Re: Why ADA is not prevalent yet?

Re: Why ADA is not prevalent yet?

[netnews.upenn.edu!uofs!guinness.cs.uofs.edu!beidler]

Sorry, I can't hesitate any longer, thought I would add my two cents to this di
scussion.  It
should be pretty obvious by now that there is no one reason why Ada has not tak
en off.  I am
surprised at one reason that has not been mentioned, namely, how the Dod/AJPO f
olks seemed to
go out of their way in the early eighties to turn undergraduate computer scienc
e educators 
off to Ada.

Let me be specific.  I recall attending an ACM SIGCSC conference where a person
 from AJPO came
and tried to shove Ada down everyone's throat.  I know it turned a lot of facul
ty off to Ada.
As Mike Feldman likes to tell us, less than 2% of all colleges and universities
 use Ada in
any meaningful way in their computing instruction.  SO why isn't Ada taking off
!  One reason is
that more than seven years ago many faculty were turned off.  

Fortunately, I had an opportunity to give Ada a real chance.  When I saw what I
 was missing, I
made the switch.  Perhaps that is where we must begin, by providing other facul
ty the 
opportunity to see what Ada can do.  

The only question is: Whose going to pay for it?  One modest solution would be 
the support of
summer programs given by faculty who primarily teach UNDERGRADUATE courses for 
faculty who
primarily teach UNDERGRADUATE courses.  
-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  John (Jack) Beidler				                              |
|  Prof. of Computer Science  Internet (VAX/VMS)  BEIDLER@JAGUAR.UOFS.ED      |
|  University of Scranton     Internet (SUN/UNIX) BEIDLER@GUINNESS.CS.UOFS.EDU|
|  Scranton, PA 18510	      Bitnet   (VAX/VMS)  BEIDLER@SCRANTON            |
|                                                                             |
|          Phone: (717) 941-7446	 FAX:   (717) 941-4250                |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Re: Why ADA is not prevalent yet?

[cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!uvaarpa!vger.nsu.edu!g_]

In article <10284@platypus.uofs.uofs.edu>, beidler@guinness.cs.uofs.edu (Jack B
eidler) writes:
> Sorry, I can't hesitate any longer, thought I would add my two cents to this
> discussion.  It should be pretty obvious by now that there is no one reason 
> why Ada has not taken off.  I am

[etc.]

My turn.  Although it has been mentioned re inexpensive compilers and the
problems of development and keeping up with validation, .... I claim that a
major problem is the Borland has not bought into Ada.  My students purchase
Turbo Pascal and Turbo C++ for 49.95 + $5.00 S&H each  They get a very nice
interface, fast compilation, and ease of development.  Borland advertises
everywhere.  They offer such good deals to educators that it is cheaper to
purchase a new version of their software than to pay for the upgrade.  It is
getting so that it's cheaper to purchase the software + manuals than to pirate
it and purchase Turbo <whatever> books from B. Dalton. 

I have a great deal of respect for Meridian, R&R, ALSYS, etc., but the plane
fact is that the Borland name sells.  If Borland were to become committed to 
Ada development in a big way, I think it would sell.  AND, it would be compared
with the other PC Ada brands - which might even boost their business.

Any comments???

George C. Harrison, Professor of Computer Science
Norfolk State University, 2401 Corprew Avenue, Norfolk VA 23504
Internet:  g_harrison@vger.nsu.edu    Phone:  804-683-8654

Re: Why ADA is not prevalent yet?

[Richard Pattis]

Borland would write a Turbo-Ada if they thought it were profitable. They may
be doing so, although I would guess not. Of course, because of Ada's
standarization, they would have difficulty creating proprietary features
that would lock users into their system. Maybe becaue of Ada's complexity,
it wouldn't be so "turbo". Maybe when Intel's architecture becomes obsolete,
Turbo-Pascal, etc. will pass away ;).

Onto another topic: Ada Prices. I'm just back from Tri-Ada where various
vendors announced new educational prices. I will post a longer, more complete
message early next week. Among the most impressive is a complete
restructuring of Alsys's educational pricing. Single copies to
Faculty/Staff/Students of FirstAda and MacAda are now $144.99 (these are the
complete systems previously sold, not "educational versions"). In quantities
of 26-50 (only one of many ranges in their discount structure) the price is
$100 each. For these site licenses, the University gets only 1 copy of the
software/documentation, but is allowed to duplicate it for student purchasers.
Support is supplied to a faculty contact, not the individual purchasers.
Single copies of their workstation/mainframe compilers (RS/6000,
DECStation/MIPS, VAX/VMS, SUN-3/4, and HP9000/300 are now under $600.

The complete story is coming soon. But I thought this was good news to
spread around immediately. Meridian and Janus are yet to respond.

Rich Pattis


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Richard E. Pattis			"Programming languages are like
  Department of Computer Science	 pizzas - they come in only "too"
    and Engineering			 sizes: too big and too small."

Re: Why ADA is not prevalent yet?

[aunro!alberta!ubc-cs!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!wup]

pattis@cs.washington.edu (Richard Pattis) writes:
>Borland would write a Turbo-Ada if they thought it were profitable. They may
>be doing so, although I would guess not. Of course, because of Ada's
>standarization, they would have difficulty creating proprietary features
>that would lock users into their system...

That doesn't mean they wouldn't have a product...it just means they'd need
to go about it differently.

The goal is not "locking users into a system" (although admittedly it looks
that way sometimes;-).  The goal is "differentiation in the marketplace"--
which is rendered in English as "creating a reason for people to buy your
product instead of someone elses.  There are various ways to do this.  Pro-
prietary features give one way...but there's also "quality" features (like
fast compilation, good diagnostics, good code) and external features like
editor help, debugger, etc.

In short, there's no end of ways to differentiate a product; I suspect the
reason Borland hasn't produced a "Turbo-Ada" (yet) is tied to Richard's
first reason: they haven't thought it would be profitable.

>...Maybe becaue of Ada's complexity,
>it wouldn't be so "turbo". Maybe when Intel's architecture becomes obsolete,
>Turbo-Pascal, etc. will pass away ;).

But Intel's "architecture" (OK, we'll call it that if we must:-) *IS* obso-
lete.  There are those who would argue it was obsolete when the 4004 was
introduced, but that's a different flamefest...the problem is that it's not
*gone* yet.
-- 
Dick Dunn    rcd@raven.eklektix.com   -or-   raven!rcd
	...Simpler is better.

Re: Why ADA is not prevalent yet?

[Rob Spray]

In <1991Oct25.003740.6546@beaver.cs.washington.edu> pattis@cs.washington.edu (R
ichard Pattis) writes:


>Borland would write a Turbo-Ada if they thought it were profitable. They may
>be doing so, although I would guess not. Of course, because of Ada's
>standarization, they would have difficulty creating proprietary features
>that would lock users into their system. Maybe becaue of Ada's complexity,
>it wouldn't be so "turbo". 

It has seemed to me that Borland's practise of developing "user-friendly"
products quickly that have only passing familiarity with recognized standards,
has always been at odds with the rigor that validation requires of
an Ada compiler vendor.

I recall that in a speech once, Mr Kahn made a joking reference to Turbo Ada.
I think that cultural environment at Borland makes the production of
Turbo Ada unlikely, but this is just pure speculation on my part.

--Rob Spray
--spray@convex.com

Disclaimer: I'm a Borland Quattro customer, I've helped my son use Turbo
Pascal. CONVEX probably wishes I'd get back to work.