Re: Embedded Keynote Speaker Mentions Ada

["Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>]

"Tom" <8f27iw6z@canada.com> wrote in message
...
> Where do you think that they might be getting that idea?  When I was
> doing a quick search for information on Ada I put "Ada compilers" in
> for the search term on google. I found a fair number of the most
> popular web sites were not updated in the last several years. It does
> not distill a lot of confidence in a computer language when the so
> called enthusiasts can't even keep their web sites up to date.  If
> this was not bad enough one of the Windows compiler distributors did
> not even mention WindowsXP. The last operating system that they say
> works with their compiler is Win95.  Come on, if the enthusiasts can't
> stay up to date then what chance is there of convincing someone new to
> Ada that it is not 'ageing' technology.

It's unfortunate that we've gotten to a point where website "churn" is more
important than the information that they contain. Most information on Ada
*hasn't* changed much since the completion of Ada 95, so there is no need to
change it. But that doesn't make what it says any less relevant.

I know that there are a number of marketing "fluff" pages on our site
(www.rrsoftware.com) that we haven't updated in years -- nothing on them has
needed change. The reasons for using Ada haven't changed; what benefits our
products give haven't changed; our company history hasn't changed -- why
change these pages? Just to keep some web designers employed? I'd rather
spend the effort on the products.

I know that our site contains pages describing our Ada 83 compilers. These
haven't been updated since 1994, and are of course obsolete technology. But
a few people still want them, and it costs us nothing to keep them in the
catalog. We don't bother to update those pages, for obvious reasons, and
it's fairly likely that someone would find "Windows 95" references there.

The full name of our flagship Ada 95 product is "Janus/Ada 95 Professional
for Microsoft Windows 95/NT", which is unfortunate these days. That name
came about because of a - ahem - correspondence with Microsoft's attorneys.
Essentially, we're not allowed to use a better name (that is, leaving off
the OS designators), and listing all of the options is just too unwieldy
"Janus/Ada 95 Professional for Microsoft Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/XP/2003".
In any case, it would be a bad idea to change the name until there is a new
release, so we're going to have to live with it for a while.

I'm not quite sure why this suddenly is in issue (this is the second time in
two days that someone has mentioned this); the name has been rather obsolete
for more than 5 years (since Windows 98 and Windows 2000 came out), and no
one has complained. Sigh.

                      Randy.