Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Corel Corp. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dave Berehowsky who wrote (5082)	4/9/1998 1:42:00 PM
From: James P Shaw	Respond to of 9798

Rod ... 1) They haven't demonstrated the ability to develop software of their own making in the last several years and that's especially true of object-oriented software (read: modern). Dave... Corel software is reasonably decent. The software shipped by Rational Software (supposedly OO gods) isn't much to brag about either Me... While I agree with your response to Rod, it isn't fair comparing Corel's products with Rational. They are two different products aimed at two totally different markets. Rational's products are on the order of 15-20 times more complex than Corel's. I have used Rational's products (specifically ROSE 2.5, 3.0, 4.0 and looked at the latest Rose98 beta) for the past 3-5 years, and they have steadily improved in quality (the Windows versions, that is). Unless a product actually states that it was designed as an OO product, or you have internal knowledge of the product, you can not infer whether or not it is an OO based product. Rod... They have a severely flawed development process and they don't have a core asset of reusable building blocks. That approach was evident in their childish attempt to build a Java-based office pack. That failed attempt also demonstrated their abject incompetence in terms of software analysis and design. How bad? Since they punted completely we'll never know. Dave... Possibly, otoh it wouldn't have been the first time engineers were forced to work on something that made no sense. What is Oracle's excuse for Hat Trick? Me... Unless Rod has inside knowledge into Corel's development process, he is once again looking at the results of Corel's Java products, and then deciding upon the reason for the failure. A good development process does not guarantee a successful product. It only helps and guides the development of a product, through its life-cycle. Dave, what about Oracle's Sedona project? There will be failures in software development as companies try to guess, determine, devine what products will be the next greatest killer application. The bigger companies, with a more solid base of stable products (i.e. cash cows) can absorb failures more easily than Corel. It would appear that the WordPerfect purchase, the Java effort, the NC and all the other Corel endeavours have had detrimental effects on Corel's true cash cows (Draw). Dave... We shouldn't be so quick to associate Corel's financial woes with unskilled engineers. Microsoft was (still is?) a heavy recruiter at the University of Waterloo in Ontario for software engineers. I don't believe Bill Gates is unhappy about how his canadian warmed over dos hackers helped make him filthy rich. Me... Good point! A good product aimed at the wrong market (or incorrect audience) will not succeed! Microsoft didn't really start any major recruitment until the last few years (4-6). MS made their money on MS-DOS and Windows 3.0, 3.1. I graduated in 1986 (my god, was it really that far back) in BMath, Honours C.S. from Waterloo, they were not actively recruiting back then. Waterloo really got known World wide in software circles, with the success of MKS (Mortice-Kern), Open Text and the author of SQL Anywhere ( I can't remember their name, off-hand). Ciao! Jim Shaw