home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: howland.reston.ans.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!usenet
- From: grantp@usa.pipeline.com(Pete Grant)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: Microsoft Visual C++ vs. Borland C++
- Date: 20 Mar 1996 11:14:47 GMT
- Organization: Kalevi, Inc.
- Message-ID: <4iopb7$1kq@news1.h1.usa.pipeline.com>
- References: <nicks.827303077@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: 38.8.60.7
- X-PipeUser: grantp
- X-PipeHub: usa.pipeline.com
- X-PipeGCOS: (Pete Grant)
- X-Newsreader: Pipeline v3.5.0
-
- On Mar 20, 1996 06:24:37 in article <Re: Microsoft Visual C++ vs. Borland
- C++>, somebody wrote:
-
-
- >softbase@mercury.interpath.net (Scott McMahan - Softbase Systems) writes:
- >
- >>Nir Sofer (nir@netvision.net.il) wrote:
- >>: Which C++ compiler is better, Visual C++ 4.0 or Borland C++ 5.0 ??
- >>: I want to know which one of them is easier for developing software.
- >
- >>Visual C++, without a doubt! Better tools, better standards support,
- >>better add-on libraries, better compiler, better (lower) system
- >>requirements, you name it.
- >
- Let's see, now:
- MSVC++4.1 BC4.52 (5.0 isn't here yet)
- Memory: --------- ---------------------------
- MINIMUM 16 mb 8 mb
- RECOMMENDED 20 mb Not stated
- Hard Disk:
- Full install 115 mb* 100mb**
-
- * I couldn't find the spec, however, that's what my installation
- used up.
-
- ** Note that BC includes both 16 and 32 bit development systems
- while MSVC is 32 bit only.
-
- This is lower for MSVC++????
-
-
- --
- Pete Grant
- Kalevi, Inc.
- Software Engineering & development
-