In a msg on , Richard Clarke of 1:134/15.20@fidonet rambles 
about Borland:
 RC> something like that, so I don't think it's a suprise to Borland. 
 RC> As for a rewrite, why not, the writing was on the wall when 
 RC> Borland switched to Pdox4Win. So Sheng Labs "picks up" the 
 RC> clientele that Borland dropped when switching to Pdox4Win. ...
                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Nothing like eating crow, just found out about Borland coming out with a 
conversion product for its DOS based users. It takes the Paradox For DOS 
objects (inc. scripts) and coverts to Pdox4Win 5.x. Don't have many details 
yet, but am interested if anyone comes across any more info on it. It's 
supposed to convert most of the coding, commenting code that can't be 
converted properly.
The marketing style is simular to IBM's support to its "release" of 
conversion products for its previous client base. Refering to the upgrade of 
2.11 to Warp kits. It seems the "new" product that takes priority, previous 
users can get by until the "new" product is a success/flop.
BTW: Been told the latest prerelease of WIN95 is pretty good (more reliable 
and stable). Still not "switching" back to Windows, but I think I'll have it 
running on one of the systems here for comparison. (the form to fill out for 
it is *many* pages long, be nice if they shortened it up *smile*)
Let's explore the CONVERSION variables:    {} - external variables
{   1. Richard Sheng's willingness to work with us here, or any other 
       software developer that makes the effort. (who you want to work with)
    2. The current "big boys" marketing ways (not keeping public informed? 
        could be I don't keep up with the right information? :-( )
    3. "Time" ensuring a clear migration path for user data that we help
       manage. (time is NOT wasted, it gets us the conversion products!)
    4. Available "operating" systems required for conversion to Pdox4Win
       Windows stability questionable? (3.xx or latest WIN95?)              }
       OS/2 Windows stability with novell directory services questionable (?)
   *5. Rewrite time required to convert to Pdox4Win (possible learning curve)
    6. Fast, reliable, low overhead program requirements
    7. Network considerations? (Novell here)
    8. Rights to distribution of resellable product (royalties, fees, etc.)
    9. Application shrink wrapping considerations. Do we want to require 
sers
       to have Pdox4Win (or Pdox4DOS for that matter) installed already to
       use our application? Size, # of files, requirements of the
       companion program; do we want to handle their installation also?
   10. Is there a need to migrate yet, if at all?
   11. Any others? Feel free to add, making a list (and checking it twice!)
       that will be requestable from 1:134/15 (hoping you Pdox4Win folks
       speak up here, did you do manual conversions for previous pdx apps or
       just start with new applications? *general* problems encountered?)
In my situation, it still looks like TurboPAL *is* the best route (can always 
convert to Pdox4Win later). TurboPAL is shaping up quite nicely, it may not 
be a "permanent" solution but at least it gives my applications the speed I 
want.  Let the bugs get worked out of the environments and conversion program 
first, then reevaluation.                                         _smile_
Comments?
ttyl
Richard
--- msgedsq 2.0.5
---------------