Xref: utzoo comp.lang.smalltalk:2370 comp.os.os2.misc:396 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!vtserf!cohill From: cohill@vtserf.cc.vt.edu (Andrew M. Cohill) Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.os.os2.misc Subject: Re: IBM and Digitalk's Smalltalk /VPM Keywords: IBM Digitalk Smalltalk ParcPlace Message-ID: <713@vtserf.cc.vt.edu> Date: 27 Nov 90 15:32:11 GMT References: <5467@taylord> Followup-To: comp.lang.smalltalk Distribution: comp Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA Lines: 24 I too would like to see Smalltalk become more widely available and more readily accepted as a mainstream development tool, but find it hard to get excited about the IBM announcement. IBM has a long history of spending gobs of money on lots of different approaches/tools/software/etc, and then dropping most of them like a lead brick when they think something else will make them more money. On a more practical note, I think it is very possible that Digitalk will end up as the tail trying to wag the dog, and support for other platforms (like the Mac) will probably suffer greatly. I could easily see IBM telling Digitalk to let their Mac product die or else, the else being loss of the IBM/Digitalk contract. If Digitalk put their "clickable application" technology that they have for PM on the Mac, it would revolutionize Mac programming, but I have little expectation that this will happen. Support from them is awful; their phone support people seem only vaguely acquainted with the product, and can only answer basic, novice-type questions. Anything else you are better off directing to the net. -- | ...we have to look for routes of power our teachers never | imagined, or were encouraged to avoid. T. Pynchon |Andy Cohill |703/231-7855 cohill@vtserf.cc.vt.edu VPI&SU