CA Commitment To CA-Clipper And CA-VO - A Quote From clcvo 
Author Message
 CA Commitment To CA-Clipper And CA-VO - A Quote From clcvo

Quote:

>Here is quote from a post in comp.lang.clipper.visual-objects:

>Hey VO developers I found the following URL    
> http://www.*-*-*.com/

Dated May 2, 1997.

Quote:
>Makes interesting reading and confirms CA support for VO despite the
>doubters out there!

uh huh - just like their Clipper support.:-(

<snip>



Wed, 19 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 CA Commitment To CA-Clipper And CA-VO - A Quote From clcvo



Quote:

>>Here is quote from a post in comp.lang.clipper.visual-objects:

>>Hey VO developers I found the following URL    
>>http://www.cai.com/products/voprofserv.htm

>Dated May 2, 1997.

Still interesting regardless.  I agree, it's not new news.

Quote:
>>Makes interesting reading and confirms CA support for VO despite the
>>doubters out there!

>uh huh - just like their Clipper support.:-(

Awwww, Jo, you still on *that*?  :-)

Seriously, the good news in this is that the Professional Services
thing is headed up by Mark Lincoln, who used to be the president of
the Clipper/VO user group in the DC area--IOW, "one of us."

I will still wait and see how this goes.  It is still necessary for
VO to gain mindshare within CA, and I honestly don't know how much
Lincoln's group will be able to help in this regard.  If they can
make some headway, fantastic.

--

Why should I change or hide my return address to deter spammers?
I just loop the garbage right back at 'em.



Thu, 20 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 CA Commitment To CA-Clipper And CA-VO - A Quote From clcvo


editing):

Quote:
>IMO, the only way that 'VO will gain mindshare within CA' will
>be an increase in current and projected sales. What is being
>done about that? On CIS, CA is so paranoid about outside
>ideas that they are spending more time censoring the forums
>than responding to requests for help.

Most successful companies have figured out that the way to increase
sales is by effective advertising.  It appears that CA still thinks
it's somehow going to happen by word-of-mouth...

Larry
--



Fri, 21 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 CA Commitment To CA-Clipper And CA-VO - A Quote From clcvo



Quote:


>>>>Makes interesting reading and confirms CA support for VO despite the
>>>>doubters out there!

>>>uh huh - just like their Clipper support.:-(

>>Awwww, Jo, you still on *that*?  :-)

>Yup and I've added VO1 to the abandoned by CA list.:-(

I guess a partial defense to that is what One-Ell said a while back
about Clipper/DOS.  There is not a lot of activity from *any* major
vendor pushing or improving DOS programming tools.

Likewise, Win16 development is hardly the hot thing these days.
VO 1.0d is adequate for most Win16 projects IMHO, and there is not
much reason to keep improving it.

I mean, what?  Do you see MS or Borland or Sybase rushing to deliver
hot new 16-bit Windows stuff?  I don't.  (Not that I pay much attention
to them.)

Quote:
>>Seriously, the good news in this is that the Professional Services
>>thing is headed up by Mark Lincoln, who used to be the president of
>>the Clipper/VO user group in the DC area--IOW, "one of us."

>>I will still wait and see how this goes.  It is still necessary for
>>VO to gain mindshare within CA, and I honestly don't know how much
>>Lincoln's group will be able to help in this regard.  If they can
>>make some headway, fantastic.

>IMO, the only way that 'VO will gain mindshare within CA' will
>be an increase in current and projected sales. What is being
>done about that? On CIS, CA is so paranoid about outside
>ideas that they are spending more time censoring the forums
>than responding to requests for help.

What EVER do you mean by that?  <g>

To answer your question, though, I want to see what happens with the
recent Gang of Five meeting with CW.  I am certain that VO 2.x will be
very nice technically, but then it all goes back to marketing.  Again.

Mark W. "If you aren't in {\it Dr. Dobbs}, you're nowhere" Schumann

--

Why should I change or hide my return address to deter spammers?
I just loop the garbage right back at 'em.



Fri, 21 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 CA Commitment To CA-Clipper And CA-VO - A Quote From clcvo



Quote:
>>>Makes interesting reading and confirms CA support for VO despite the
>>>doubters out there!

>>uh huh - just like their Clipper support.:-(

>Awwww, Jo, you still on *that*?  :-)

Yup and I've added VO1 to the abandoned by CA list.:-(

Quote:
>Seriously, the good news in this is that the Professional Services
>thing is headed up by Mark Lincoln, who used to be the president of
>the Clipper/VO user group in the DC area--IOW, "one of us."

>I will still wait and see how this goes.  It is still necessary for
>VO to gain mindshare within CA, and I honestly don't know how much
>Lincoln's group will be able to help in this regard.  If they can
>make some headway, fantastic.

IMO, the only way that 'VO will gain mindshare within CA' will
be an increase in current and projected sales. What is being
done about that? On CIS, CA is so paranoid about outside
ideas that they are spending more time censoring the forums
than responding to requests for help.


Fri, 21 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 CA Commitment To CA-Clipper And CA-VO - A Quote From clcvo


Quote:

> >Here is quote from a post in comp.lang.clipper.visual-objects:
> >Hey VO developers I found the following URL    
> >http://www.cai.com/products/voprofserv.htm
> >Makes interesting reading and confirms CA support for VO despite the
> >doubters out there!
> uh huh - just like their Clipper support.:-(

BTW Jo, did the meeting between the UG-Pres and Mr Wong take place yet ?

Anne.

* Sure he's cute, but can he _type_ ? *



Fri, 21 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 CA Commitment To CA-Clipper And CA-VO - A Quote From clcvo



Quote:
>>>>uh huh - just like their Clipper support.:-(

>>>Awwww, Jo, you still on *that*?  :-)

>>Yup and I've added VO1 to the abandoned by CA list.:-(

>I guess a partial defense to that is what One-Ell said a while back
>about Clipper/DOS.  There is not a lot of activity from *any* major
>vendor pushing or improving DOS programming tools.

>Likewise, Win16 development is hardly the hot thing these days.
>VO 1.0d is adequate for most Win16 projects IMHO, and there is not
>much reason to keep improving it.

We have a communication problem.:-) I have not sought improvements
to either Clipper or VO 1. I simply ask that they fix what they have
sold. Hmmmm, come to think about it, that *would* be an improvement.
Quote:

>To answer your question, though, I want to see what happens with the
>recent Gang of Five meeting with CW.

CA would not even post the UG requests on CIS. They agreed to
make a point release, 2.x, prior to CA-World next April. Whether they
had intended to make one anyway is open to speculation. Marketing
was not mentioned in CA's public response to the meeting. Neither
was documentation.

Quote:
>  I am certain that VO 2.x will be very nice technically,

On what basis? - They haven't been able to fix 2.0 yet -
one update in a year (plus a quick fix to the update)! There are more
informal run time dll's floating around this fall than ticks on a
hound dog. OTOH, CA is getting smarter - they have managed to
get the UG to do their "Questionnaire" for them.:-) Wonder if CA will
permit them to post the results on CIS?

Keep your eyes open for the Springtime $99 special. And then be
prepared to learn the true meaning of 'maintenance mode'.



Sat, 22 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 CA Commitment To CA-Clipper And CA-VO - A Quote From clcvo



Quote:


>> >Here is quote from a post in comp.lang.clipper.visual-objects:
>> >Hey VO developers I found the following URL    
>> >http://www.cai.com/products/voprofserv.htm
>> >Makes interesting reading and confirms CA support for VO despite the
>> >doubters out there!

>> uh huh - just like their Clipper support.:-(

>BTW Jo, did the meeting between the UG-Pres and Mr Wong take place yet ?

Yes; but I have no idea how long Mr. Wang was in attendance. I am not
monitoring the VO news group but I would imagine there would be quite
a bit of discussion there because comments to the UG folks are due
shortly.

Quote:
>Anne.

>* Sure he's cute, but can he _type_ ? *

Not very well.:-)


Sat, 22 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 CA Commitment To CA-Clipper And CA-VO - A Quote From clcvo


[MAJOR SNIPS]

Quote:
>To answer your question, though, I want to see what happens with the
>recent Gang of Five meeting with CW.  I am certain that VO 2.x will be
>very nice technically, but then it all goes back to marketing.  Again.
>--


It all gets back to confidence in Computer Associates. Regardless of why,
confidence is very, very low. And, that appears to be the driving force behind
VO's path.

Richard Mitchell



Sat, 22 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 9 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. CA clipper -> CA VO 2.5

2. !CA-VO True 32-bit CA-Clipper for Windows

3. Problem in multimdia software development with CA-Clipper / CA-VO

4. Directory() function in ca vo 1.0c(2) v ca vo 2.0

5. CA-Clipper 5.3 with CA-Clipper Tools

6. Question about CA RET with CA VO 1.0c

7. CA releases CA-VO SDK

8. CA-VO or CA-dBFast storing large binary objects

9. CA-Tools III with CA-Clipper v5.3b

10. Testing network prgs in CA-Clipper / CA-dBFast

11. IP number change on fortress.uccb.ns.ca AKA w3.uccb.ns.ca

12. Operating Btrieve with ca-Vo/ Clipper

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software