Re: [colorforth] DOES> How is colorForth different from other Forths?

["Samuel A. Falvo II" <kc5tja@xxxxxxxx>]

As seems to be usual for me, I'm missing some messages in the thread.  
Hence the double-quotation.

> > here. But actually MS does not produce very bad quality products,

This is certainly arguable.  While I agree that their entire product line 
has some really good quality stuff (I personally do like Microsoft's 
Visual C++ developer studio, for example[1]), it's clear that more than 
half their offerings appear to be botch-jobs hellbent on getting to 
market quickly, rather than being an honest software development effort 
centered on quality.

Note that this entirely ignores the issues of user interface, which has 
earned Microsoft perpetual contempt from those in the human interfaces 
branches of computer science and those who derive their paychecks from 
consulting in user interface design.

[1] But this is probably only because this is the only area where as soon 
as they purchase Yet Another IDE Company, a new one springs up to take 
the purchased's place.  Hence, MSVC has perpetual competition.  Funny 
how that works!

> > What I don't like it that analytical and technical information is
> > being hidden, and there's lots of sales and marketing junk
> > available, but almost no real imformation. Almost everyone talks

That's precisely because they have *nothing* to say about their products 
except sales drawl.  If they released useful information, then their 
customers would immediately recognize just how abysmal the Windows OS 
architecture really is, how competing technologies offer competitive 
capabilities for less money or with easier to program interfaces, etc.

> > about their products, but there are almost no independent analysis
> > and reviews. Maybe it's because of US legal system when it's better
> > to keep mouth your shut :)

A lot has to do with Microsoft's legal brutality too.  If you say 
something bad about Microsoft in public, and you're a company known to 
use a lot of Microsoft software, then Microsoft can retaliate by making 
your technical support a living hell, if not outright canceling your 
licenses to use their software all-together.

Don't think it can happen?  Here's a hint: it has, and I'm living proof.

> Having strugled with a simple named pipe for four days at work, I
> don't have anything good to say about the Win32 API. Its ugly, overly
> complex, not fully specified. There is simply no way to have any
> confidence that my code, dependent on Win32, will work in a consistent
> manner.

Interestingly enough, the Windows NT kernel-level API is actually pretty 
decent.  But, of course, it wasn't designed by Microsoft.  It was 
designed by half the original team who developed the VMS operating 
system, and it shows.

> > DirectX vs (what
> > alternatives exist there?);
>
> OpenGL, which while being a poor abstraction of PC hardware, is not
> impossible to work with.

SDL?  DirectFB?  GGI?  C'mon, there are *TONS* of alternatives to 
DirectX.

> > PDF vs PostScript vs DPS vs GDI;

You forgot the SVG.

> > CORBA vs its absense;

I find this wording interesting.  CORBA vs. DCOM has been decided long 
ago: CORBA blows DCOM away, in terms of ease of use, in terms of 
performance, and in terms of memory footprint.  Where CORBA doesn't do 
quite as well is when it's against COM (note no D).

This because DCOM is a bolt-on to a middle-ware solution designed 
*solely* to handle the in-process case between Microsoft Office 
products.  As a bolt-on, it's a really fine piece of software.  I'm glad 
to see that it works, is solid, and all that jazz.  But it is still no 
match compared to CORBA.

But, now-a-days, there's still more alternatives.  XML-RPC and SOAP are 
just two of the competing technologies and (unfortunately) seem to be 
gaining ground.

> I think so. I think that is the only reason the U.S. government did
> make any effort to dismantle the Microsoft monopoly. It is not simply
> a matter of national competition, internationaly they want Microsoft
> to succeed.

Historical evidence very plainly shows that dismantling a monopoly into 
several different companies *increases* business revenues for all 
companies involved.  AT&T and SBC are **huge**, all thanks to the 
breakup of AT&T many years ago.  Where monopolies are left to their own 
devices, they universally collapse (ultimately) under their own weight.

Microsoft is currently showing bad signs of collapse.  For the first 
time, their earnings did not exceed their predictions, and is what many 
believe to be the start of a major negative trend.  The majority of 
their customer base is, for the first time, majorly upset with them.  
Companies are actively searching for viable alternatives as we speak, 
and yes, people are being fired for choosing Microsoft.  Personally, I'm 
not sure this is the beginning of a trend, but it clearly does show a 
crack in the dam.  The water will flow.  It's just a matter of time.

> > Also, because of lack of clear understanding of ColorForth message
> > (let me use this marketing term here), we waste lots of time for
> > discussion of unimportant details, etc.

This suggests that there are important details to discuss.  The thing 
with ColorForth, MachineForth, and the whole concept of the MISC 
architecture is that they are *so simple* that there is *nothing* to 
discuss.  This is a very liberating thing.

I posit, absolutely, that MISC can *never* catch on commercially (sorry 
Chuck), because the concept is so simple that a teenager with a year's 
experience hacking TTL circuitry can replicate the CPU, in its entirety, 
in discrete component TTL logic, based *entirely* from online material 
accessible today.  E.g., the CPU si so simple, it's virtually public 
domain.

Likewise with ColorForth, and I believe this is why Chuck released 
ColorForth to the public domain.  The software is just too simple.  
There are no parsers in the traditional sense of the word, the 
optimizations performed are no-brainers and drop-dead simple to 
implement, etc.

The only thing one needs to do is write a tutorial on using ColorForth, 
on how PAD words, on how to code graphics routines, and maybe a few 
other tid-bits, tips, and tricks.  I predict a 13-page manual (if that) 
is all that'd be needed for someone even half-way familiar with Forth in 
general to become virtually a virtuoso with ColorForth.

--
Samuel A. Falvo II


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: colorforth-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: colorforth-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Main web page - http://www.colorforth.com