Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!MathWorks.Com!news.duke.edu!convex!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!csn!cherokee!da_vinci!lookout!tblanch
From: tblanch@lookout (Todd Blanchard)
Subject: Re: Microsoft & Object Standards: Editor's Question
Message-ID: <CwL7u7.HpH@da_vinci.ecte.uswc.uswest.com>
Sender: news@da_vinci.ecte.uswc.uswest.com (IT Netnews)
Nntp-Posting-Host: lookout
Organization: US WEST Information Technologies
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <35n623$ged@panix.com> <199409201820.OAA03641@mercury.interpath.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 14:49:18 GMT
Lines: 24

Smalltalker (rayhorn@mercury.interpath.net) wrote:
: I think Microsoft should get into the object business by creating 
: Microsoft Smalltalk and perhaps call it Smalltalk/M or VisualTalk and 
: then take over the CORBA definition and the ANSI-Smalltalk definitions 
: and own the Smalltalk language market. Perhaps Microsoft could just buy 
: out OTI, Digitalk, ParcPlace and ObjectShare Systems and then they'd be 
: free to market Envy-ized Smalltalk worldwide in a completely 
: cross-platform manner and right the wrongs that the other major Smalltalk 
: vendors have botched the world into over the last 25 years or so. One fo 

I think that would be the best reason I can think of to abandon
Smalltalk.  Monopolies do nobody any good.  MS is  in the same position
IBM enjoyed 10 years ago.  They have a stranglehold on the desktop
and they keep it by threatening incompatibility if you use 3rd party
products.  That and their products are hopelessly arcane and of
questionable technical merit.

While your at it, lets get rid of Congress, the Supreme Court, and the
Presidency.  After all, a king would be so much less complicated.

Fascist.

Todd Blanchard

