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:

Stanley Allen <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Stanley Allen <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 26 Nov 1998 04:38:15 -0600

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (213 lines)

Al Christians wrote:
> "When Failure Is Not an Option, Ada IS the Answer!"

Tucker Taft wrote:
>      When your software has to fly...
>      When there is no room for error...
>      When reality is more important than hype...
>      When lives are on the line...
>              Choose Ada:
>    The Most Trusted Name in Software(tm).
>
> This highlights the point that software engineers/managers
> have the ability (and a duty) to make a choice

Hal Hart wrote:
> "When Failure Is Not an Option, Ada IS the Answer!"

Gary Kephart wrote:
> "In Ada We Trust"

Dave Wood wrote:
> "I wouldn't use another language if my life depended on it!"

Jeff Burns 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.
>
> "Ada, the safety critical language"


Teamniks:

I suppose that many of the regulars on this forum are
tuned in to what I might say about these suggestions.
If you've paid attention to my previous strident diatribes
on Ada marketing (Feb and Apr of this year), you're probably
expecting me to relate a few words about what should be
selected as the "Ada slogan" or in my (and Rosser Reeve's)
terminology, the "Ada USP".

Well, not being one to disappoint, I am here to say my peace.
However, rather than couch my ramblings this time in sermon
form, I will try the Socratic method and ask some non-rhetorical
questions.  I hope to generate some dialogue this time instead
of spewing forth with a monologue like I have before.

First question: do we really believe that programmers will
be attracted to Ada on the basis of reliability?  I know that
some will, but what evidence is there to persuade us that these
are more than a small minority of programmers?  It appears
to me that, in America especially, programming is an ego-enhancing
activity, the vast majority of practitioners being males
interested in the creative and fun aspects of programming, with
a focus on new or exotic technology features.  The satisfactions
that the average programmer seems to find in developing software
are not very closely related to the goals we often list as
"software engineering principles": reliability, maintenance, etc.

Does anyone else sense this?  When I discuss "reliability"
in my Ada classes, I never get the feeling that my students
are crouching on the edge of their seats or perking up their
hearing.  They do those things when I start talking about
tasking and real-time stuff.  But reliability bores them, and
I suspect bores the "average programmer" as well.  Of course,
it may be *wrong* for programmers to be disinterested in
reliability in favor of having fun -- but then again, when has
the human race, en masse, preferred listening to a sermon over
having a good time?

A good analogy seems to present itself from the automobile
market: the Volvo.  The Volvo was sold for years in the US
as a "reliable" and "safe" car with a sophisticated aura
because it comes from Sweden.  Intellectuals, worrywarts,
and upper-middle class status seekers bought it.  No one
else did.  Volvo's image was the subject of a joke in the
movie "Crazy People" -- Dudley Moore played an advertising
man who eliminates the less straightforward aspect of ads
in favor of blunt minimalism: "Volvo: They're boxy. But
they're good."  Big laughs from the audience, who recognized
Volvo's essential message.

"Safety" and "Reliability" didn't sell Volvos.  So, Volvo
recently has introduced "sleek" autos -- all the corners are
rounded now.  They've got sex appeal.  And the ads downplay or
don't mention reliability and safety.  Sales are up.

Even Quaker Oats has dropped its older sales approach --
the stern grandfather figure Wilfred Brumley saying that
eating oatmeal is "the right thing to do".  Not to pick
on Richard Riehle too specifically, because the spirit of
his suggestion is essentially the same as most of the others,
but he sounds like papa Brumley when he says:

> Ada, soybeans, broccoli:  good for you. good for your system.

I'm sure he was joking at least a bit.  But all of our (meaning
we Ada programmer's) home-grown marketing suggestions tend to
come across this way, at least to my ears:  "Ada is the right
thing to do.  Ada is your conscience -- be stern with yourself
and choose it.  Ada is like peas and carrots -- you must eat
them because they are healthy, even if you don't like them;
so chose Ada for the same reasons."  Tucker Taft's comment
above about "duty" has the same ring to it.

All of these appeals to the superego leave to the marketers of
other languages (C++ and Java especially) the vastly more
appealing solicitations that can be made to the id.  Bjarne
Stroustrup *directly* invokes this half of human nature when he
says that "The purpose of the C++ language is to make programming
more enjoyable for the serious programmer".  Can you beat that?
This is what programmers program for anyway -- enjoyment.  I can't
help but think the spirit of this statement has quite a bit to do
with the widespread use of C++.  In my view, "fun" figures
prominently in the promotion of the Java language as well.

Furthermore, it seems to me that our attempts to sell Ada on the
basis on reliability, safety, "critical" systems certification,
etc. have a touch of bad faith in them.  By this I mean that I
distrust you people whenever you claim that "reliability" or
"safety" are the main reasons that you like to program in Ada.
It's a bit like hearing people say they subscribe to Playboy for
its fine journalism.  You just want to say, "Come on, get real!"
My thesis is: programmers (like you) program for pleasure first;
other considerations come second.  What aspect of Ada first
appealed to you, struck your fancy, aroused your interest?  For
me it was tasking.  For you perhaps it was private types,
generics, or other various features that lend themselves to the
creative impulse in programming.  I doubt it was range checks.

Second question: what's wrong with selling Ada as the real-time
language of choice instead of the safety-critical language of
choice?  Jeff Burns says:

> 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.

But this is not a good reason for not trying, and not a
reason that would exclude Ada from making *any* significant
inroads into real-time systems.  We shouldn't think we need to
"own" a whole market segment -- if Ada got 10% of the real-
time market, Ada vendors would all be fabulously rich!  I appreciate
Jeff's other warning about making our appeal too
broad:

> 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....

but, like Tucker, I believe that "safety-critical" is too
narrowly focused because that market is too small:

> The problem is that safety critical systems is not (yet) a big
> enough "niche."
> You would at least have to generalize it to "business critical"
> or "mission critical" or simply "critical."

Unlike Tucker, I tend to believe that focusing on "critical"
systems has the wrong psychological results.  The underlying
message of such an approach is "Ada is good for systems that
absolutely must work -- so don't consider it for less
'significant' tasks."  Since I think I've said it better before,
I will violate a cardinal tenet of good taste by quoting myself;
here is part of a team-ada message I submitted in April:

> The flavor of both of these statements ("Ada should
> be used mainly for very large projects", and "Ada is
> mainly good for safety critical projects") is
> that Ada is something you only should use if you
> absolutely have to, if you've got no other choice,
> or when you're backed into a corner because of
> the size of your project or its safety requirements.
> Continuing to sell Ada along these lines will be its
> downfall for two reasons: 1) projects that fit in
> either of these two categories are not any kind of
> mainstream, not even the mainstream of the real-time
> systems niche; and 2) programmers are persuaded that
> Ada a necessary evil rather than an enjoyable and
> useful tool.
>

On the positive side, my argument for focusing the marketing
effort on real-time systems has two aspects: (1) real-time
systems are "cool" and Ada can become "cool" by association
with them, and (2) real-time systems are a large and growing
market segment.

In February, I recommended a mantra for Ada along the lines
of "Ada is the most powerful language for real-time software."
(see my long post called "Ada USP" in the team-ada archives
for a complete discussion of why).  Now I'm ready to recommend
a tag line that reduces it to button proportions:

        Ada: Real-Time Power

For those who insist on including some element of the
traditional Ada creed in the tag line, a compromise
could include a hopefully unobtrusive word

        Ada: Safe Real-Time Power

Well, I guess there was more monologue than I had planned,
and maybe more diatribe than is proper; hopefully no one is
offended and we can move together, amoeba-like, to the very
proper goal of discovering how to sell Ada effectively.


Stanley Allen
mailto:[log in to unmask]

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