Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!willett!ForthNet
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: What's WRONG with Forth?
Message-ID: <2215.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>
Date: 10 Jan 91 04:17:17 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.
Lines: 62

Category 2,  Topic 9
Message 45        Wed Jan 09, 1991
F.SERGEANT [Frank]           at 01:05 CST
 

 Clyde Phillips writes
 > I've been curious about HS FORTH.

  That reminds me of something I've been planning to complain about.   Now's
as good a time as any.  I've never used or even seen HS/FORTH.   However, they
have a startlingly entertaining ad in Forth Dimensions.   At one point they
criticize public domain versions of Forth.  Then they  say 

 "We don't shortchange you with promises.  We provide implemented 
  functions to help you complete your application quickly.  And we ask 
  you not to shortchange us by trying to save a few bucks using 
  inadequate public domain or pirate versions.  We worked hard coming 
  up with the ideas that you now see sprouting up in other Forths."

  It seems to me they are making a charge of some sort of impropriety  against
unnamed other Forths (or their vendors/creators).  A charge  that does not
seem to be substantiated in any way in the ad (see p. 15  of the Jan/Feb '91
Forth Dimensions).  It seems in poor taste to me -  especially in an ad. 
Further, I've seen their ad somewhere else, a  non-Forth publication, where
they showed the good sense of omitting the  part about "And we ask you not to
shortchange us ..."

  Is HS saying that they never used any ideas that came from others -  not
even from, say, Chuck Moore?  I'd find that damn hard to believe,  especially
since they are using the word "Forth"!  Further, are they  saying that if an
idea appeared in HS/FORTH no one else has the right  to implement that idea,
in his own way, in his own Forth?  That would  seem to me to be an very anti-
Forth philosophy.

  And, when they admonish us not to save a few bucks, just what are  they
talking about?  Their production level version is only $495.  If  F-PC or
VanNorman's optimized 32 bit eforth for the 8086 or F-83 or Guy  Kelly's Forth
or Mitch Bradley's Forth or BBL or Pygmy satisfies us I  hardly see how we are
shortchanging Harvard Softworks!  Of course they  didn't name the above
Forths.  They merely said "inadequate public  domain or pirate versions."  I
had, though, the feeling they meant to  include every Forth in the world other
than HS/FORTH.

  On the other hand, I've never heard a bad word about the quality of 
HS/FORTH.  It is probably an excellent Forth.  It may well be worth the 
money.  If so, I think it should compete on its merits.  It should  exhort
people to buy it because it is superior, not because people OWE  it (in some
vague fashion) to Harvard Softworks to buy it.

  As I mentioned, they seem to bring this point up only to the loyal  Forth
community (re the Forth Dimensions ad) and not in their general  advertising. 
I think that is rather like biting the hand that  recommends (or fails to
recommend) them.

  Thanks for reminding me.

  -- Frank
-----
This message came from GEnie via willett.  You cannot Reply to the author
using email.  Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions
the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, whatever).
Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us or uunet!willett!dwp