Re: The Hobby Lobby was Windows CE?

[Richard Riehle <richard@adaworks.com>]

Caution:

           This is one of Richard's long and tedious rantings,
            and is best read, if at all, when there is absolutely
            nothing else of interest anywhere in your life.  Most
            of you can enjoy far more pleasurable entertainment
            than you will find in what follows.       RR

Several people have commented on the virtue of satisfying
those who program as "hobbyists" versus those who are
working as bona fide professionals doing "real projects."
This raises some interesting perspectives on how the software
industry develops, evolves, becomes, and achieves.

Dr. Dewar is absolutely correct when he notes the importance
of a business case for any allocation of corporate resources or
funds.   Few, except for very large, cash flush, corporations
can afford to fritter away their assets on attracting anyone but
those who ultimately contribute to the stability and growth of
the company.   Even those who are blessed with seemingly
unlimited cash reserves must husband them wisely, charity
being nothing more than a way to add "goodwill" to the balance
sheet in many instances.

With that in mind, it is not inappropriate to review what happened
to the computer industry in the early "Eighties" as a derivation of
the hobby lobby.   During the 1970's I was a practicing programmer,
paid for my work by an employer, but also attending meetings of
the local computer hobby club in my community.   To many of us,
it was clear that a revolution in thinking was gestating, even as
some major corporations had no inkling that anyone was pregnant.
IBM was certainly caught off balance, at first, although they
temporarily regained some momentum.

It was, in fact, the hobby lobby, that provoked the sleeping giant, IBM,
along with some others to realization of the potential for the new
technology.   Many of those early hobbyists have gone on to become
major forces in our industry.  One member of the computer club I attended,
Gordon  Eubanks, became CEO of Symantec and made many important
contributions to the progress of our industry.  Hobbyists were among the
most important users of the CP/M operating system, an operating system
that evolved into MS-DOS in the hands of Tim Patterson, and eventually,
after some shenanigans by Microsoft, became the dominant operating
system of our industry for a long time.

It was the democratization of computing during the 1980's that allowed
hobbyists to transform an industry, many promoting themselves from
hobbyists to professionals in three easy steps.   Even now, that
democratization persists as hobbyists purchase compilers, language
tools, web building kits, and other products, initially for fun, and later
for profit.   The best of these hobbyists are motivated, intelligent, and
often endowed with a better sense of business development than those
we train for professional programming in our computer science schools.

One successful businessman was addressing a group of professionals a
few years ago, he having built a business from the ground up, transforming
his abiding interest into a thriving corporation.   He was asked, during the
Q&A portion of his address, whether he had a Ph.D.   "I have five of them,"
he replied, "They all work for me."

I realize that Robert Dewar, better than many people, understands the importance

of these hobbyists in the contemporary world of computing.  I believe he and ACT

have remained conscious of the importance of this segment of our industry.  That

is one of the significant contributions he and his colleagues have made.  GNAT
is,
by is very existence, a recognition of the importance of this democratization,
the
power of the hobby lobby, and the conception of new businesses.

What Ada needs, indeed it is already happening, is the dedication of people who
are willing to commit their own resources to the creation of products programmed

in Ada, for a variety of platforms.   Many of these might be hobbyists who will
go
on to be successful entrepreneurs.   It is not likely they will be doing this
under the
auspices of some company already committed to some other language technology.

We are in a unique situation with Ada right now.   There are more free and
low-cost
development tools available than ever before for more platforms than ever
before.
For Wintel platforms we have the power of CLAW.   For others there are other
tools, including GtkAda.   If you have an idea for a better product, you can
easily
use Ada to build it.  Nearly every commercial product currently on the
shrink-wrapped
shelves somewhere, has some vulnerability.   Find that vulnerability, exploit
it, fix
it, and transform yourself from hobbyist to entrepreneur.    Many years ago,
there was
a glut of accounting packages on the market.  That did not stop someone from
inventing
Quicken and selling it for a sticker price that was so low no one could afford
to
ignore it.   Now they practically own the market.

If you have an idea, a product for Windows CE that you want to program in Ada,
and
see a benefit for using Ada, my guess is that you can partner with others who
have a
similar vision and make it happen.   In the case of those 1970's hobbyists, they
all,
with a few exceptions, had as their most important resource, a passion for what
they
were doing.  That passion was the key to their success.   That passion fed a
revolution.
In fact, every revolution is stoked more by the passion of its visionaries than
by the
proprietors of the status quo.

So, I don't expect an established company to risk much of its own resources in
pursuit
of every flight of fancy.  ACT has been more forthcoming on this than many might
be,
but Robert has a fiduciary repsonsibility to be a little bit conservative.   If
there is a
strong view that a particular product is needed;  if there are applications that
can be
better served with GNAT-CE, then some hobbyist can easily take the source code
and
build a business on this model.   If, on the other hand, we expect someone else
to put
their money into such an effort, we need to take the time to develop a
well-planned
business strategy that justifies such an investment.

Richard Riehle
richard@adaworks.com