LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for TEAM-ADA Archives


TEAM-ADA Archives

TEAM-ADA Archives


TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

TEAM-ADA Home

TEAM-ADA Home

TEAM-ADA  November 1998

TEAM-ADA November 1998

Subject:

Re: Ada market viability

From:

Jeff Burns <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Jeff Burns <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 25 Nov 1998 12:56:00 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (102 lines)

Hal,

The DOD's stated strategy these days is to focus limited resources to be able
to sustain two major wars at the same time.  Ada positioning should be
focussed likewise.  We don't have the resources to take on C and C++, etc. on
all fronts all the time.  We can make more progress through a single strong
over arching position from which the other fronts can be chipped away at.
On the basis of the tagline and slogan suggestions, I'm not clear what the
intended position is for Ada.  It's just "better" at everything, but that's
gonna be a hard sell to make to people who already believe in the other
languages they're currently using.

If you could have non-Ada software engineers and program managers think of
just one thing when they think of Ada what would that one thing be?  What do
you think that one thing is now?

This is what market positioning is about.  You try to establish or fill a
market position where there ain't nobody yet or where you are clearly so much
better than whatever else is there.  Ada has several unique qualities, but
what position can it take in the market place? Look for the opening.

Ada may be better at real time, but C is the major player there and well
established. It's an uphill battle to establish Ada as better than C for real
time.

In distributed systems isn't CORBA the standard for distributed objects and
C++ the most established language?  Again, I'm not saying Ada isn't better,
I'm just looking at this from a marketing viewpoint.  C++ is strongly
positioned in distributed systems and will be tough to budge.

Ada can take on these markets, but it needs to do so from a position of
strength.  And that's why I think Ada's best shot is to be thought of as the
safety critical language.  IMHO, Ada has the most credible position carved out
and compelling stories to tell through its extensive use in safety-critical
DOD apps, as well as apps for nuclear plants, commercial aircraft, trains,
etc.

Note that positioning is not the same as themes or slogans or tag lines.
Those are supportive promotional elements for specific uses that should all
reinforce the position you want to establish.

One merry marketeer's opinion, fwiw.  I opened my mouth because it looked to
me like implementations were being proposed without an underlying strategy.
If this is too nit-picky, let me know and I'll go back to lurking ;-).

Jeff

-----------------------------
Jeff Burns, Director of Marketing
GrammaTech, Inc.
One Hopkins Place
Ithaca, NY  14850
ph: 607-273-7340
fax: 607-273-8752
e-mail:  [log in to unmask]
www:  http://www.grammatech.com
==============================




-----Original Message-----
From: Hal Hart <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tuesday, November 24, 1998 2:41 PM
Subject: Re: Ada market viability


>Jeff Burns (GrammaTech) wrote:
>>As a marketeer, I think that "Safety Critical" is Ada's strongest possible
>>position in the market and this should be stated explicitly in the tag line.
>>
>>Safety critical is a compelling and justifiable position relative to other
>>languages that Ada is uniquely qualified to fill.
>>...
>
>Realize that at least the following 4 attributes are being hailed as
>"unique" qualifications of Ada (and there could be others with strong
>claims to uniqueness, including "large,", "complex," & "software
>engineered," although these are pretty much orthogonal to the list of 4):
> - safety critical
> - reliable
> - real-time
> - distributed
>
>I think our Ada-promotion strategy should recognize and advocate Ada's
>strengths when any of these are important.
>
>As Jeff points out, the first two correlate well, but the other attributes
>are relatively independent, standing on their own as Ada advantages even if
>the others don't matter to a particular application.
>
>As a note, the SIGAda'99 conference theme (Tucker Taft & Franco Gasperoni,
>PC Co-Chairs) is going with "real-time" and "distributed" to sharpen
>(narrow) the focus in the conference to areas perceived to be Ada's unique
>strengths, an intention shift from previous all-comers themes.  (And Ada
>Europe's conference theme  is always about "reliable software
>technologies," naturally bringing in "safety critical.")
>
>   --hh
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
June 2007
May 2007
March 2007
February 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager