TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
"Matthew S. Whiting" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 26 Apr 1997 09:28:03 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (22 lines)
>
> Magnus
>
> ps: why is Ada the only major language that Microsoft has not attempted
> to transform into a Windows-only dialect?

Two reasons in my opinion: they don't worry about producing high
quality, high reliability systems and they don't see a mass market ($$)
for Ada.  A few months ago a Microsoft rep gave a presentation at the
company where I work.  He used the term "robust" often when describing
MS software.  I finally asked him to define robust.  To him robust was
synonymous with "feature-rich", which isn't the say robust is typically
defined in the control systems domain...

>is this a good or a bad sign?

Yes!

Matt
--
Remove question marks (spam repellent) from address to reply.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2