TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Proportional Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Richard L. Conn" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Richard L. Conn
Date:
Wed, 1 Dec 1999 22:49:03 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (91 lines)
Perhaps ... I could have had a lot of exposure to
M$, but I've had a lot of exposure to Ada, UNIX, and
the others as well.  As a result, I see a lot of
different views.  There is also the chance that
others have not had ENOUGH exposure to M$ to look
through the heresay and see what is happening.

May I suggest (for further reading):
  1. MIT Technology Review (all the 1999 issues)
  2. The report and follow-up to the President's
Information Technology Advisory Committee

I can't post the first one, but I can post the second.
It will be on the next Ada and Software Engineering CD.
It is on the web now; look under
  http://www.whitehouse.gov/
and search for PITAC.  Details are at:
  http://www.ccic.gov/
and search for PITAC.

Yes, something is wrong (there's a LOT wrong), but
something is also right.  I don't have the
Australian point of view, but I can share the point
of view I have, as can you.  We certainly welcome it.

Rick
----------------------------------
Richard Conn, ASE and PAL Manager
http://xenadu.home.mindspring.com/

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Geoff Bull
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 1999 9:55 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: What the competition looks like
>
>
> Richard L. Conn wrote:
> >
> > I view my perception as more practical than
> > defeatest.  Yes, you are right ... there are
> > many more non-Microsoft needs than the safety
> > critical one I mentioned.  But the point is:
> > who is going to pay for the infrastructure
> > development?  Hobbiests working at home at night?
> > Volunteers?  Venture capitalists?
> >
> > Tuck said the other day that the ARA has an
> > annual budget of $75K.  I think it should go
> > toward enhancing Ada's strengths, not spreading
> > us thin.
>
> I don't recall anybody suggesting the ARA fund any development.
> Even if they had the funding, that is not their purpose.
>
> Was GtkAda funded by venture capitalists?
> Did Linus Torvalds need the blessing of M$ before
> he started Linux?
>
> I made a small Ada to Java JNI binding for my work.
> I realized it might have wider appeal, so I spent my own
> time making it more generally useful.
> What is wrong with this?
>
> Also, I can't see the value in you telling us we are all
> wasting out time.
>
> I also see your drop out rate is > 50%.
> Man, you gotta be doing something wrong!
> Back when I went to University (it was free in those days)
> the dropout rate was nothing like yours.
> (or maybe this is an American v's  Australian thing?).
>
> My first language was Pascal and my first program was
> probably "hello world", but I was stilled hooked.
> I was just thankful to not have to use punch cards.
>
> I think if Ada is content to just play in a couple of
> small niches, it will find its territory continually eroded
> by other languages. To survive Ada needs to build critical mass by
> aggressively invading new territory. Look for areas where
> other languages are weak - I agree the M$ desktop is not one
> of these areas. Of course, the ARA with a marketing budget of
> just $75K is not in position to do much.
>
> I think you have had too much exposure to M$.
>
> __
> Geoff

ATOM RSS1 RSS2