karl@grebyn.COM (Karl A. Nyberg) (03/01/88)
[BEWARE - this article contains a significant amount of sarcasm, sometimes thinly veiled as humor. I guess the subject matter just put me in that kind of a mood.] For any of a number of reasons, I couldn't let these false claims go unaddressed. I find it hard to believe that someone who can go on at such length on these matters is so uninformed. On second thought, maybe I don't... > From: eberard@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu (Edward Berard) ... front matter deleted > 1. While many vendors of technology have active and > well-established third party product programs (e.g., Apple's > Certified Developer program and Sun's Catalyst program), few, if > any, in the Ada community have such programs. For example, how > many Ada compiler vendors have established programs which help > those who wish to develop commercial products with their > compilers? At least nine that I know of when I last counted (granted that some of those nine are also hardware vendors, not just Ada compiler vendors). As a part of my survey of runtime license fees (another HOT item for commercialization of Ada), I explicitly requested information on whom to contact within vendors organizations regarding such third party programs. Catch my talk at the CAUWG in Phoenix in March (the SECOND such talk I have given on related issues). Anybody that has more information on either runtime licensing fees or third party programs, please forward to me at the address(es) below. In addition, I know of at least four services that are publicly available that allow the use of Ada compiler products without the requirement to make capital investment in hardware (or license fees either, I believe). They're called TIMESHARING services. Expenses for such services are likely smaller than the capital expenses required for capital equipment acquisitions. It helps, I suppose, if the commercial products that are being developed, and the support that is requested from the Ada compiler vendors is geared toward the furtherance of their products as well. It also helps if the attitude in approaching the vendors is one of mutual benefit, rather than aggression and negativism (or is it just plain cheapskatism (?) ?). It is necessary to convince them that the benefit they will get out of the relationship (that's the buzzword here) outweighs the cost, both in terms of additional overhead to support the third party program, as well as potential lost revenues for sales of their products. > 2. There are any number of newsgroups, mailing lists, etc. which > allow detailed discussion of products and services. For example, > consider the communication channels open to Macintosh users > (e.g., comp.sys.mac, comp.sys.mac.programmers, info-mac, and > Delphi). Users of Ada technology do not enjoy the same freedom > of discussion as do their counterparts on other mailing lists. I > am not necessarily advocating a change to comp.lang.ada. -- putting on my info-ada administrator hat You are free to start your own mailing list or newsgroup. However, remember the constraints under which you might find yourself. Somebody, somewhere, has to pay for something (in this case, your account on and access to ajpo.sei.cmu.edu). If you are willing to support your own mailing lists or other forums with your own funds, computer equipment, and so forth, feel free to do so. However, if you're using somebody else's medium, you gotta play by their rules. That's what we do here on INFO-ADA (or try to anyway, at least on the INFO-ADA half of things). We play by the rules laid down by the director of the AJPO, who sponsors this mailing list, provides computer access, and accounts. And I don't get paid for any of my time (including writing this response). -- taking off my info-ada administrator hat In addition to administering INFO-ADA, I also happen to run a VADS users group mailing list, and a POSIX Ada mailing list - from my own computer, using my own resources. I also happen to know of a bulletin board system specifically established for the Meridian users by Eric Beser, using his own computer. You can make it happen. All it takes is a little effort, commitment of resources, etc. But, that was the problem in #1 above, wasn't it - getting resources? Takes time. Costs money. Or is your commitment to the advancement and commercialization of Ada dependent upon somebody else footing the bill, and riding their coattails? > 3. In the U.S., there are no publications, which are totally > dedicated to Ada technology, which accept advertising. Vendors > of Ada products and services must either have enough money to > cover the potential marketplace by many ads in many different > publications, or hope that direct mailing to the SIGAda mailing > list will bring in new customers. Ah, marketing. now we're down to the crux of the matter, perhaps? Revenues down this year, perhaps? (Sarcasm partly intended - considering how much other drivel had to be gone through to get to this point.) There are certainly a number of publications dedicated to Ada (perhaps not necessarily to Ada technology), and they might not (at this time) accept advertising. Perhaps the folks who do publishing might not think that there is a sufficient marketplace for such a publication to justify the investment in developing it. Maybe there isn't. It sounds like a wonderful entrepreneurial activity. Perhaps, as with the electronic mailing list idea in the previous item, you might like to begin such a publication. Or maybe try to convince the folks that do such things to do so. I doubt, however, that many of those folks read INFO-ADA. -- BEGIN PERSONAL OPINION Taking on any of the options I've outlined would sure be a lot better (and more constructive) than this complaining, ranting and raving on INFO-ADA. I don't see how so much non- and dis-information is beneficial to the advancement of Ada, commercially or otherwise. -- END PERSONAL OPINION -- Karl -- Karl A. Nyberg karl@grebyn.com, nyberg@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu Grebyn Corporation karl%grebyn.com@umd5.umd.edu P. O. Box 1144 {decuac,umd5}!grebyn!karl Vienna, VA 22180-1144 703-281-2194