From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,c23311c4d57b937e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.megapath.net!news.megapath.net.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 17:08:08 -0500 From: "Randy Brukardt" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <414B6E62.9070402@acm.org> <0hL2d.762$QB1.501@trndny02> <414E2306.6030404@acm.org> <8%q3d.1820$kn2.1441@trndny07> <414EE3A0.9080106@acm.org> <97de285c.0409211234.596b663a@posting.google.com> Subject: Re: Embedded Keynote Speaker Mentions Ada Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 17:09:19 -0500 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.32.209.38 X-Trace: sv3-oG3nQgfJDevn13htoRIveNw19dA70ZPCZ0HHmUmeY1SJIQTl6rHvYKsZes1E1TLlnWrEWkFYyu0OJxK!WjHVzugIw1pKbrbSloQv5f3rMh1hrGx9/hsNRXvdqTnhcdWHJn4nswBkfBGiLPd0JCuXIfv0QtHH X-Complaints-To: abuse@megapath.net X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@megapath.net X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.13 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4052 Date: 2004-09-23T17:09:19-05:00 List-Id: "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.