Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!lethe!yunexus!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!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: <2239.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>
Date: 16 Jan 91 03:38:20 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.
Lines: 72

Category 2,  Topic 9
Message 47        Mon Jan 14, 1991
F.SERGEANT [Frank]           at 02:17 CST
 

 MB>I wouldn't get too upset about what Jim Callahan says in his HS 
 MB>Forth advertising literature.  The guy is just trying ...
  .
  .
 MB>Certainly, the implication that PD systems somehow "ripped off" his 
 MB>work is a bit extreme.  I shrug it off as a unfortunate statement 
 MB>made in a moment of frustration.  Lord knows I've made my share of 
 MB>those.

 Yes, haven't we all (at least I have)!  No, I'm not upset.  It  provided me
with some entertainment.

 You do bring up an interesting point.  I can see that a Forth vendor  could
feel his business is being hurt by the plethora of good PD and  shareware
Forths available.  (And, if I can say the following with the  greatest of good
humor and no offense intended:) Rather like  prostitutes being unhappy because
the ordinary girls of the town are  "giving it away."

 I don't think he has a leg to stand on to say the PD, shareware, & 
inexpensive Forths vendors have no right to sell or distribute their 
creations.  If not for Chuck's generosity in not locking up Forth and  "Forth"
with patents, trademarks, and copyrights possibly even HS Forth  could not be
sold.  I think it is very possible that CM and Forth Inc  have benefitted from
having a less than 100% share of a larger market  (rather than 100% of a very
small market).  To go a step further,  someone suggested that if Forth Inc had
placed polyForth in the public  domain at the right time (probably too late
now) it would be *the*  standard, etc etc.  Lots of people would be using
Forth other than  Forth Inc, but they might get considerably more consulting
work because  of the extra wide spread of their name, etc.

 However, I think HS would be in a stronger position to say to the PD, 
shareware, & inexpensive Forth vendors: "Look, you are hurting  *yourself* by
giving it away.  Here's why ...  Here's what you should  do instead ...  Yes,
you have a perfect right to do so, but I suggest  you do not, as you will be
better off, because of the preceeding  reasons."  I think it would take some
strong arguments in place of the  elipses to be convincing, but I'd cheerfully
listen to them.  (I hope  you've noticed I'm including your Forth in this "PD,
shareware, &  inexpensive" category.  Look at all the damage you are doing to
HS,  Forth Inc, LMI, etc. by offering it for only $50!)

 His arguments might go something like this:  By selling your Forth so 
cheaply you threaten to put me out of business.  If you back off (or  raise
your price enormously) you allow me a larger profit margin.  I'll  use much of
this for increased advertising in the main stream computing  magazines.  This
will so enlarge the market for and acceptance of Forth  that you will make so
much more money from your consulting (preferably  using HS Forth) that you
will be far better off in the long run than if  you continue to sell your
measly little Forth.  In addition, because  only high-priced Forths will be
offered, Forth's reputation will  improve because people will say "if it costs
that much, it's got to be  good."  On the other hand, if you and the others
continue to dilute the  currently very small market you'll drive me and the
other real vendors  out of business, no national advertising will be done,
there will be no  acceptance of Forth at all, and then where will you be?

 (He did include a related argument in the ad - that our patronage of  the
inexpensive systems was a drain on resources, slowing down the  process of his
bringing us even better tools.)

 Obviously, not everyone is persuaded by the above arguments.  Perhaps better
ones could be put forth.

  -- 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