Extolling the virtues of VOSS (Was Re: OODBMS For Smalltalk) 
Author Message
 Extolling the virtues of VOSS (Was Re: OODBMS For Smalltalk)

It would seem from following the posts related to the VOSS OODBMS that it is
one the best available expressions of persistency for our favourite
language. I remember having a conversation with one of the proprietors at
the Digitalk conference in Santa Ana, CA in 1994.

The question comes up in my mind: Why isn't there an issuing of this
persistent framewERK for the premier environment VisualWorks Smalltalk?
Does IBM own VOSS? There are some of us die-hard VisualWorks avids out here
that would like an opportunity to give this fine sounding OODBMS a run.

Enquiring minds would like a clarification of this one point.

Kind Regards,

-Larry I. Martin
Architect/Mentor - Special Projects

[Smalltalk - The Computer's genius!]



Sun, 16 Nov 2003 17:32:47 GMT  
 Extolling the virtues of VOSS (Was Re: OODBMS For Smalltalk)
Hi Larry,

No, IBM doesn't own VOSS, and it's not prejudice<g> - just a matter of time
resource, a port was begun but slipped down the priority list.  How many other
folk would be interested in VOSS for VW?

John
Logic Arts Ltd
http://www.logicarts.com



Quote:
> It would seem from following the posts related to the VOSS OODBMS that it is
> one the best available expressions of persistency for our favourite
> language. I remember having a conversation with one of the proprietors at
> the Digitalk conference in Santa Ana, CA in 1994.

> The question comes up in my mind: Why isn't there an issuing of this
> persistent framewERK for the premier environment VisualWorks Smalltalk?
> Does IBM own VOSS? There are some of us die-hard VisualWorks avids out here
> that would like an opportunity to give this fine sounding OODBMS a run.

> Enquiring minds would like a clarification of this one point.

> Kind Regards,

> -Larry I. Martin
> Architect/Mentor - Special Projects

> [Smalltalk - The Computer's genius!]



Mon, 17 Nov 2003 03:41:28 GMT  
 Extolling the virtues of VOSS (Was Re: OODBMS For Smalltalk)
John John,

<g>Funny</g>. You can obtain the data from CINCOM as far as the number of
downloads of the non-commercial version of VW compared to the number for the
past two years, I am sure you will get e{*filter*}d.

You already support VSE, so as far as CINCOM is concerned, they are seeing
revenue on that for VOSS IMHO, I am not speaking for them. Try and ask them
for outright purchases of VW this year so far and you would be even more
e{*filter*}d. Every legacy programmer that I have introduced to Smalltalk so far
likes the maturity of VW. Not saying the other dialects do not have their
followers too, but VW seems to be catching on among {*filter*} legacy
programmers looking for something other than [the.u.know.what].

Thank you for the feedback. I will be looking forward for your port to VW.

Kind Regards,

-Larry I. Martin
Architect/Mentor - Special Projects

[Smalltalk - The Computer's Genius!]


Quote:
> Hi Larry,

> No, IBM doesn't own VOSS, and it's not prejudice<g> - just a matter of
time
> resource, a port was begun but slipped down the priority list.  How many
other
> folk would be interested in VOSS for VW?

> John
> Logic Arts Ltd
> http://www.*-*-*.com/



> > It would seem from following the posts related to the VOSS OODBMS that
it is
> > one the best available expressions of persistency for our favourite
> > language. I remember having a conversation with one of the proprietors
at
> > the Digitalk conference in Santa Ana, CA in 1994.

> > The question comes up in my mind: Why isn't there an issuing of this
> > persistent framewERK for the premier environment VisualWorks Smalltalk?
> > Does IBM own VOSS? There are some of us die-hard VisualWorks avids out
here
> > that would like an opportunity to give this fine sounding OODBMS a run.

> > Enquiring minds would like a clarification of this one point.

> > Kind Regards,

> > -Larry I. Martin
> > Architect/Mentor - Special Projects

> > [Smalltalk - The Computer's genius!]



Mon, 17 Nov 2003 05:22:29 GMT  
 Extolling the virtues of VOSS (Was Re: OODBMS For Smalltalk)
At TotallyObjects we have been asked in the past if we would consider moving
our frameworks to VW. Whenever we have taken this up with the VW people
(prior to CINCOM admittedly), there has always been a fairly hefty cost
involved in getting working copies of VW for our commercial use (using the
NC version would break the licence). Most of our small frameworks do not
make a lot of money and thus paying a large amount (relatively speaking) for
2-3 VW licences has always made it unattractive.

IBM, on the other hand, give us free development licences due to our support
of the IBM development community.

Maybe things have changed. I would be interested in knowing.
.



Quote:
> John John,

> <g>Funny</g>. You can obtain the data from CINCOM as far as the number of
> downloads of the non-commercial version of VW compared to the number for
the
> past two years, I am sure you will get e{*filter*}d.

> You already support VSE, so as far as CINCOM is concerned, they are seeing
> revenue on that for VOSS IMHO, I am not speaking for them. Try and ask
them
> for outright purchases of VW this year so far and you would be even more
> e{*filter*}d. Every legacy programmer that I have introduced to Smalltalk so
far
> likes the maturity of VW. Not saying the other dialects do not have their
> followers too, but VW seems to be catching on among {*filter*} legacy
> programmers looking for something other than [the.u.know.what].

> Thank you for the feedback. I will be looking forward for your port to VW.

> Kind Regards,

> -Larry I. Martin
> Architect/Mentor - Special Projects

> [Smalltalk - The Computer's Genius!]



> > Hi Larry,

> > No, IBM doesn't own VOSS, and it's not prejudice<g> - just a matter of
> time
> > resource, a port was begun but slipped down the priority list.  How many
> other
> > folk would be interested in VOSS for VW?

> > John
> > Logic Arts Ltd
> > http://www.*-*-*.com/



> > > It would seem from following the posts related to the VOSS OODBMS that
> it is
> > > one the best available expressions of persistency for our favourite
> > > language. I remember having a conversation with one of the proprietors
> at
> > > the Digitalk conference in Santa Ana, CA in 1994.

> > > The question comes up in my mind: Why isn't there an issuing of this
> > > persistent framewERK for the premier environment VisualWorks
Smalltalk?
> > > Does IBM own VOSS? There are some of us die-hard VisualWorks avids out
> here
> > > that would like an opportunity to give this fine sounding OODBMS a
run.

> > > Enquiring minds would like a clarification of this one point.

> > > Kind Regards,

> > > -Larry I. Martin
> > > Architect/Mentor - Special Projects

> > > [Smalltalk - The Computer's genius!]



Mon, 17 Nov 2003 17:00:59 GMT  
 Extolling the virtues of VOSS (Was Re: OODBMS For Smalltalk)
I'm sure that we could use something like that here at LingoMotors.  Right
now I'm teetering towards trying Glorp.

-Carl


Quote:
> Hi Larry,

> No, IBM doesn't own VOSS, and it's not prejudice<g> - just a matter of
time
> resource, a port was begun but slipped down the priority list.  How many
other
> folk would be interested in VOSS for VW?

> John
> Logic Arts Ltd
> http://www.logicarts.com



Mon, 17 Nov 2003 22:20:22 GMT  
 
 [ 5 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Disributed Smalltalk and OODBMS for VisualWorks and ObjectWorks\Smalltalk

2. Voss 3.0 - Transaction Processing for Smalltalk - free evaluation

3. Voss 3.0 - persistent object transactions for VA Smalltalk - free evaluation

4. Voss 3.0 - Transaction Processing for Smalltalk - free evaluatioin

5. OODBMS for Smalltalk

6. Object Persistence (OODBMS alike) for Smalltalk

7. US-FL P/A, SMALLTALK, Envy 1.43, OODBMS

8. USA-FL P/A, SMALLTALK, Envy 1.43, OODBMS

9. USA-FL P/A, SMALLTALK, Envy 1.43, OODBMS

10. USA-FL P/A, SMALLTALK, Envy 1.43, OODBMS

11. US-FL VisualWorks smalltalk and GemStone OODBMS opportunities

12. OODBMS for use with smalltalk

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software