며칠전 올렸던 The Open Community Letter to Borland Management 가 현재 draft 1.7c까지 작성되었고 드디어 서명 게시판이 만들어졌습니다. 마음같아선 전문을 해석해서 올리고 싶지만.. 제 코가 석자라.. ㅠ ㅠ.. 사실 읽는 것과 번역문을 작성하는 것은 차이가 많이 나더군요. 부족한 영어실력을 보완하기 위해 상당한 시간과 노력이...

일단 능력이 되시는 분들은 함 읽어보시고 서명도 많이 하시면 좋겠습니다. 코멘트도 다시구요~

일단 오픈레터의 전문은 여기서 확인하시면 됩니다.
http://www.simventions.com/gustavson/2004/10/open-community-letter-to-borland.html

다음은 서명 사이트입니다.
http://www.simventions.com/gustavson/2004/10/community-letter-signature-page-up-and.html
읽어보기 귀찮으신 분들은 이 링크로 다이렉트로 들어가실 수 있습니다.
http://www.simventions.com/gustavson/2004/10/lettersign/regaddform.htm


함 번역을 시작해 보긴 하겠지만.. 언제 다 될지는 장담 못하겠네요. ㅠ ㅠ
영어 전문 올라갑니다.

//------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Open Community Letter to Borland Management (Draft 1.7c)
Thanks for all the feedback... I think were about there. See our strategy to get this out (including the survey)! Most important, however, be sure to submit your signature and please get the word out!!!

To: The Borland Management Team
From: Community of Developers Using Borland C++ Builder
Subject: C++Builder’s Future – Mutually Mission Critical

Among software developers and those that they support, there is overwhelming consensus that Borland Software Corporation should continue development, maintenance and updates of its Rapid Application Development (RAD) focused C++Builder product line. This letter outlines the key issues as to why C++Builder is a Mission Critical application for developers, and, ultimately, the customers whom developers support. This letter also outlines why it is imperative that Borland re-channel its direction and resources into updating and delivering this mission critical product. Underlying to the statements made in this letter is the essential business case and rationale for Borland to recommit to the C++Builder product line.

The development, maintenance and distribution of the C++Builder product line, which was focused on RAD development for the Microsoft platform, must be restored. Take into account the vast and significant number of developers and their customers who rely on products that have been built using the C++Builder product line.

Some of these customers* who use and rely upon C++Builder built software include:

- U.S. Department of Defense (DoD)



Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC)
Naval Air Systems Command
U.S. Army Research and Development Engineering Command (RDECOM)
U.S. Marine Corp System Command (MARCORSYSCOM)
- U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

U.S. Coast Guard
Local government agencies
- Major Players in the Space Industry

the European Space Agency
Astrium
Alenia Spazio
Alcatel
SAAB Space
NASA/JPL
- Aviation Industry / Corporate Aviators

Caterpiller, Inc.
Chevron Texaco, Inc.
DuPont
Eastman Kodak Company
Ford Motor Company
General Electric
General Motors Air Trans
Kellogg Company
Pepsico
much more
- Crime Control / Criminal Investigation / Forensic Sciences

Many UK police forces
Several UK and US government security agencies
A number of customs units in Europe.
Worldwide users of latent fingerprint workstation
- Delphi/BCB 3rd party component/library vendors

- Users of custom and commercial Windows applications, which include

Students,
Teachers,
Families,
Hobbyists,
Amateur Photographers,
Finanical Analysts,
Engineers
Aviators
and much more
Borland’s lack of communication and commitment among the C++ development community over the course of the past two years has and continues to adversely influence decisions being made by these and other organizations, individuals and associated stakeholders. As a result, alternative tools, languages and vendors products are receiving greater consideration for future product development. Unfortunately, the “investment” made by those customers who either purchase software that was built using C++Builder technology (such as the VCL) or bring on board contractors or consultants who use C++Builder to accomplish their service tasks is grimly being seen as a “loss” due to Borland’s lack of commitment to their product and lack of communication to the large following of developers who use Borland products for C++ development.

For those organizations choosing alternative options, skilled developers using Borland’s C++Builder product line will require to be retrained and re-skilled for other development environments and languages.

Legacy or “long lived assets” that have historically continued to be budgeted for maintenance support and extensions, are now considered to be in jeopardy of future funding. Many of these legacy or long live software assets can be considered mission critical applications.

For example, the U.S. Navy relies on software built using C++Builder for integrating critical system assets, supporting real-time and after action analysis of combat system capabilities, and providing front-end man-to-machine interfaces for military personnel onboard modern U.S. Navy surface and subsurface vessels.

As another example, today’s modern marine relies on Forward Observer Forward Air Control (FO/FAC) devices with critical software elements some of which were built using C++Builder, which are hosted on ruggedized, yet mobile Windows based platforms. In all of these DoD examples, these specific applications must be maintained and updated to effectively equip the warfighter.

Other mission critical applications developed for major players in the space industry using BCB include the following:

the infrastructure for the Rosetta spacecraft, which needs to stay operational until 2014-2015.
a telemetry/image processor for the Japanese ALOS satellite, which is the first system in the processing chain for all ground stations in the African/European zone.
a Power Front-End system that, if subject to anomaly, could cripple or destroy a $1 Billion satellite hardware construction project.
Borland C++ Builder is also used to develop and maintain one of the world's leading computer forensics packages. This software is used by various government agencies in several countries and has been instrumental in the successful conclusion of a number of high profile legal cases including the Gary Glitter and Dame Shirley Porter prosecutions in the UK. It has also been used by several large companies to protect intellectual property rights and track down sources of internal computer abuse.

It's important to mention the strong interest and support third party Delphi component and library vendors have in the future of BCB as well. Consider that these vendors have a more viable and financial interest to produce controls, components and tools if they know they can be leveraged not only by Delphi users but the large contingency of BCB users. Furthermore, developers who use BCB often depend upon these Delphi/BCB vendors to equip them with essential VCL controls and components and IDE tools, which help expedite the RAD process.

There are many other examples, too numerous to name, where there is critical reliance on software built using the C++Builder and the VCL framework. Furthermore, for these customers who demand high performance and reliable applications, only a standard-based language such as C++ can be uniformly considered. This eliminates other languages and environments such as Delphi, and, in some cases, even Java, which has not yet been standardized despite its popularity. Furthermore, Java is often withdrawn from consideration due to performance issues often related to the Java Virtual Machine (VM) that must run as middleware between the OS and application. Performance is often a key attribute of mission critical applications. This is an attribute in which C++ has often been able to support.

We find that there is a not so subtle irony to this predicament that developers and their customers are now in. Much like the two-way capabilities provided between a designer and code editor within a RAD IDE like Borland C++Builder, there is also a corollary impact to the developer based on what Borland’s decision will be with the future direction of C++Builder. Consider the fact that many of the customers, sponsors and users of a software developer’s program created using C++Builder expect and rely on that software to be maintained and updated, especially mission critical software. Likewise, the developers who are using C++Builder to build and maintain these products rely on the C++Builder software development environment to be maintained and updated. The ability for software developers to continue to support customers, sponsors and users - all of whom expect updates and continued software maintenance - is directly influenced by the availability of the language, framework and tools for which they use to build the software. If Borland doesn’t deliver, then the developer is at risk to deliver as well.

We, the development community including BCB users, the Delphi and BCB third party vendors, and those that we support through our software products and services, find that it is imperative that Borland continue to the develop and update the C++Builder product line. We respectfully ask Borland Management to consider the following stark realities and grim fears:

A significant number of large organizations and a greater number of small organizations have invested considerable time and effort in C++ Builder projects.
The time and effort investment is now more and more at risk as Borland delays on showing their commitment to developers.
People who took a risk on Borland instead of “playing safe buying into Microsoft” are now losing their credibility.
Many projects and organizations have begun or are considering moving away from Borland tools.
To this last point, a comment was received during the development of this letter that adequately reflects the common sentiment of the development community, “Borland can sideline their products if they choose, but the consequence is that the developers who used them, and many more who see what happened, will sideline Borland.” This, I am afraid, is a very real possibility if a favorable decision is not made soon.

While developers are angered and disappointed with Borland, understand that they would dearly wish otherwise. The necessary ingredients to turn things around have been and continue to be commitment and communication. And, based on the decisions that developers and their customers need to make, time is of the essence. Borland must no longer delay. We have made it clear that the product in itself is mission critical for developers so they can continue to support their customers, sponsors and breadth of users. Additionally, Microsoft has recently renewed their focus in C++ as the principal language to exploit all the features of the CLR for .NET. With this in mind, it should be recognized that there is an untapped world of yet to be developed applications for both Win32 and .NET that could be manifested using C++Builder as the mission critical application development environment of our industry.

We close with a reminder of statements made by Borland’s CEO Dale Fuller, which he shared at the recent 2004 Borland Developer’s Conference (BorCon) in San Jose, California. In his keynote and throughout the week he emphasized that since its infancy, Borland has and will continue to “never abandon the developers.” He added, the “past is really our future.” We hope that this is true, for there is no greater time than this for Borland to live and measure up to these words.

We look forward to hearing a favorable decision on or before December 15th, 2004.

Thank you.

Very Respectfully,

The C++Builder User Community
(submitted by Paul Gustavson - spokesman)

Enclosure - A list of signatures from developers, sponsors, users and other stakeholders who share the thoughts and opinions that have been expressed in this letter.

* The identification of any company, organization and/or agency in this letter, here on referred to as an entity, that sponsors or uses software developed using C++Builder either in part and or in whole SHALL NOT be misconstrued as an endorsement by that entity of any single product nor used in a court of law for settling contractual disputes or any other legal issues with the said entity. The software products and/or entities referenced in this letter are mentioned only for purposes of identifying C++Builder as a critical tool used in the construction of said software or by said entities.

It should be noted that a significant number of companies, organizations and agencies preferred to not be publicly identified in this open letter, and, therefore, their wishes were abided. However, where appropriate, a general description of the type of entity that sponsored or used software that has been built using C++Builder was identified as an alternative.