When I see words like this, I'm used to people meaning a word pronounced
similarly (I once spelled "which" all wrong, ran it through a spell-checker
and was told I'd better not use swear words). In this case, my guess is
that Miguel means "doubts".

Set

At 15:03 15.11.2000 -0700, Jason wrote:

>> Jason, I have to comment to your message that IBO is fantastic but
>your
>> IBO native orientation are doing that the people have dudes about
>> performance and dependence when they want to use IBO TDataset only.
>
>Would you please clarify this sentence. I'm not sure I understand what you
>are trying to convey just right.
>
>Just for giggles, I think a "dude" is an in-grown hair on a horse's rear
>end. It's also a slang to refer to a cowboy.
>
>Having learned to read, write, type and speak Korean, I sympathize with all
>who endeavor to learn another language. As well as look for the humor in it
>as well... <g>
>
>> Kylix migration is other topic, the people say me that if you will have a
>separate
>> architecture for TDataset it will do more easy the migration like IBX.
>
>I am committed to making the migration of the native components and controls
>to Kylix as smooth and easy as possible. I know I am going to have my hands
>full but my goal is to have 100% application conversion. So far I have seen
>no reason to believe that this isn't attainable.
>
>There is a little bit of a catch 22 involved here. With native IBO you are
>dependant more upon me than Borland to accomplish this. With TDataset you
>are dependant upon Borland regardless of anything within my power to have a
>nice migration path.
>
>With IBX you are dependant upon yourselves since it is OS. Seems Jeff is
>going the extra mile but nobody knows how much longer his goodwill is going
>to hold out and where things are going to be left off if he has a falling
>out of some kind.
>
>So, it's a matter of who can you trust, or who can you influence
>significantly enough.
>
>> If
>> your efforts will be in TDataset package and other controls around it but
>> without any dependence you could to earn a lot of market but it is only my
>> personal opinion.
>
>I hope it is clear that I am committed to supporting both the native IBO
>strain and the TDataset compliant strain of components. There is significant
>value and place for both of them. I will favor neither above the other.
>
>> I comment to the people about your OATs features, the
>> famous OnPrepareSQL event that does IBO fantastic and a lot of things more
>> that we can to see in IBO TDataset.
>
>OnPrepareSQL and OAT features are general and apply to both strains.
>Wherever possible I make the functionality of the engine available to both
>strains of components.
>
>> Your efforts could to go in the
>> connectivity and not in the controls, I know that you was in Delphi 2
>> without TDataset descents but we are waiting to Delphi 6 at this moment.
>;-)
>
>I am largely driven by what I need in applications that I write. There were
>and are still no 3rd party controls that work the way my native ones do. I
>wouldn't have written them if I didn't need them the way they are. You are
>right that in Delphi 2 days TDataset was far out of reach and along with it
>the data aware controls. But, I would make the same decision today given it
>to chose again.
>
>> I tell you it because the people see me in the news, lists and so on
>and
>> they are asking me about these aspects because I have been testing IBX and
>> IBO. I need the power Jason arguments.
>
>Thanks for helping people understand the two products better. That's all I
>ever really hope people do is get to understand both and make their own
>educated decisions.
>
>> Thank you Jason. You have a fantastic product.
>
>Thank you.
>
>Regards,
>Jason Wharton
>CPS - Mesa AZ
>http://www.ibobjects.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>