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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,79ea565763c599df X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-10-10 05:27:21 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!207.217.77.102!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!harp.news.atl.earthlink.net!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: PDA Ada Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 08:26:46 -0400 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Message-ID: References: <3DA4E4A8.5C1DEAE0@adaworks.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: d1.56.b1.7a X-Server-Date: 10 Oct 2002 12:27:20 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:29651 Date: 2002-10-10T12:27:20+00:00 List-Id: That's always a dillema for the vendors and I can't blame them too much. They've been burned in the past trying to build for targets where the end clientelle really weren't willing to consider Ada in the first place. The excuse was always "Ada is a non-starter because there's no compiler for my target..." when in reality there was an underlying attitude of "I don't like Ada because its not C so I won't use it no matter what you do..." If the vendors did want to go after the PDA market, it would be a major mistake to go after it with anything less than a massive effort. People have already got development kits for PDAs and they aren't going to drop them for Ada if all they are offered is just another compiler for a different langauge. In particular, Ada's selling points of reliability, comprehensibility, maintainability, etc., are simply not compelling in a market where the apps are going to live for a few months and get tossed out in favor of something "New and Improved" that will make the marketing department happy. A vendor would need to go into the PDA market with a development kit that provided *more* than what is currently available, or nobody is going to find any advantage to switch. I agree that Ada could benefit dramatically by getting in on the ground floor of some emerging technology and PDA's, cellular phones, digital TV and a variety of other things are still new enough to not be hide-bound in their ways. But whatever you bring to the table with these folks, it *must* give them leverage in the time to market area or they have no incentive to switch. That's a lot to ask of vendors with limited resources and no clear mandate to build something. MDC -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jast.mil/ Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ a c m . o r g "I'd trade it all for just a little more" -- Charles Montgomery Burns, [4F10] ====================================================================== Richard Riehle wrote in message news:3DA4E4A8.5C1DEAE0@adaworks.com... > > The Ada compiler publishers have always, with a > few exceptions now and then, operated on a risk > averse model with regard to products. I suppose > that is what we can expect again. Unless there is > customer demand, there will be no compiler. Meanwhile, > there are no customers demanding Ada for PDA's because > they have other alternatives. >