Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!rburns
From: rburns@netcom.com (Randall J. Burns)
Subject: Re: Java is not competition-Go VWave!
Message-ID: <rburnsDKvsF0.HIC@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <4c1mk4$k3@sundog.tiac.net> <4cre3b$pcf$1@mhadf.production.compuserve.com> <30F17487.3D68@lanl.gov>
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 1996 21:16:11 GMT
Lines: 55
Sender: rburns@netcom4.netcom.com

In article <30F17487.3D68@lanl.gov>, Thierry Thelliez  <tgt@lanl.gov> wrote:
>Joe Hughes wrote:
>> 
>> Java is complementary to VisualWave, not competition.
>> This is why you would use Java with VisualWave:
>> VisualWave handles the communication from the Web page to the
>> smalltalk app and vice versa.
>...
>
>I agree on what you said about VisualWave (although I don't have
>access to it for the moment). Yes VisualWave seems to be a great
>way to generate a Web based application. You do it in your local
>Smalltalk environemnt without taking care of HTML/CGIs/JAVA.
The main problem being that it is fairly high priced at the moment
and ParcPlace will never get it together to turn it into a 
low priced mass-market product(necessitating someone like 
Microsoft coming out with similar functionality at some point).

>
>But still there is a competition at another level. Why sending
>Java bytecodes when you could send Smalltalk Virtual Machine 
>codes ? 
Yeah, it might have been nice if the Smalltalk vendors had gotten
their act together and did this. As it is, this is lost territory.
Maybe the Smalltalk Virtual Machine should just be revised to make
it Java compatible.

>
>Java doesn't really promote Smalltalk ! Actually I think that Java
>comes at a very bad moment for Smalltalk. More and more reports
>were blaming C++ for the poor productivity. Smalltalk was raising.
>Great. 
Yes, this is true.

>But Java success will deviate the (old C++) programmers from
>the Smalltalk wave (I could not resist ;-).
You may well be right here.

>
>What if all these companies which signed for Java, had done the
>same for Smalltalk ? Imagine Microsoft signing for Smalltalk
>(actually I don't know if this example would be good for us ;-) !
So we wind up with Smalltalk vs Java in a few years instead of 
Smalltalk vs C++?

From what I understand at the moment, there are only a few
things that Java really does that can't be done rather easily
within the Smalltalk world. The big issue is one of commitment
to making a mass-market product from what I can see right now.
Anyone can play with Java cheaply and easily. Smalltalk is
hoarded like some kind of crown jewel.

RJB
 

