>>91
I don't use Delphi myself, but I've had some experience with it in the past. You only get such huge binaries if you statically link various libraries in with your application. If you use only what is strictly necessary, you will only get a few KB overhead. It's no different from statically linking libc costs about 60kb, statically linking MFC costs about 600KB, and dynamically linking either costs less than 1KB.
>>92
I'm not so sure about GCC, but in general it's possible to get pretty slim binaries if you dynamically link everything, strip/not include debug info(gcc tends to leave a lot of that around), use as little alignment as your executable format allows you, and optimize for less code space usage. Some further cutting down can be done by using a custom entrypoint. That should give you a tiny executable you could get without resorting to packers which compress the code and data and abuse various properties of the executable format to squeeze even more space(sometimes making illegal images, but still recognized by the OS loader).