Re: Improving Ada's image - Was: 7E7 Flight Controls Electronics

[Marin David Condic <nobody@noplace.com>]

I basically agree with your analysis. I'd suggest that the way to get 
executive level attention is by having companies that successfully build 
things with a large software component developed in Ada be successful in 
selling their wares. A company that makes some device or software 
product that gets it out the door faster/better/cheaper and does it in 
Ada is going to get attention.

Trying to persuade mid-level managers in existing companies that they 
should adopt Ada when the rest of the world is using C++ or Java is 
going to be an uphill, losing battle. Forget the frontal assault and do 
an end-run around them. Start a company that markets something built in 
Ada and *prove* it is better because you're getting stinking rich doing 
it. Or is Ada not that much better?

MDC


Per Dalgas Jakobsen wrote:
> 
> The good old story: "You don't get fired for choosing IBM".
> The good old story on a new bottle: "You don't get fired for choosing
> Microsoft".
> The good old story on a another new bottle: "You don't get fired for
> choosing C/C++".
> 
> One way to make Ada come through, is to make it visible to them. Not just to
> those at the "safety-critical" segment, but to the entire software segment.
> A couple of years ago I suggested changing from C/C++ to Ada on a company
> strategy meeting. The suggestion was met with comments like: "No real
> company is using Ada for anything", "Ada is a heavy/slow and expensive
> language", "Only projects with a *lot* of money can do that", "We are not
> building rockets or aeroplanes, we are just building ...".
> 
> Even though you can counter-argue most of their claims, they still have it
> in their stomach and won't make the leap.
> 
> Instead of advertising for Ada in software magazines, web-sites, etc. I
> believe that Ada needs to get an "image-lift" at executive level. Imagine if
> we could get to the point when project managers are suggesting C/C++ and the
> executive asks: "Why not use Ada?" :-p
> 
> It doesn't take many arguments to convince most serious programmers of the
> advantages in Ada (even though there *are* religious extremists around, that
> believe void-pointers and goto-statements are the only true way) - But it
> really doesn't matter if the project managers doesn't have the courage to
> even suggest it, because of the opinion of the executives.
> 
> Executives will like to hear:
> *) that the reusability factor of Ada is magnitudes higher than for C/C++.
> *) that Ada is much better suited than C/C++ for larger projects with
> several (potential distanced) developers. And by larger, I mean almost any
> project with a project manager.
> *) that Ada projects results in fewer bugs at the customer.
> I'll bet that this news-group can come up with a dozen or more easy-to-prove
> arguments...
> 
> But another important thing to nail into their heads are: It does *not* have
> to be expensive to choose Ada. Most visible projects are safety-critical
> once, with budgets in the "heavy league".
> We need to establish a common knowledge, that Ada is as cheap as choosing
> C/C++ (buying toolchains), and that even small projects will have a higher
> probability to complete on time with fewer bugs.
> The cost of sending people on Ada courses will be insignificant in anything
> but the narrowest view.
> 
> 
> But how can we get the attention of the executives?
> Let the brainstorm start ;-)
> 
> Per
> 
> 


-- 
======================================================================
Marin David Condic
I work for: http://www.belcan.com/
My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm

Send Replies To: m   o   d   c @ a   m   o   g
                    c   n   i       c   .   r

     "Face it ladies, its not the dress that makes you look fat.
     Its the FAT that makes you look fat."

         --  Al Bundy

======================================================================