From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,MSGID_SHORT
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 26 Feb 93 03:42:59 GMT
From: fedfil!news@uunet.uu.net  (news)
Subject: Re: Why IBM is a detriment to non-Mandate Ada growth
Message-ID: <295@fedfil.UUCP>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <SRCTRAN.93Feb24103445@world.std.com>, srctran@world.std.com (Gregor
y Aharonian) writes:
 
> while none of the future standard bearers (such as Microsoft, Borland,
> Computer Associates, Novell, or Lotus) ignore Ada and aren't involved
> with DoD software engineering research activities?  Seems a strange way
> to keep compatible with the world.

Microsoft and Borland ARE compatible with the world.  It's DOD (actually the
small/unfortunate sections of DOD which do not manage to find waivers) which
are incompatible.


-- 
Ted Holden
HTE