Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!cornellcs!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!newstand.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!129.33.24.22!fox.almaden.ibm.com!garlic.com!news.scruz.net!cruzio.com!news
From: jordan@cruzio.com (Jordan Bortz)
Subject: Re: Wakeup - Smell the Java. Smalltalk is decaying...
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Reply-To: jordan@cruzio.com
Sender: news@cruzio.com (System Administrator)
Organization: Object Productions Inc
Message-ID: <E5IJKo.LAs@cruzio.com>
References: <32fbe347.1059289@news.enterprise.net> <32fc58e2.290868393@library.airnews.net> <32FCF9C6.6E3E@mindspring.com> <c0.9w.2F0FHf$09D@craftedsmalltalk.com> <5dl5cu$2h3i$2@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <330283fc.1117667@news.enterprise.net>
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: mbay5.cruzio.com
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 20:17:02 GMT
Lines: 53

The reason that visual basic was a win was not because the language
wsa any good (it wasnt, isnt) but because there are/were TONS of 
THIRD PARTY enhancements for the product (VBX et al).

VB was the first to commercialize the "object plug in" metaphor.
The value of VB is not the language -- the value of VB is the ability
to buy VBXs...(Third party enhancements, either controls or vertical
market plug ins).

The value of Java is not the language -- the value of Java is the
perceived value of a robust and rich marketplace for Java plug ins --
general purpose and vertical market objects.

What the rest of the world has been marketing is a "flavorless" "tofu"
class, with the ability to buy world class mix ins.

Some Smalltalk vendors (eg PPD) forgot that the world wants to buy
mixins, not a certain brand of tofu.

Luckily, IBM seems to understand that concept a little better...whther
that will help Smalltalk at this point is an open question

	Jordan

PS If you never programmed in InterLisp-D or FLAVORS -- well, you'll
just have to look it up in the (lisp ma)CHINE (man)NUAL!

nigelk@enterprise.net wrote:

 >Whoever thought that  Visual Basic was a good language
>implementation?
>Answer: not many - but it was good enough.

>Another reason why Visual Basic may have succeeded is the company
>behind it, and the market power it held.

>That same company is behind JAVA and so are all of the major players
>in the software industry. That is what will tip the balance in favour
>of JAVA, not its implementation.




>On 9 Feb 1997 18:35:10 GMT, Bill Felton <bfelton@ibm.net> wrote:
>>>
>>And I for one have insisted that  I will willing to give up
>>Smalltalk and move on as soon as there is a superior
>>alternative.  There still isn't -- and JAVA isn't
>>even a contender.




