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: 103376,630c12e823d1bdf4 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-01-10 05:22:30 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!cyclone.bc.net!sjc70.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!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: Ada Compiler Pricing (was Re: Hijacking a Thread was RE: New Ada compiler for .NET) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 08:22:04 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Message-ID: References: <1040653133.613605@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <3e18f3f3_1@news.tm.net.my> <6KwmrO7CZtnj@eisner.encompasserve.org> <1041910244.361888@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <3E1E5604.5030209@nospam.adrianhoe.com> <3E1EA349.6B97C328@adaworks.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: d1.56.bf.1e X-Server-Date: 10 Jan 2003 13:22:29 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:32879 Date: 2003-01-10T13:22:29+00:00 List-Id: Thanks for getting the thread out of politics and back onto the newsgroup topic. I'd agree that Ada's lack of followers isn't really related to some sort of Left Wing reluctance to touch anything that might be associated with the military. Its more that there is a general perception that things designed for the military won't be suitable for commercial use and that corresponding commercial technology will be cheaper. Look at the Mil-Std-1553 bus. Its a good, reliable means of blipping bits up and down a wire and many companies that make avionics for both the military & commercial sector will use the 1553 for the military side of the shop, but never consider it for the commercial side. Why? Probably mostly price. 1553 cards are still quite expensive when compared to something else like an Ethernet card, which is far more complex in what it has to do. Probably it starts with vendors figuring they can milk the government cash-cow and thus making little effort to reduce costs. (Government accounting policies help this along too.) Hence some similar technology goes to the private sector and competition + volume starts driving the cost down. Pretty soon, its a self-fulfilling prophecy: Military equipment costs more than commercial equipment. Ada certainly messed up on that one too. Especially back in the early days, the prices were so high that any private citizen who thought he might be interested in getting involved with Ada would look at the price tag and immediately be consumed with an urge to deficate. RR Software helped that picture some, but not before the damage had already been done. There was also the overall damage done by the poor quality and lack of validation of the early compilers - leading people to believe that Ada was just another overpriced, unworkable government boondoggle. Early impressions are really hard to overcome. You mention DDC-I and Irvine. Out of curiosity, what sort of price range are their compilers going for these days and do they target anything interesting? 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:3E1EA349.6B97C328@adaworks.com... > > I believe Ada can stand on its own. The work of ACT, along with > many others has helped to democratize the language. However, > ACT is not the only game in town and others continue to create > serious compilers for the rigorous demands of real-time, safety-critical > software. DDC-I and Irvine Compiler Corporation come to mind > as examples of these kinds of responsible commercial companies > who continue to be strong supporters of Ada. I apologize if I > have overlooked anyone else, but the fact is that none of those > companies does much to promote Ada beyond their traditional > customer base. Oh, yes, Aonix made an attempt before it > was purchased by an a bunch of ignoramouses who failed to > see the value of their Ada capability until too late.