Re: DoD asks Microsoft to help undermine Ada

[agate!spool.mu.edu!darwin.sura.net!rayleigh!mike@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Mi ke Black)]

In article <CB5n7C.CIB@world.std.com> srctran@world.std.com (Gregory Aharonian)
 writes:
>
>	"Windows NT appears to have won an early victory at the
>	Department of Defense.  Sources say the DoD has agreed
>	to add Microsoft's still-unavailable 32-bit operating
>	system to the technologies it offers the Army, Navy, Air
>	Force, Marine Corps and the Defense Information Systems
>	Agency under the existing Standard Multi-User Small
>	Computer Requirements Contract.  Insiders say the DoD's
>	main interest is to provide NT - preloaded on MIPS R4000
>	based workstations - to its own software developers."
>
>--------------------------------------------
>
>    Given that Windows NT is about 4 million lines of C++ code, and
>that most useful software development tools, applications libraries
>and advanced technologies are all written in C/C++, with what language
>does the DoD expect "its own software developers" to use when Microsoft
>floods the DoD with Windows NT?  Ada?  Probably not.  C/C++?  Probably yes.
>Microsoft would love to have Windows NT permeate the DoD for this very
>reason (the Microsoft marketers are very aggressive), as would all of the
>hundreds of small companies selling reusable C/C++ libraries compatible
>with Windows NT.
>

Allow me to re-word the above:
>    Given that MS-DOS is about N lines of assembler code, and
>that most useful software development tools, applications libraries
>and advanced technologies are all written in assembler, with what language
>does the DoD expect "its own software developers" to use when Microsoft
>floods the DoD with MS-DOS?  Ada?  Probably not.  Assembler?  Probably yes.
>Microsoft would love to have MS-DOS permeate the DoD for this very
>reason (the Microsoft marketers are very aggressive), as would all of the
>hundreds of small companies selling reusable assembler libraries compatible
>with MS-DOS.

Gee...I wonder how Turbo Pascal, Fortran, C, C++, APL, Ada, Small-Talk,
etc. ever got to work with MS-DOS??  If Ada can't run on NT then Ada has
a BIG problem.  On the other hand, I have no doubt that it can and
probably quite well.

For the most part I agree with Greg on DOD's lack of marketing savvy.
However, does Greg propose that DOD ignore NT??  How many operating
systems are around that are written in Ada?  Maybe DOD should develop
their own Ada operating system (I once suggested this to DOD and was
soundly disapproved).

P.S.  Have the Ada compiler companies got their product ready to roll
out the door with NT?

Mike...

-- 
mike@rayleigh.aftac.gov