Re: common place apps in forth available, for example irc, or multi

On Feb 10, 5:31 am, Richard Owlett <rowl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> pml540...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
>
> > John Doty wrote:
>
> >>pml540...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
>
> >>>John Doty wrote:
>
> >>>>gavino wrote:
>
> >>>>>I have seen that forth can do the things c can.  Are there common
apps
> >>>>>for linux such as a IRC chat client, a web browser, a multi chatter
> >>>>>like pidgin? x-terminal? things like that?
>
> >>>> From its very beginning, Forth has never had much success at "me
too"
> >>>>programming. Its successes have mainly been in places where other
> >>>>techniques have either failed or not even been tried.
>
> >>>That's not entirely correct. There was a Lotus 123 clone with added
> >>>functionality that was written in kforth (not the kforth you
sometimes
> >>>see posted about these days). I think it was called VP-plus, and it
> >>>was "better" as a product but defeated by legal efforts based on look
> >>>and feel. It's just that you didn't hear much about the Forth side of
> >>>clone efforts like that. It mwould certainly be interesting to see
its
> >>>source...
>
> >>So we don't actually know whether that software could have been
> >>successful. But in the end, it wasn't. That's the best you can come up
> >>with? I rest my case.
>
> > Then you've effectively surrendered the point. We DO know whether that
> > software could have been successful - it was (I've actually used it
> > myself). It was precisely because it was a superior product that the
> > lawyers were brought in. "But in the end, it wasn't" is wrong - in the
> > end, it was litigated out of the market. P.M.Lawrence.
>
> Messing him up with FACTS. unfair ;)


I think is is AWESOME that you made something as nice with new
features in forth.  Was it also easier on resources?
Lawyers heh, rats!