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

On Feb 10, 7:01 am, John Doty <j...@[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.
>
> It was litigated out of the market. So we can't know if it would have
> been a success.
>
> And again, I said 'never had *much* success at "me too" products'. A
> single counterexample is insufficient here, even if not flawed.
>
> --
> John Doty, Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.http://www.noqsi.com/
> --
> History teaches that logical consistency is neither sufficient nor
> necessary to establish practical, real world truth. Those who attempt to
> use logic for that purpose are abusing it.

Wow Osbourne was awesome.  If only lawyer rats were shooed away.