Compare it from their ease of use. VC has a series of tools such as ClassWizard, SourceBrowser, and Visual SourceSafe, Visual Modeler, etc., which is easy to use. (VC self-modeling tool Visual Modeler, may illustrate that it is an engineering-level development platform, different from C Builder.) The MSDN "developer's encyclopedia" it belongs is to let you "I haven't found it, only I can't think of". And its small functionality such as AutoComplete is also more than the C Builder. Although the new version of C Builder also provides this feature, it has to wait for a few seconds, sometimes you will stop the mouse in one place, and wait for the hard drive to ring a few seconds, this is 566MHz Celeron II. Don't laugh at me trivial, sometimes the maturity and ease of development tools, it is from these small places. C Builder acts as a RAD tool, it should emphasize ease of use. However, it is still not mature than VC. This should not be.
Let's take a look at their portability. Inprise is developing C Builder and Delphi's Linux version, the code is Kylix. Perhaps through Kylix, a Windows program written in a VCL architecture is possible to transfer to Linux. But this is just possible. Because it is not good to work in the current Inprise compatibility. C Builder can compile VC programs and you have to use Microsoft to write MFC using standard methods, and its own compatibility between its own versions is not very good. Low versions of C Builder cannot use high versions of VCL components (which don't say it), and high version of C Builder can't use low version of VCL components. It's really this, I rarely see that the software is not compatible. If Windows 98 cannot run 95 programs, Windows 95 cannot run 3.x, Win 3.x cannot run the DOS program, do you still use Windows? If it is not the other of C Builder too good, the light is not compatible, it is enough to let me abandon it. Moreover, although C Builder can compile Delphi's Object Pascal code by bundled compilers, C Builder cannot use VCL components developed by Delphi. So a component has a different versions of these different versions of the For D1 / D2 / D3 / D4 / D5 / C1 / C3 / C5, and the upgrade of the C Builder may also increase. I hope that Inprise can solve the compatibility problem of the same brother. And Microsoft's VC has no such problem. The program of MFC 1.0 can also be compiled under VC6.0 without barrier.
Let's take a look at their prospects. In fact, the advancement of technology is many times. At first, Borland's Turbo C and Borland C were almost unique. Microsoft's Quick C (now someone knows this product?) And Microsoft C / C have never become mainstream. But how many years is Borland C ? Soon, I was pressed by the newly rising Microsoft Visual C / C . Now C Builder has a post-hosted situation. If stability is improved, BUG is less, and there is hope to become mainstream. But the overall strength of Inprise is not Microsoft, which is not a context. From the Release Notes of C Builder 5, you can see the size and quality of their help documents. (Which other product helps "and MSDN ratio?) Inprise should learn from Netscape, do not let C Builder become the second Netscape Communicator. (Communicator is also a leading technology, and even occupied most browser markets, but it seems to be lack of strength, and there are many bugs in 6.0 pr1, 2, and now I've can't do it.) C builder is the flagship of Inprise One of the products, the prospect should be more optimistic, and Inprise has been entered to Linux, and Microsoft has not moved. Is it necessary to go to Linux? This emerging market? It seems that their attitude towards Linux has a sluggish response to the Internet a few years ago. But later ... Hey, I hope that Inprise does not step back to Netscape. C Builder is a very promising development tool. Unfortunately, the founder of Inprise Delphi has already hopped to Microsoft to host the Visual J project. I hope that INPRISE is not too big. What is the prospect of Microsoft Visual C ? Visual Studio 7.0 will soon be launched. I don't know if I can't catch up with C Builder on the advancement of the technology while maintaining stability. In addition, this version will strengthen the characteristics of network development. It seems that Microsoft is judged, the development strength is not a discount.
For technology (mainly referring to the application framework), C Builder is currently leading to Visual C . But there are few less unsatisfactory, let me "I don't want to say that I love you". Although VC has been very perfect today, the MFC framework is already a tomorrow. If MFC is not used, there is no suitable alternative. WFC is supporting components, properties, and events, but it is used by Visual J ; ATL is also very advanced, but it is used for COM / ActiveX development; ATL-based WTL is also good, but unfortunately is an unofficial work, and may not be more than VCL. advanced. Microsoft recently proposed C # (read as C Sharp) language scheme, but it belongs to the same class as Java. It seems that it is gold and boys. Do your choice based on your needs. In fact, Visual C and C Builder are not just a single competitive relationship. They do not overlap in many fields, even complementary. How to pay, to decide on your project characteristics. If you develop something on the system, it takes excellent compatibility and stability, select Visual C . You can only call various APIs of Windows, without MFC. If you write traditional Windows desktop applications, the Visual C MFC framework is "orthodox". If you develop databases for enterprises, high-level applications such as information management systems ("high-level" are relative to "low-level / underlying", not technically advanced or low.) And have a tight time limit limit, choose C Builder Better. If the language you use is Object Pascal, Delphi is the only choice (if the free compiler, such as GNU Pascal does not consider). If you originally use Delphi (Object Pascal language), you want to change C , you should first use C Builder. The familiar interfaces and the same frame will make your transition half a time. In addition, although the MFC has been revealed, it is not worth learning. In fact, I don't learn MFC is equal to no learning VC. Using the MFC framework development program is still mainstream mode currently developing desktop applications, and it remains a very long time. Even if you don't use the MFC framework, take some time to learn the MFC package mechanism is also very beneficial to the OOP mechanism you are familiar with C and the Windows underlying function.
Above comments are for reference only.
