Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.java,comp.object
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!nntp.sei.cmu.edu!news.cis.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!netcom.com!rfenney.slip.netcom.com!user
From: rfenney@netcom.com (Robert J. Fenney)
Subject: Re: Java vs. Smalltalk vs. C++ vs. OO COBOL
Message-ID: <rfenney-2706960920350001@rfenney.slip.netcom.com>
Sender: netnews@mork.netcom.com
Nntp-Posting-Host: rfenney.slip.netcom.com
Organization: FenTek
References: <31CC4ABE.6DDE@individual.com> <4qrahn$49ns@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <4qrjrl$e7s@piglet.cc.uic.edu> <31D1AD68.10D8@concentric.net>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 16:20:35 GMT
Lines: 74
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.smalltalk:40026 comp.lang.c++:197457 comp.lang.java:64733 comp.object:51094

This is already starting. Roaster on the Mac is do shortly with a native
Java development environment. What will happen is that there are going to
be two types of programs: netborn and custom system. The problem is that
the users are going to want the speed and look of the system custom and
the easy of the netborn and this may not be possible. They are going to be
very frustrated because they think that they are being promised
imdependance!

Robert

In article <31D1AD68.10D8@concentric.net>, "Alan L. Lovejoy"
<alovejoy@concentric.net> wrote:

> Jason Kratz wrote:
> > 
> > dave000@ibm.net wrote:
> > 
> > >In <31CC4ABE.6DDE@individual.com>, Jeff Sutherland
<jeff.sutherland@individual.com> writes:
> > >>http://www.tiac.net/users/jsuth/smallman.html
> > >>
> > >>The Smalltalk Manifesto: Avoiding RoadKill on the InfoBahn
> > >>
> > >>If you want Smalltalk to survive or build a better Java, you better read
> > >>this.
> > >>
> > >>Regards,
> > >>--
> > 
> > >Quite honestly, I'm waiting for VisualAge Java to appear and then all
the C++
> > >and Smalltalk stuff is gone from our company. A java application can
run on any
> > >platform where a java viewer is present. No more "cross platform" coding
> > >concerns, etc. True "data independence" for the developer and user. No more
> > >deciding to work with Mr. Bill, Scott or Lou's environment, just code
and go.
> > 
> > >Dave
> > 
> > Dave -
> > 
> > Quite honestly I think youre nuts :)  Smalltalk is a far superior
> > language to Java.  Unfortunately the only problem is the
> > platform-dependence.  If it were "platform-independent" like Java it
> > would blow java out of the water.
> > 
> > Jason
> 
> VisualWorks already lets you code with about as much platform independence
> as you're going to get.  On WinTel (OS/2, Windows XXX), Mac and the major
> Unices (SunOS, Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, Ultrix).  Problem is, most PPD customers
> have been saying that THEY PREFER PLATFORM DEPENDENCE SO THAT THEIR
APPLICATIONS
> LOOK AND ACT (and interact with the host platform) COMPLETELY NATIVE!
> 
> I don't see why "platform independent Java" won't encounter the same customer
> resistance that VisualWorks has on this issue.  I refuse to listen to anyone
> slam Smalltalk for being "platform dependent" after all the years I've spent
> apologizing to Windows and Mac bigots for the fact that VisualWorks is so
> very platform INdependent.
> 
> And anyone who honestly believes that each different Java implementation from 
> each different Java vendor won't differ in important ways from all the others 
> is living in Wonderland.  It won't be long before there's a wild market 
> frenzy for "Windows-native Java" and "Mac-native Java" so that Java 
> applications will be able to fully interoperate with the full rights and 
> privileges of native applications.  You can take it to the bank.
> 
> --
> Alan L. Lovejoy         | Would you sign a contract to receive $100k term life
> alan@rwi.com            | insurance for a year--for 38% of your annual
income? 
> alovejoy@concentric.net | Then why buy government services on a similar basis?
