X
Business

Corel takes Paradox command from stricken Borland

Corel has taken over the reigns of the Paradox database package from Borland. The broad licensing agreement between the pair means that product development, sales and marketing, and - after November 21 - service, will be handled by Corel.
Written by Martin Veitch, Contributor

Corel has taken over the reigns of the Paradox database package from Borland. The broad licensing agreement between the pair means that product development, sales and marketing, and - after November 21 - service, will be handled by Corel.

Corel said it plans to release a new version of Paradox with Web publishing tools for database developers and improved tool support, including support for Delphi forms. Through a previous licence, Paradox is already part of the Corel Office Professional suite for Windows 95, alongside WordPerfect, Quattro Pro and Presentations.

Borland will continue to develop the Borland Database Engine, used in Paradox and other Borland products, and will sell versions of Paradox to corporate customers until October 21, 1997 "to ensure a smooth transition", a spokeswoman for Borland UK said.

"It's clear that suites hold the future for end-user databases," said Michael Greenbaum, vice president of worldwide marketing for Borland. Borland added that Paradox staff would move to client-server and intra-net development in the company.

PCDN Comment: When Borland bought Ashton-Tate with its flagship dBASE desktop and Interbase server database products at the beginning of the decade, it looked a powerhouse capable of challenging Oracle. In hindsight, the over-reaching of its then chief Philippe Kahn looks folly. Microsoft's introduction of Access and aggressive pricing on suites cut Borland deep and its future now looks gloomy. Borland's tools division has the respect of developers but even corporates who admire its ace card, Delphi, may now think twice before backing their technical judgment on a company that has been in a tailspin ever since Microsoft got tough.

Editorial standards