Launching Delphi - Feb 14, 1995
February 14, 2020
It was twenty-five years ago today that Anders Hejlsberg and I got up on stage at the Software Development '95 conference and launched Delphi to the world. The joke was that all 1,500 of us were geeks who couldn't get a date even on Valentine's day.
We knew Delphi was a good product. Maybe even a great one. Our beta testers loved it, the team was excited and we had a 32-bit version in the works for the upcoming Windows 95 OS that would be bigger, better and faster. But the scale of Delphi's success took us by surprise. The Borland booth was mobbed at the conference. Delphi, with the help of DavidI and Charlie Calvert, gave birth to an ecosystem of third party books, magazines, component libraries and more. I've met countless developers over the years who told me Delphi enabled them to learn Windows development, build their career, their business.
So what made Delphi so good? You gotta give credit to Anders. He is probably one of the ten best programmers in the world and certainly the best developer I've ever worked with. He had more than ten years of compiler experience under his belt when we built Delphi. He knew exactly what tradeoffs mattered in language design to balance programmer productivity with machine performance. Delphi compiled to machine code at the speed of 35,000 lines per minute on a 90 mhz pentium. I have no idea how fast that is on today's machine. But you could load a demo program, hit the run button and by the time you clapped your hands together it was running. And I clapped my hands together ever time I gave a demo, just to make the point.
As Anders pointed out that night on stage, Delphi was written in Delphi. So the team that built Delphi (and it really was a team: Anders, Gary, Chuck, Dave, Allen, Hank, Ray, Marc, Danny, Charlie) used it every single day. We made it great because Delphi was the tool that we wanted to use. It was pretty mind-blowing when Anders loaded the Delphi project source code into Delphi and compiled itself.
The Delphi project was not an easy one though. It came at a tough time in Borland's history. The company was sued by Lotus in 1990, acquired Ashton Tate in 1991. By 1993, the company essentially sold off Quattro Pro and Paradox to Novell after Microsoft decimated the standalone spreadsheet and end-user database market. Oh yeah, and the founder and CEO, Philippe Kahn left to create Starfish Software a month before we launched. Philippe helped protect Delphi as a skunkworks project when we started and he coined the codename VBK (ahem) which none of us liked, but all of us believed in.
We knew if Borland was to stay relevant in developer tools, we needed to build something better than Visual Basic. We never saw Delphi as VB Killer, but certainly a VB Kompetitor. How would we compete with that behemoth? Well, we weren't cocky, but we also weren't afraid of Microsoft. We had to make Windows programming easy enough that a DOS programmer could do it. And in that regard, our prior efforts with Turbo Pascal 7, missed the mark. Borland had a couple of other internal efforts that never saw light of day (Monet, anyone?) and at some point, Gary, Anders and I came to the realization, someone had to make it happen, and that someone was us. Having a native code compiler meant that Delphi would have a huge performance advantage over interpreters. It also meant Delphi developers would be able to create their own reusable objects without having to learn a different language. That gave us huge extensibility.
We also learned there was another change on the horizon and that became our opportunity. Borland VP Rob Dickerson had highlighted the need for the company to build a client/server development system. Again, we looked around and we realized Paradox wasn't going to do it, dBase wasn't good enough, C++ was too hard. And so I put up my hand and convinced Gary and Anders not only did we need to make Windows development easy, we had to take on Client/Server development at the same time. Luckily they agreed, not knowing what Client/Server development meant. I didn't either, but I trusted we would figure it out. Ultimately this became our biggest differentiator in the market. While our performance over VB could be 2-3x faster, compared to SQL Windows or PowerBuilder, Delphi was 5-50x faster, and sometimes 800x faster.
When we first started, we thought the project might take a year, but that Client/Server stuff was a lot harder than we expected. One of the developers working on that area eventually left the company and when Chuck and Anders looked at his code they just about barfed. That cost us about six months. I'm pretty sure every single person working on the project came to see me and said: "Can't we forget that Client/Server thing and just ship the desktop Windows version?" But my answer was always the same. I drew a curve of what Delphi desktop revenues would be. Then I drew a second line for Client/Server below the first one but growing at a steeper angle, eventually eclipsing the desktop revenues. I don't know if anyone believed me (and I honestly didn't know if I believed it myself) but it put an end to the discussion.
I knew that the Client/Server product was more important strategically for the company because it would expand our market beyond Borland's traditional base. Ironically, at some point my boss VP Paul Gross asked why we were working on the desktop product, suggesting we skip that completely. I told him Delphi desktop revenues would be $30 million in the first year (a number I made up on the spot) and he nodded and said "good point."
Delphi's first year revenues were $70 million (far higher than we'd expected) and grew from there. That's about $118 million, adjusted for inflation. And the Client/Server revenues really did eclipse the desktop revenues in the second year. To say Delphi saved Borland was not an overstatement.
We also made a good bet on shipping a 16-bit version of Delphi first, rather than jumping straight to 32-bit. It was a safe assumption that Microsoft would slip Chicago (Windows 95). So we had a stable 16-bit compiler and operating system and could work on that without having to worry about the ground moving beneath our feet. We were fortunate to get the 32-bit compiler under development in parallel, shipping it just about 12 months later as Windows 95 was gaining market share. Delphi 2.0 boosted performance another 3-4x giving us an even bigger lead.
When we built Delphi we never thought it would last so long or have as much impact as it did. We were grateful for the support and feedback from our customers and third party developers. While we weren't obsessed with press coverage and awards, we were happy that it helped get the word out. I still have the Jolt Cola award on my bookcase. I figured if Delphi lasted to version 3.0, that meant we did a good job. But twenty-five years? Who could have guessed?
Looking back on Delphi 1.0, much of those two years is a blur of sixty hour weeks, late evenings and occasional setbacks. But the memories that stand out were about the team. We were committed to building something great, something that we would use. Gary and Anders (and Chuck, and Danny...) all had great taste. So there was a kind of aesthetic to the product. It's hard to explain, but we knew it as "it works the way you hope it would." Delphi wasn't just fast, it avoided the limitations of many Rapid Application Development (RAD) tools that ran out of gas when you pushed hard.
I've done a lot of interesting things in the last twenty-five years, but Delphi is the product I'm most proud of. It was a magical time in our lives when we were experienced enough to do good work and young and foolish enough to bite off more than we could chew. We solved some hard problems that mattered in a market that we understood and the market responded. It shaped my thinking about how to build products in ways that I continue to use and teach to this day.
I'm grateful to Anders and Gary that we took on the project. Gary is the best engineering manager I have ever worked with and I was glad to get to work with him again at MySQL. Anders, of course, has gone on to do even greater things architecting C#, .Net and TypeScript. I'm proud of the many developers, writers, and testers, product managers and marketers (Lance, Diane, Ben, you were awesome), who built on the early success of Delphi 1.0 to create a legacy that has withstood the test of time.
And thank God we finally got that darned Language Reference Manual out.
Got a recollection of Delphi 1.0 or a story about Anders, Gary or me? Post a comment below...
- Delphi Informant: Birth of Delphi
- Danny Thorpe: Why The Name Delphi?
- Anders Hejslberg: .EXE Interview
Thanks for Delphi!
Many of our POS apps were made using it , even cross platform...
Posted by: Kris | February 15, 2020 at 07:06 AM
Being a VB user, I couldn't wait to see what the hype was about. I was sold on the first hello world app with a simple TLabel, TButton on a form. I found it so unbelievable that I copied the EXE to another floppy and ran it on another PC to check if there were hidden dependencies. I was floored! It is one of the most memorable days in my life.
Thanks for the wonderful years,
Posted by: Dave Bhatia | February 15, 2020 at 08:41 AM
Hmm. Since Delphi made so much money for the company, and that money got used to pointlessly buy Ashton-Tate (a company that was going out of business on its own) instead of being available for the future, one could argue that Delphi not only saved Borland, it also sank it! Chew on that paradox for a bit...
Posted by: Bruce Eckel | February 15, 2020 at 04:03 PM
Bruce: As Zack says in the article, Ashton-Tate was purchased long before Delphi's revenues came along, back in 1991. Though nice pun re: Paradox(es). We did spend $100 million on a new campus, that may have been a bit too much cash to burn for where the company was at, at the time. Anyway, hindsight's usually 20/20!
Posted by: Brad C | February 15, 2020 at 07:07 PM
Bruce, as was pointed out, Delphi came after the purchase of Ashton Tate and after the move to a new campus. (Technically, I think we moved while Delphi was still under development.) I'm not sure what the campus cost to build, though I have seen reports suggesting it was of that order of magnitude. While the new campus was certainly fancier than our Greenhills Rd offices (especially the gym and pool), the company consolidated half a dozen or more rented locations in Scotts Valley. I also recall there was a secondary stock offering around that time. So it's not clear to me whether the development of the campus had any impact on Borland's cash situation. As Borland's revenues declined in the 2000's with the rise of the Internet and open source, the company shed more products and employees, and it's likely that the fixed cost of maintaining a campus became an albatross.
Posted by: Zack Urlocker | February 20, 2020 at 03:29 PM
Hard to see this discussion without remembering how Microsoft targeted Borland and caused extensive damage, stealing Anders and many others. Years later we got a $100M settlement out of MS and they finally stopped the onslaught. Losing the Sun Microsystems lawsuit regarding Java finally took them out of the Java picture altogether. The rise of the Internet and Java as the enterprise platform of choice in the last 90's and early oughts turned Borland around and helped it survive the dot.com implosion. Jbuilder had Delphi genes and became the defacto standard for Java development for many years. Many of us on the Jbuilder team remembered the wow-factor that was Delphi and we tried to carry this on for many years after.
Posted by: Tony de la Lama | February 27, 2020 at 12:18 AM