From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,LOTS_OF_MONEY, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,7bcba1db9ed24fa7 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-07-20 09:26:43 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!news.mindspring.net!not-for-mail From: Lao Xiao Hai Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Death by analogy Part 2 (was Re: is ada dead?) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 00:49:29 -0700 Organization: AdaWorks Software Engineering Message-ID: <3B57E288.8A7090F0@ix.netcom.com> References: <3B4B3432.5BAFE9E1@easystreet.com> <3B4B4BF9.12C1E8C@lmco.com> <3B4B613B.25659225@mediaone.net> <9ijlnq$5or$1@reader-00.news.insnet.cw.net> Reply-To: richard@adaworks.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 9e.fc.c5.c2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Server-Date: 20 Jul 2001 07:48:02 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10349 Date: 2001-07-20T07:48:02+00:00 List-Id: At long last we hear from someone at Aonix. Does that mean they are still in the Ada business? It is really hard to tell. There seems to be little in the way of visibility. Nice to hear they are upgrading their compiler and development tools. Did they plan to tell anyone about this? Now, is Rational still in the Ada business? And are they planning to let the rest of world know they are? Are they improving their Ada products? Do they plan to let those of us in the Ada community know about their upgraded products? Some of us might be interested. I get regular updates in my email from some compiler publishers such as DDC-I. I don't consider it spam since I want to know what is happening with Ada compiler publishers. Since I hear from DDC-I on a regular basis, I also tend to recommend them to clients when I know they have a product that conforms to my client's needs. I also get regular input from folks at ACT. Ever since Dave Wood left Aonix, I get nothing from them. I see nothing of them. They seem to have vanished. It would not hurt for these Ada compiler publishers to escalate their visibility among those who are actually Ada advocates, even if they are reluctant to risk offending those who are not by acknowledging that, yes, they do support Ada products. Rational, in particular, has become a sad case. They built their business on an Ada business model, made a lot of money on Ada, and now behave as if their Ada past is something of an embarassment. We at AdaWorks continue to believe Ada is the best programming language for a wide range of applications and that is why we have the name of the language in the name of our company. The same is apparently true of Ada Core Technologies. We don't believe anyone needs to be embarassed about a business model openly based on Ada. A little more openess might just help change some minds about its viability in the larger marketplace. Richard Riehle richard@adaworks.com David Humphris wrote: > DuckE wrote in message > news:q_O27.328129$p33.6632851@news1.sttls1.wa.home.com... > > "Ed Falis" wrote in message > > news:3B4B613B.25659225@mediaone.net... > > > > As an ObjectAda user it is my opinion that the lack of success of Aonix' > > windows product likely has little to do with wanting the support of > 5-digit > > development systems. > > > > Unless support means providing a usable debugger with the system. Until > > version 7.1.2 the debugger was a bad joke. Still with 7.2 the debugger > has > > some problems (though few). > > > > When a debugger doesn't allow you to set breakpoints or exammine the > content > > of arrays of data, or just as bad, incorrectly displays data, it is very > > frustrating. Frustrating enough to move to a different development > > environment. Sometimes frustrating enough to move to a different > > programming language that provides a debugging enviroment that works. > > > > In order for ObjectAda to succeed it must be a solid product, and it must > > continue to grow and improve. Unfortunately, about the same time what I > > believe is the first viable version of the product was delivered (OA 7.2) > > Aonix apparently decided that it was not a product worth the significant > > continued investment to to improve. > > This is not the case. > > Aonix continues to take the Ada products, including ObjectAda for Windows, > forward with new versions. > > In fact a new version of ObjectAda for Windows (7.2.1) is due for release > in a couple of months time. One of the focuses of this product is to make > improvements in the debugger robustness and functionality. > > David Humphris > Aonix > > > SteveD