[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Why I don't use Dylan
In article <8jehcr$5ul$1@bob.news.rcn.net>,
"Timothy Guimond" <tguimond@ma.ultranet.com> wrote:
> I must admit that it is a complete package. The price is reasonable.
But it's hard for most programmers to take it seriously. Functional
Objects does not inspire confidence that the programmer would be making
a wise investment of time and money. The company is run by former
Harlequin employees who give the vague impression they might be doing
it as a part time hobby. There have been so many such products in the
past which have gradually faded into obscurity, when their proprietors
found their time occupied by other pursuits and put the product on the
back burner, till they gradually reached the point where they could no
longer even do any more maintenance on it.
One thing Functional Objects could do to improve their credibility a
lot would be to put their source code in escrow with SourceForge to
become free open source if Functional Objects ever drops the ball. A
clear guarantee, that the product will definitely have a future no
matter what, is exactly what people need to be able to take it
seriously enough to invest the time and money needed to get started
with it.
What is the development situation at Functional Objects? I get the
vague impression some contract programmers working for other companies
might be doing the Functional Developer work between contracts and/or
in their spare time. Or does Functional Objects have venture capital
to pay the salaries of full time programmers?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Follow-Ups:
References: