Steve Summers wrote:

> What I don't understand is why Interbase is even on the DevCo
> product list, when AppServer & VisiBroker are considered
> "Infrastructure". I think Borland threw it in because they
> don't want it- and see no long term potential for it.

Of all the conversation so far this is the one thing that hits
me as most likely. When you look at the history of IB it seems
to be a series of contortions trying to make it fit. By giving
it away now they get rid of the embarrassment and can have
someone else decide what should finally happen to it (and take
the brunt of criticisms etc that may result).

Take a look at the product line (entitled "IDE") on the Borland
website and pick the odd one out. Only a company as blind as
Borland has been for many years could miss it! Even the news
articles about the "spin-off" discuss it in reference to
Borland's "IDEs" (which sort of leaves IB out in the cold).

As for what we can expect from DevCo in respect to IB... it
seems likely to me that anyone interested in the rest of the
product line will probably want to divest themselves of IB in
fairly quick time.

I am not at all convinced that someone interested in the IDE
product line is going to want to get involved in a database
open source product - at least not on a scale that would help
either IB (if it were reopened) or FB.

The existing support obligations will probably mean trying to
off-load to a commercial entity that can take over those
obligations - which must appear, to someone interested in the
IDE products, as more of an encumberance than an asset. We can
only hope that this stage of the reshuffle may result in
something favourable to Firebird, but I am not holding my
breath.

--
Geoff Worboys
Telesis Computing