Re: The cost of CLIM and its future

• To: doughty@daffy-duck.hq.ileaf.com
• Subject: Re: The cost of CLIM and its future
• From: Arun Welch <welch@cis.ohio-state.edu>
• Date: Thu, 17 Sep 92 13:26:41 EDT
• Cc: clim@BBN.COM
• In-Reply-To: <9209171607.AA01449@daffy-duck.HQ.Ileaf.COM>; from "doughty@daffy-duck.HQ.Ileaf.COM" at Sep 17, 92 12:07 pm

> 
> I don't understand how I should reconcile the two statements "stuffing
> yet another Lisp window system down the users' throats" and "only a
> couple of people even asked if we implemented it." 


They represent two different points on a timeline. The marketing types
said that users really should buy CLIM (statement # 1), and the users
said "no thanks" (statement #2). Interest in CLIM was high 2 years ago, and
very low now.


> Believe me, the
> original ILA effort started precisely because users wanted a facility
> which allowed for the delivery of Lisp applications, with user
> interface, across all Lisp platforms.

I don't disagree with this being ILA's motive at the start, but the reality
is that now it's virtually impossible for any company other than the original
5 to get on the bandwagon. 

> 
> I know we can't expect sympathy, but can we get suggestions?  Can you
> suggest something on the market which addresses the Symbolics -> MCL
> -> Lucid -> Franz -> Harlequin portability issue?  

In the current state, it's locked into those 5 companies. What about -> Ibuki
-> Gold Hill -> Top Level  -> Venue -> etc. *That's* my point. It's effectively
raised the entry point into the Lisp market by a couple of manyears of effort.
Heck, Franz doesn't even implement it across all their platforms. 

...arun

0,,

• Re: The cost of CLIM and its future
• From: "Lawrence G. Mayka" <lgm@iexist.att.com>

• Re: The cost of CLIM and its future
• From: leafusa!daffy-duck.HQ.Ileaf.COM!doughty@BBN.COM

• Prev: A few more cents
• Next: Re: The cost of CLIM and its future
• Index: CLIM Mailing list (1-Sep-92 to 31-Dec-92)
• Thread: CLIM Mailing list Index (1-Sep-92 to 31-Dec-92)