[ANN] Smalltalk Chronicles

In article <[hidden email]>, [hidden email] says...
> Smalltalk got HUGE publicity when it was available
> on the very small scale, and cheaply, as Smalltalk/V.

So true.

That's how I got my start with Smalltalk in 1990.  We used Smalltalk/V
for DOS for an advanced AI class at York University.  Makes you wonder
where Smalltalk would be today if it had not been for Digitalk.
--
Bob Nemec
Newcastle Objects
[hidden email]

Hmm.

What would happen if STIC or STAB provided a consultant to said utility in
exchange for positive press re: Smalltalk.  Of course, a headline in
ComputerWorld saying: "Programmers Were Utility's Problem", or "Smalltalk
Rescues Utility from Management" would need some work.

--
.tom

That niche is currently filled by two vendors - Object-Arts (Dolphin)
and ObjectConnect (Smalltalk/MT).  So the space has better competition
than it did in 'the good old days'.

Additionally, Cincom ships ObjectStudio with Cincom Smalltalk, and OST
is a fine Windows specific development environment - it has excellent
database mapping and connectivity tools.



Bob Nemec wrote:
--
James A. Robertson
Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
[hidden email]
<Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>

"James A. Robertson" <[hidden email]> writes:

The VisualAge for Java cost is a once off.  No percentage of
product revenue, no annual fees.  

>
>
>
>--
>James A. Robertson
>Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
>[hidden email]
><Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>

"James A. Robertson" <[hidden email]> writes:

>That niche is currently filled by two vendors - Object-Arts (Dolphin)
>and ObjectConnect (Smalltalk/MT).  So the space has better competition
>than it did in 'the good old days'.

Only if you are a Windows developer.  I develop for Windows, Linux,
and Solaris.

>
>Additionally, Cincom ships ObjectStudio with Cincom Smalltalk, and OST
>is a fine Windows specific development environment - it has excellent
>database mapping and connectivity tools.

Note the word 'Windows'.

A SERFer wrote:
Sure.  And IBM doesn't expect to make money off of it either.  In fact,
pricing of that sort is pretty much guaranteed to reduce your choices in
the future - all you will be left with is the largest companies
providing whatever tools they feel like funding as loss leaders.  

People seem to have an allergic reaction to Microsoft doing that with
tools like Office, but somehow feel that Sun and IBM are 'heroic' for
doing it with tools...


>
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >James A. Robertson
> >Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
> >[hidden email]
> ><Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>

--
James A. Robertson
Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
[hidden email]
<Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>

"James A. Robertson" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
news:[hidden email]...
> >
> > The VisualAge for Java cost is a once off.  No percentage of
> > product revenue, no annual fees.
>
> Sure.  And IBM doesn't expect to make money off of it either.

For the ~$130 VA Java Pro version, that is certainly true. That is just a
merketing giveaway as far as they are concerned. They do make money on VA
Java Enterprise which costs $2K per copy and VA Gen (which included VAJ)
which costs ~$7K per copy. VA Java Pro is basically a single user version
that leaves out most of the enterprise features and wizards found in the
high-end version. it also includes a more streamlined (i.e., stripped down)
version of ENVY relative to the enterprise version. As with everything else,
it's a case of getting what you pay for. I don't know of any serious, large
VAJ customers who are using the pro version. All of them buy the enterprise
version.

-Eric

James A. Robertson wrote:


> $500.00 per year per developer, plus 5% of product revenue (based on the
> revenue of the Smalltalk portion of the product - we are flexible there
> as well).  The percentage shrinks if you are willing/able to pay more up
> front on an annual basis

Is that 5% of profit margin, or 5% of total revenue? The latter is
ludicrous. In today's ever optimizing market of shaving profit margins
to the narrowest margin, profit margin may be less than 5% total
revenue. OTOH, 5% of profit margin for a software product, is just plain
difficult to compute.

--
Travis Griggs (a.k.a. Lord of the Fries)
Member, Fravenic Skreiggser Software Collective
Key Technology
"It had better be a pretty good meeting to be better than no meeting at
all"-- Boyd K. Packer

"A SERFer" <[hidden email]> wrote in message news:[hidden email]...
>
> The VisualAge for Java cost is a once off.  No percentage of
> product revenue, no annual fees.

And at $2K for the high-end enterprise version and ~$7K for the ultra
high-end generator version, IBM makes good money off of it. Don't forget
annual support and upgrade fees either...

-Eric

Unfortunately, organizations with no track record of successful
application delivery will not find themselves suddenly enabled just by
using Smalltalk.  

Or to put it bluntly - Fools with Tools are still Fools...

Regards;

Bill Cole
Smalltalk Advocacy Board

On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 09:06:40 -0400, Thomas Gagne
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>Hmm.
>
>What would happen if STIC or STAB provided a consultant to said utility in
>exchange for positive press re: Smalltalk.  Of course, a headline in
>ComputerWorld saying: "Programmers Were Utility's Problem", or "Smalltalk
>Rescues Utility from Management" would need some work.

A SERFer wrote:
>
> "James A. Robertson" <[hidden email]> writes:
>
> >That niche is currently filled by two vendors - Object-Arts (Dolphin)
> >and ObjectConnect (Smalltalk/MT).  So the space has better competition
> >than it did in 'the good old days'.
>
> Only if you are a Windows developer.  I develop for Windows, Linux,
> and Solaris.

Notice I said 'that niche'.  Digitalk was selling into the Windows space
as well, although they also had (as ObjectStudio once had) an OS/2
version.

>
> >
> >Additionally, Cincom ships ObjectStudio with Cincom Smalltalk, and OST
> >is a fine Windows specific development environment - it has excellent
> >database mapping and connectivity tools.
>
> Note the word 'Windows'.

Sure.  But that was the Digitalk niche.  They never had a Unix product.

--
James A. Robertson
Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
[hidden email]
<Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>

"James A. Robertson" <[hidden email]> writes:

I have no idea whether or not IBM makes money of it.  Do you have
evidence that it doesn't?

But that is irrelevant anyway.  Its a fact that these tools are cheaper,
for whatever reason.

>
>People seem to have an allergic reaction to Microsoft doing that with
>tools like Office, but somehow feel that Sun and IBM are 'heroic' for
>doing it with tools...

No... Microsoft tools are cheap too.
Its not a matter of what is heroic or not - its a matter of what
is in the market.

Travis Griggs <[hidden email]> writes:

And, if I buy a development tool, why should I expect it to be tied in
with profit?  If I buy some other business tool, such as a car or
photocopier, do they expect part of my profit?

>--
>Travis Griggs (a.k.a. Lord of the Fries)
>Member, Fravenic Skreiggser Software Collective
>Key Technology
>"It had better be a pretty good meeting to be better than no meeting at
>all"-- Boyd K. Packer
>

"Eric Clayberg" <[hidden email]> writes:
But that annual support and upgrade fees are NOT part of the initial
purchase - they are *optional*, unlike with VisualWorks.

Steve

"James A. Robertson" <[hidden email]> writes:

Well... I was not talking about a niche.

The Digitalk 'niche' included reasonable portability to OS/2 and Mac:
UNIX was not anything like around as much then.

 Nemec wrote:

Hi out there!


Peter van Rooijen schrieb:
>

> What is really preventing wider acceptance of Smalltalk is exactly the same
> thing that makes it so appreciated by the people who know it. Smalltalk in
> all forms that I know it is a big, powerful system. Big, powerful systems
> don't generally get widely used.
>
> I'm not at all convinced that Smalltalk needs to be more widely used, but if
> that's what you want, make it easy to program Smalltalk in Notepad, or
> MS-Word.

I can't really understand why many of you think that making Smalltalk an
environment which is emacs-enabled or narrows it to a scripting
environment. A lot of what makes Smalltalk powerful is the browser-based
environment and the very specific tool.

A lot of Java programmers love to work in VisualAge for Java because it
helps thinking in objects and makes you a lot more productive than plain
jdk. This is due to the tools which are derived from Smalltalk browsers.

I wouldn't see any publicity arising from the fact that you can use
Smalltalk by using Notepad.
People and organizations would make the efforts to learn use the
Smalltalk environment if they were convinced of the productivity and
other advantages.

To make Smalltalk popular or more popular than it has been (in fact, it
is getting more popular right now) we need to see articles, books etc.
People need to hear about it.

My current impression is that the time for talking about Smalltalk
hasn't been better for years. A lot of organizations learn that Java is
not a solution to any problem, it's just another tool and if you use it
improperly, you get a thick thumb which hurts. This is good. Java is
good for many things, Smalltalk is good for many of these things and for
some of them it is much better. It's just that most people do not know
about this.

> If you know of anyone working on that, I'd sure be interested to hear about
> it.

Look into the archves of this group. it has been discussed a few weeks
ago. Maybe you will love GNU ST, which comes close to that.


Joachim

Hi out there!

A SERFer schrieb:
>
> dspublic-REMOVE THIS AND HYPENS- <[hidden email]> writes:
>
(I love long cites like the one deleted here ;-) )
>
> The large scale is not where hearts and minds are won.  Languages
> are often (mostly?) successful because they can be taken up and used
> by the *small* developer and individuals, including the academic
> market.  

Okay, hearts are good to make Smalltalk the world's most beloved
language. And if it's the hearts you are going for, look at Dolphin,
Smalltalk/X (free and cross platform), VW NC and many more.
If you want a tool for guys going home and writing their private killer
app, they can choose one of these.

But I think Dollars are more powerful. Sure, people like a language or
they don't. But a language which is great for my video collection may
not be helpful at my daily work. People start to love a tool also if it
helps them get their work done quick and in satisfying quality. If it
makes them more productive and helps them get rid of a lot of technicall
overhead like absolutely unneccessary type casting and stuff, they might
even love the tool more.

> These people then take their enthusiasms and skills into
> industry.  Smalltalk got HUGE publicity when it was available
> on the very small scale, and cheaply, as Smalltalk/V.

It is. If you don't use it commercially, you can get everything for free
from Cincom or Exept.
If you are a small developer, IBM is helping you a lot if you register
in PartnerWorld for developers.
So what you request is there.
There seems to be more to it.

Maybe more people need to hear about these options.
Maybe more people need to read the word Smalltalk in the press.



Joachim

Hi

A SERFer schrieb:
>
> "James A. Robertson" <[hidden email]> writes:
>
> >That niche is currently filled by two vendors - Object-Arts (Dolphin)
> >and ObjectConnect (Smalltalk/MT).  So the space has better competition
> >than it did in 'the good old days'.
>
> Only if you are a Windows developer.  I develop for Windows, Linux,
> and Solaris.

Do you know Smalltalk/X from exept? If not, check http://www.exept.de

Maybe you will find what you are looking for.
Smalltalk/X supports your platforms, is free for non-commercial use and
has proved to be suitable for a very interesting range of projects. Look
at it, you'll probably love it.

Joachim

"A SERFer" <[hidden email]> wrote in message news:[hidden email]...
Realistically, they are hardly optional if you are a big customer and need
support, upgrades and bug fixes. Even with VW, they are optional in the
sense that you could always stop using VW or stop getting updates or
support. Some folks are perfectly happy using VW 3.x and not paying Cincom a
dime. The bottom line is that, if you want the latest versions and the
latest bug fixes, you are going to pay for them on a recurring basis one way
or another.

-Eric

"A SERFer" <[hidden email]> wrote in message news:[hidden email]...
>
> The Digitalk 'niche' included reasonable portability to OS/2 and Mac:

To OS/2, yes; to the Mac, no. ST/V Mac was quite different from ST/V Win &
OS/2.

> UNIX was not anything like around as much then.

Although Digitalk did work on a Unix version for a long time and promised it
for years.

-Eric