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