Whatever happened to that "with" removal feature that was in Castalia? They got rid of it because it didn't work? I mean it never worked for me, but I was hoping that Emb. fixed it.
So they paid all that money for the product, spent time integrating it, shipped Delphi with it even though it was clear as day it was incredibly buggy, then ended up spending more time taking most of it out again rather than fixing it? :-(
Joseph Mitzen From what I saw from the history of events, Emb purchased it, Jacob Thurman work with Emb to integrate it better in to the IDE (as a new ToolsAPI came about from it) and then they (both?) integrate right in to the IDE to what you have now.
You could look at the purchase as a secondary thing, where Emb was after Usertility but was forced? to take Castalia with it, and as such, they implemented the little they had to (with Castalia) and got rid of the rest (less to support).
It wouldn't be the first time something like this has happened, right?
I was wondering the same thing. I liked that product
ReplyDeleteSo they paid all that money for the product, spent time integrating it, shipped Delphi with it even though it was clear as day it was incredibly buggy, then ended up spending more time taking most of it out again rather than fixing it? :-(
ReplyDeleteMike Margerum There was some nice things.
ReplyDeleteJoseph Mitzen From what I saw from the history of events, Emb purchased it, Jacob Thurman work with Emb to integrate it better in to the IDE (as a new ToolsAPI came about from it) and then they (both?) integrate right in to the IDE to what you have now.
You could look at the purchase as a secondary thing, where Emb was after Usertility but was forced? to take Castalia with it, and as such, they implemented the little they had to (with Castalia) and got rid of the rest (less to support).
It wouldn't be the first time something like this has happened, right?