OK, I'll pitch in. I've been doing a bunch of ASIS for a while. What's an
ASIS topic
that y'all would like to see done. I've done papers/presentations on
        "General" ASIS - what it is, etc.
        1.x --> 2.0 -- How to make the jump (beyond a general purpose
article,
                I know).

What would be interesting to the general reader?

Joe

> ----------
> From:         Chad Bremmon[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Reply To:     Chad Bremmon
> Sent:         Monday, June 12, 2000 4:32 PM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: Should we form an Ada Marketer's Association?
>
> What about a concerted effort to provide articles related to Ada for as
> many magazines and such.  I think if we could form a team of 10 who are
> willing to write and review articles for one another, we should be able to
> get them into some key magazines.
>
> You know how it is, we'd have to hide the Ada a bit.  Say. . . "Here's a
> new concept" we've been doing it.  Here's how we did it.... Can you do
> that in your language?  Seriously?  What can you do in Ada that you can't
> do in another language?  Is is something someone might want?
>
> I just submitted an article to Embedded Systems about OOP in Ada95 for
> embedded systems.  We'll se where that gets.  If anyone wants to review
> that before it's "official," please let me know.
>
> I'd like to se articles in other magazines like: Component Developer (What
> used to be Object), Rose Architect, Information Week, IEEE?. . . . I don't
> know, we'd probably have to get suggestions on what magazines to target.
>
> I think one of the most important things to do now, is ensure that we
> don't flame too much.  If someone is listening to us. . . let's be nice.
> If we're too Pro-Ada anti everything else, I think we just perpetuate the
> mindset that we're somehow special.  If we work to engage associates and
> understand their problems and be realistic, I think we'll make more
> headway.
>
> I guess that's enough chatter for this Sunday morning.
>
> Chadley
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kester, Rush W. [ mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 10:00 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Should we form an Ada Marketer's Association?
>
>
> Another forum for such a project would be the Ada Power web site.
> I'm sure that David Botton would setup a "lab" area for what ever
> "killer app" we should decide to develop collectively.  The lab area
> also comes with an associated email "chat" forum.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [log in to unmask] [ mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 2:29 AM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Should we form an Ada Marketer's Association?
> >
> >
> > >The only forum we have for those of us who are Ada enthusiasts
> > >with an interest in promoting Ada is Team-Ada.
> >
> > There is of course c.l.a. Although it's noisy, there are
> > quite often some stimulating discussions (aka flame wars)
> > on the benefits of Ada over C/C++/Java etc that tend to
> > overflow into other newsgroups. Because of that, I personally
> > see c.l.a and Usenet in general as a better forum for
> > *promoting* Ada than Team-Ada.
> >
> > >I am not one of those who thinks print ads make that much of
> > a difference.
> >
> > They may not make a lot of difference, but they can certainly
> > make some. It's also not necessarily specific adverts for Ada
> > products that would help, but for those products that support
> > Ada (e.g. Rational Rose) as well as other languages, to be a
> > bit more upfront about their Ada support. I get the impression
> > sometimes that certain companies are embarassed to admit that
> > they support Ada.
>
> While advertisments in print may not be the most cost effective
> because of its high cost it is effective.  IMO, they can definitely
> make a difference.  Lack of Marketing is one area which has held Ada
> back.  Looking at the software companies that have become successful.
> Success comes from a number of factors (applied in the right amounts,
> times & places):
>   a) the right product,
>   b) energetic leadership that is effective in building a shared vision.
>   c) strategic alliances/partnerships,
>   d) good marketing,
>
> IMO, Unix & C are successful because of a, b & c (and now d).
> Microsoft and Java are successful because of all of these.
> Linux is successful because of a, b, & c (and now d)
> Early Ada suffered because we tried a & b with too little  c & d.
>
> (see below for my rational)
>
> I say this not because I'm a Microsoft, C, Unix, Java or Linux fan
> (they all have good and bad points).
>
> I say this because we can learn from them what it takes to be success
> (and that when you stretch the law too far, the courts will eventually
> catch up with you inspite of your economic power). :-)
>
> > >We need more.   We need products written in Ada.  We need some of
> > >the Team-Ada members submitting articles to IEEE Computer and other
> > >IEEE publications.  We need papers published in the ACM publications.
> > >We need stories of problems solved using Ada in Dr. Dobb's.
> >
> > These are all interesting points, but I am sure many of us
> > are not paid to spend time writing papers and articles, and don't
> > have the free time available to do it in. Perhaps people who have
> > already written papers that may be of interest should consider
> > submitting them to a wider range of journals?  I cannot remember
> > the last time I saw an article promoting Ada in any IEE (not
> > IEEE) journal, so perhaps that would be a place to start.
> >
> > John
>
> MY RATIONAL
>
> (Obviously not everyone will agree with my rational and it's not
> something about which I want to start a debate on Team Ada.)
> If you must, please do so via private email.
>
> C came at a time when assembly language was used for most programming
> and unique O/S's were built for each computer.  AT&T gave both away to
> universities for use in training their computer science & engineering
> students.
>
> Microsoft is successful because it used all of these factors.  They
> partnered with PC manufacturers to bundle MSDOS with their hardware,
> leaving CPM, IBM & other DOS's behind.  With marketing they made everyone
> aware that most computers had Microsoft inside.  They then tied (aka
> integrated) their successful products (e.g. Windows) to their other
> less successful products (e.g., Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Access, &
> Internet Explorer) and replaced Word Perfect, Visi-Calc, Lotus, Corel
> Draw, D2B and Netscape in most consumers minds.  They also made their
> products so that they could "import" user data from almost any
> competitor's product while making "exporting" to other products or
> importing by other products difficult.
>
> Java came at a time when programmers & project managers were becoming
> disillusioned with C & C++ and looking for an easy way for their
> software to excute everywhere (including over the internet).  Sun also
> made partners with others (most of whom were looking for a way to beat
> Microsoft).  Sun also marketed Java heavily not just in software trade
> press but in newspapers and magazines read by the general public.
>
> Linux came at a time when PC users where looking for Open Software
> solutions to problems perviously solved by proprietary O/S's or those
> that could easily be scaled down from larger computers.  Linux developed
> partnerships with many companies who found it easy to develop their
> added value products.  Now Linux has reached a stage where it is being
> marketed.
>
> Rush Kester
> Software Systems Engineer
> AdaSoft at Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Lab.
> email:  [log in to unmask]
> phone: (240) 228-3030 (live M-F 9:30am-4:30pm, voicemail anytime)
> fax:   (240) 228-6779
> http://hometown.aol.com/rwkester/myhomepage/index.html
>
>