Re: COM support

[Sidney Barry <sidbarry@yahoo.com>]

> http://www.bkeeneybriefs.com/files/562ec3f93aabef5bbb6978124f067122-105.html

> 
> I would consider COM functionality to be paramount to Windows
> development. It's, arguably, as bad or worse than not having declare
> support would be, as Windows puts a sizable portion of its
> functionality in COM... Not to mention .NET could also become
> available. I think adding COM support would be a pretty quick and
> definitely big win for REALbasic.
> 
> I encourage everyone to check out Bob's post and take part in the discussion.
cheers!

Very interesting. I see someone from Paradigma Software commented on this. If 
it is partially implemented, why not just spend the money and go all the way? 
REALbasic will never dislodge Visual Basic (no matter how much VB blows), but I 
suspect a lot more VB users would try REALbasic if they knew they could use 
Crystal with it.


Sid

---------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------
Sidney Barry
Canberra Software
---------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------



      
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>