix your own bugs if they
trouble you so much". Lol, I would get fired for this.


What does your attitude to your paying customers have to do with
anything? Are you saying Jetbrains should or would behave like that?

Irrelevant strawman.

I'd like to tweak IDEA for my purposes. For fun, if nothing else.
I'm sorry if this offends you.

/Kreiger

0
Comment actions Permalink

Christoffer,

>I'm just saying that i think they'll someday need to open source IDEA to
>remain competitive. Since they know what they are doing, i think this is
>what is going to happen.
>

>


Do you really think that a "team" of volunteers, working after hours,
could go beyond minor tweaks, and handle major tasks like rewriting the
code formatter (what JB has been doing for quite some times now),
creating the language API and refactoring IDEA to use it widely,
creating the openAPI and moving to a plugin based architecture, etc, etc...
I don't think so.


Alain

0
Comment actions Permalink


I'd like to tweak IDEA for my purposes.

I'd love to know how, and whether you've explored the various plugin APIs for your purposes.

--Dave Griffith

0
Comment actions Permalink

Dave Griffith wrote:

I'd like to tweak IDEA for my purposes.

I'd love to know how, and whether you've explored the various plugin APIs for your purposes.


Yep. The plugin API has become extremely powerful and I think it's safe to say that there is
enough to explore "just for fun". No offense, but I can't imagine that anyone except JB would
be able to use the full source for much more than adding a new checkbox here and there. Sure
there are things that may be interesting from an educational point of view (e.g. Dataflow stuff),
but after all this is JB's very own intellectual property.

There are indeed cases where the OpenAPI may not be powerful enough yet, but I think the community
is welcome to make any suggestions in this regard.

Though I'd be one of the first to grab the source if it were available, I don't see how that makes
a difference for their product and its success.

Sascha

0
Comment actions Permalink

Alain Ravet wrote:

I don't think so.

That is your prerogative.

/Kreiger

0

Please sign in to leave a comment.