Re: ADTPro beta available

[pausch@saaf.se (Paul Schlyter)]

In article <Y9CdndLdO9znNCvZnZ2dnUVZ_u-dnZ2d@comcast.com>,
Michael J. Mahon <mjmahon@aol.com> wrote:
>Paul Schlyter wrote:
>> In article <OcGdnUmXsNjKwSjZnZ2dnUVZ_sadnZ2d@comcast.com>,
>> Michael J. Mahon <mjmahon@aol.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>>A more useful definition of a platform is any layer of uniformity that
>>>enables a common market in applications.
>> 
>> 
>> :-) ...that's the first time I've seen anyone use a marketing definitin
>> of what a "platform" is.  By this definition, the Apple II is no longer
>> a platform, because there is no longer any market for it.
>
>No, you have to look at it with a time machine.  The Apple II *was*
>a big market, hence a big platform, and, to those who enjoy nostalgia,
>that period is forever frozen in time.

As you say, the Apple *was* a platform.... its market is in the past
and today it has vanished.  Is it still a platform today?

>But from the point of view of *new* applications, the Apple II has
>(almost) ceased to be a platform.

Of course it's a very insignificant platform today - but IMO it's
still a platform.  It's even a more useful platform today than back in
the 1980's, because today it can be emulated on several other host
platforms -- just like Java!

Being insignificant is not the same as being nonexistent.


>>>(Unix, for example, never quite made it to this status, mostly for
>>>competitive reasons.)
>> 
>> 
>> There was never just one Unix, true.  But that doesn't mean that a
>> particular Unix platform wasn't a platform.....
>
>Right, it's just that they were all separately much less viable
>than they could have been if merged--though that might have meant
>that some hardware vendors were winners at the expense of others.
>
>The cost of developing and deploying applications for the "Unix
>platform" was hugely increased by the disparity of the many vendors'
>platforms, which created considerable "drag" for the whole market.

I know --- I've done some cross-platform Unix development myself,
in plain C, which should run on both Linux, Solaris and HP-UX....

>There was a window (no pun intended) of opportunity for a converged
>Unix to play a significant role (maybe even dominant?) on the corporate
>desktop, but that opportunity was missed.  The market growth that would
>have enabled $50 Unix applications never happened.

Instead we got $0 Unix applications, thanks to Linux and the
Open Source movement.

>Linux is trying to rekindle that flame, but it's so late and so far
>down the road that their primary "fuel" is not the excellence of
>thier offering, but fear and hatred of Microsoft.  Truly a movement
>driven by negative energy.  ;-)  (BTW, this in no way applies to the
>high priests of Linux, who are all devoted idealists--only to the
>_hoi polloi_ who chant in the streets waving firebrands, or to the
>corporate opportunists who see a stick to swing at MS.  ;-)

Otoh Linux does also offer an economical advantage compared to M$...

>A revolution may take hold, but, like all revolutions, not without
>most of its participants becoming tainted with the same ugliness that
>they were revolting against.  Never underestimate the power of the
>dark side.  ;-)

Perhaps the dark side is your father.... ;-)

>>>For this to be viable, the platform definition must be sufficiently
>>>"complete" that one does not need to go outside it to write useful
>>>applications, and it must be sufficiently "strong" that a single
>>>testing regime is sufficient for deployment on all implementations
>>>of the platform.
>>
>> By this definitions, I think there are no platforms.  There are always
>> some holes somewhere...
>
>That's why I said "sufficiently".  Avoid the trap of the ideal.

...and introduce subjectiveness, making people disagree....

>> The conclusion is that there are different opinions on what a "platform"
>> actually is.  Different people have somewhat different semantics here.
>
>Yep--that's what makes it interesting.  But try mine out from the point
>of view of living your life and making decisions, as opposed to writing
>textbooks, and I think you'll find it quite useful--even profitable. ;-)

Even if I consider an insignificant platform a platform, I can still
decide that I ought to settle for significant platforms -- unless I do
it in my spare time, just for enjoyment.  Writing software for the ENIAC
could actually be fun, at least for a little while.... and now there
are ENIAC emulators one can execute such programs on.

>-michael
>
>Fast Sudoku solver for Apple II's!
>Home page:  http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/
>
>"The wastebasket is our most important design
>tool--and it's seriously underused."


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter,  Grev Turegatan 40,  SE-114 38 Stockholm,  SWEDEN
e-mail:  pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se
WWW:     http://stjarnhimlen.se/