End of Reality
John Lambert
It is with regret that I have to announce that MDIS has today RIF'd the
entire remaining REALITY (R) development staff.
This brings to a close a 20 year involvement with the Pick (TM) system
only weeks after Dicks tragic demise.
The company (MDIS) is now solely committed to PRO4 a fourth generation
language for application development.
Anyone interested in attending a wake for REALITY(R) in the So Cal Area
please email me !!!
All trademarks were the subject of many years of wastefull litigation!!
John
Doug Constiner
migrate our Reality into?
All of our programming is done in PQN Proc. I have just purchased a
Motorola M911 system last May. We are running System V R4.
I also have Novell 3.11 using Novix for WorkGroups.
Any and all help appreciated!
Richard Williamson
> The company (MDIS) is now solely committed to PRO4 a fourth
> generation language for application development.
From one obscure system to another. Bet that marraige won't last 20+ years.
G. D. Hildebrand
: So if this is true. What is the best pick database that I can
: migrate our Reality into?
: All of our programming is done in PQN Proc. I have just purchased a
: Motorola M911 system last May. We are running System V R4.
I only know of one outfit who has done that, Mr. Cook and his gang. Do
you work there?
If not, it would certainly be interesting to hear what has been done in
PQN Proc, and perhaps why, and we can all discuss what is the best in
the way of options for you!
My bet is that Universe will be the place to try. What version of REALITY?
: I also have Novell 3.11 using Novix for WorkGroups.
: Any and all help appreciated!
--
---------------------------------------- _|___/v\___|_ ---- g...@ACM.ORG -
Garrett Hildebrand Systems Wrangler -====(~)=(.*.)=(~)====- (310) 595-1092
"Therefore the security of the traditional `-' cryptosystem is properly
measured as the work required for an intruder..." --D. Denning and P. Denning
G. D. Hildebrand
: Investigate jBase from James Anthony Consultants. Written by
: ex-MCD staff probably has the best PQN proc support out there,
: also claims Novell integration.
REALLY? I didn't know that! What version of PQN is this based upon?
: Contact them on in...@jbase.demon.co.uk.
Timothy Cianchi
ex-MCD staff probably has the best PQN proc support out there,
also claims Novell integration.
Contact them on in...@jbase.demon.co.uk.
ros...@ibm.net
>So if this is true. What is the best pick database that I can
>migrate our Reality into?
>
Advanced Pick... Native/DOS/Unix as the client needs. We have even found a
way to convert those pesky CompuSheet spreadsheets from Reality to AP.....
Robert O. Sachs
Internet ros...@ibm.net
FIDOnet 1:123/44.4
BBS 901-757-2076 (USA) leave msg for sysop.
Jeff A. Schasny
> The company (MDIS) is now solely committed to PRO4 a fourth
> generation language for application development.
'Tis truely a sad day in the Pickworld, I (like many other) first saw
Pick on a Microdata machine, so I hold a special fondness for them.
But... being the optimist that I am, I figure that surely some bright
person at Vmark or Unidata is franticly dialing the phone and
trying to obtain the services of some of the true Pick heros. :)
===============http://www.csn.net/~jschas=============================
Jeff Schasny : jsch...@alert.com : "They say time loves a hero,"
Berger & Co. : jsc...@csn.org : "but only time will tell"
Denver, Colorado : jsc...@aol.com : - Lowell George
======================================================================
Mark Preston
Actually, MDIS is commited to using Reality (at least the Unix version,
RealityX) along with PRO IV, C++, and a number of others. They are a realistic
and modern company, very well aware of the risks of putting all one's eggs in
the same basket.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| From : Mark Preston Ma...@mpreston.demon.co.uk |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. D. Hildebrand
: In article: <78929772...@jina.rain.com>
: > 04 Jan 95 08:08, John Lambert wrote:
: >
: > > The company (MDIS) is now solely committed to PRO4 a fourth
: > > generation language for application development.
: Actually, MDIS is commited to using Reality (at least the Unix version,
: RealityX) along with PRO IV, C++, and a number of others.
Companies who are committed to a product do not layoff all of the people
who understand it both architecturally and in terms of its gestahlt. We
have observed that every person committed to REALITY was either RIF'd,
transferred to a non-job, put on PRO-IV or encouraged to leave by one
means or another.
Making Henry Eggers report to the manager of PRO-IV is not my idea of
being committed to anything but figuring out the square root of fuck-all
using a sun dial for a calculator.
In fact, the departure of Henry is the signal that MDIS is AFU. FUBAR.
Hopelessly.
There are only a couple, or maybe a few people left in MDIS who understand
the gesthalt of the system. There are certainly not enough people left
there to do anything useful with it, and they are not working on it anyway.
Who is selling RealityX in the US?
Who is supporting existing REALITY customers? Who fixes their bugs?
There certainly is NOBODY left in MDIS who knows how PQN ought to work.
Probably nobody who knows ENGLISH, either.
The few folks left who really know certain other parts, such as Data/Basic,
or File I/O, do not get consulted on what ought to happen with REALITY.
: They are a realistic and modern company, very well aware of the risks
: of putting all one's eggs in the same basket.
They work on PRO-IV.
PRO-IV is the eggs _and_ the basket, IMHO.
As for realistic and modern, I don't think so, Alice. Save that line
for the mushrooms who still work there. Maybe they will believe it. Not
me.
If the plan was to do REALITY in, it has succeeded. In fact, I often
wonder if that wasn't the plan all along. Of course, no one would ever
admit to such an atrocity, would they?
: Mark Preston Ma...@mpreston.demon.co.uk |
David Hona
>From: jlam...@ca.mdis.com (John Lambert)
>Subject: End of Reality
>Date: 4 Jan 1995 08:08:50 GMT
>John
MDIS gave up the fight along time ago, so it seemed, only now have they
'bitten the bullet' so to speak.
I will alwalys remember fondly the Microdata Sequel 9000 which my "first"
system.
I visited the World Wide Web site for MDIS and you really had to look real
hard to find the history of the company, let alone the world 'Reality' being
mentioned. It seems it has been an embrassment for them to mention it. The URL
is http://www.mdis.com
Does anyone know if ADDS Mentor has been shutdown or sold yet or still (just
barely) going? How are the other 'traditional' PICK players going too???
Regards
David Hona
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
David Hona | "The best movie is your own imagination"
dh...@ozemail.com.au | Some people are always at the movies!
10025...@compuserve.com | http://www.ozemail.com.au/~dhona
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Henry Eggers
: Timothy Cianchi (73764...@CompuServe.COM) wrote:
: : Investigate jBase from James Anthony Consultants. Written by
: : ex-MCD staff probably has the best PQN proc support out there,
: : also claims Novell integration.
: REALLY? I didn't know that! What version of PQN is this based upon?
Item-save. :-)
Regards hve.
Henry Eggers
: In article: <78929772...@jina.rain.com> Richard.W...@f246.n105.z1.fidonet.org
: >
: > 04 Jan 95 08:08, John Lambert wrote:
: >
: > > The company (MDIS) is now solely committed to PRO4 a fourth
: > > generation language for application development.
: >
: > From one obscure system to another. Bet that marraige won't last 20+ years.
: >
: Actually, MDIS is commited to using Reality (at least the Unix version,
: RealityX) along with PRO IV, C++, and a number of others. They are a
: realistic and modern company, very well aware of the risks of putting
: all one's eggs in the same basket.
What'ch'you smokin', boy?
Regards, hve.
G...@rosenberg.org
> &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Quite.
Mark Preston
>
> Mark Preston (Ma...@mpreston.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> : In article: <78929772...@jina.rain.com>
> : (Richard Williamson) writes:
> : >
> : > 04 Jan 95 08:08, John Lambert wrote:
> : >
> : > > The company (MDIS) is now solely committed to PRO4 a fourth
> : > > generation language for application development.
> : >
> : > From one obscure system to another. Bet that marraige won't last 20+ years.
> : >
>
> : Actually, MDIS is commited to using Reality (at least the Unix version,
> : RealityX) along with PRO IV, C++, and a number of others. They are a
> : realistic and modern company, very well aware of the risks of putting
> : all one's eggs in the same basket.
>
>
Richard Williamson
> : Actually, MDIS is commited to using Reality (at least the
> Unix version, : RealityX) along with PRO IV, C++, and a number
> of others. They are a : realistic and modern company, very
> well aware of the risks of putting : all one's eggs in the same
> basket.
Which caused Henry Eggers to wonder:
> What'ch'you smokin', boy?
Mark then explained that he wasn't old enough to smoke:
> Its true, honest. At least, I work there and that's what they
> keep telling me.
Wanna buy a bridge? :)
jeff g.
: : So if this is true. What is the best pick database that I can
: : migrate our Reality into?
: : All of our programming is done in PQN Proc. I have just purchased a
: : Motorola M911 system last May. We are running System V R4.
: I only know of one outfit who has done that, Mr. Cook and his gang. Do
: you work there?
: If not, it would certainly be interesting to hear what has been done in
: PQN Proc, and perhaps why, and we can all discuss what is the best in
: the way of options for you!
: My bet is that Universe will be the place to try. What version of REALITY?
Reality to Universe is one of the easiest ports I've ever done. The
Motorola seems a little flaky, but the database end is quite sound.
jeff g.
Jim Idle
: Anyone interested in attending a wake for REALITY(R) in the So Cal Area
: please email me !!!
I'm in. You know that I snap at any excuse to drink that great Californian beer
;-). I emailed you but I don't know that you have access to that email acount
anymore?
:
Jimi
Jim Idle
: Mark Preston (Ma...@mpreston.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: : Actually, MDIS is commited to using Reality (at least the Unix version,
: : RealityX) along with PRO IV, C++, and a number of others. They are a
: : realistic and modern company, very well aware of the risks of putting
: : all one's eggs in the same basket.
:
: What'ch'you smokin', boy?
when I worked there (at least for the first few months anyway!) We shall see!
:
: Regards, hve.
Jim
Frank Yeh Jr.
: In article <heggersD...@netcom.com>, heg...@netcom.com (Henry Eggers)
: writes:
: > Newsgroups: comp.databases.pick
: > From: heg...@netcom.com (Henry Eggers)
: > Subject: Re: End of Reality
: >
: > : RealityX) along with PRO IV, C++, and a number of others. They are a
: > : realistic and modern company, very well aware of the risks of putting
: > : all one's eggs in the same basket.
: >
: > What'ch'you smokin', boy?
: >
: > Regards, hve.
: Having been inside MDC for a few (painful) years, I have to agree with Henry.
: MDC may indeed be aware of the risks of putting all their eggs in the same
: basket, but it seems that their baskets are having a little trouble too, and
: now all the eggs are broken all over the street. They haven't got a clue
: what they have, or what they've lost. They never did.
: Kevin
I'd like to think that there are still some of us who know what we have and what
we've lost. I'm a Reality fan, but when times change, you gotta change with them
or be left behind. I don't work with Reality anymore, and there are some things
that I admittedly miss. However, there are many parts of Reality that I expected
to really miss and found that what I ended up with was as good or better. There's
also nothing to prevent this company from stripping out the O.S. trappings and
making the parts they want available separately... Like ENGLISH!!!!
(that was for you, Henry ;-).
The thing I miss most is the guys who worked on Reality. I'm not about to get
all sentimental over a piece of software no matter how much blood, sweat & tears
I've put into it. It's still just software. What I lament over losing is the
tremendous technical expertise that was pissed away when the product became passe.
There's also a certain comraderie built up from years of working and drinking
together that is irreplaceable. These are going to be sorely missed.
Being another current MDIS employee, I have to back poor Tim up when he says
that the company isn't really putting all of its egss in the PRO-IV basket.
However, I've been around long enough to know not to swallow everything they tell
us. Those of you who have worked here before should know what's going to happen...
They'll get ready to officially bury the product until someone comes along with
a couple million pounds or so and guess what? Instant resurrection! Remember how
long it took 'em to bury the Sovereign line?
To be fair, the company's official position is that its application business
units (each of which owns a niche market application) will be converting their
applications to PRO-IV and doing future development in PRO-IV. While this is the
official position, many of the business units are not too eager to give up their
current software vehicle, regardless of what it is.
There is also a contract programming group in the UK that does a lot of
windows programming as I understand it, and that's where C++ comes in to the
picture. It should also be noted that the PRO-IV Windows Client is written in
C++.
Bottom Line is the bottom line. The product will be around as long as it
generates enough revenue. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar or a fool.
Obviously, these are my opinions and not those of MDIS. If they found out I
had opinions, they might make me write marketing drivel (no! NO!! not THAT!)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Frank Yeh, Jr. MDIS
fy...@ca.mdis.com 18881 Von Karman Ave. Ste 1800
Irvine, Ca. 92715-1589
b...@rosenberg.org
> Kevin Nelson (Kevin_...@vos.stratus.com) wrote:
> : > : (at least the Unix version, RealityX) along
> : > : with PRO IV, C++, and a number of others.
> : > : They are a realistic and modern company,
> : > : very well aware of the risks of putting
> : > : all one's eggs in the same basket.
> : > What'ch'you smokin', boy?
> : > Regards, hve.
> : a clue what they have, or what they've lost.
> : They never did.
> : Kevin
> I'd like to think that there are still some of us
> who know what we have and what we've lost. I'm a
> Reality fan, but when times change, you gotta change
> The thing I miss most is the guys who worked on Reality ...
> ... Being another current MDIS employee, I have to back
> poor Tim up when he says that the company isn't really
> putting all of its egss in the PRO-IV basket.
> fy...@ca.mdis.com
Eggs? Baskets? Smoking? Clues? I dunno.
Let me just say this: no comment. And don't quote me.
Here's what's getting posted elsewhere from MDIS.
Michael Graz <mg...@netcom.com> says:
> Newsgroups: comp.lang.cobol
> Subject: Cobol src needed for Reverse Engineering beta test
> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 19:58:27 GMT
> Greetings to all.
> We are nearing the completion of development of
> a combination CASE/Reverse Engineering tool.
> We need large amounts of generic non-proprietary
> cobol source code for testing. The dialects we
> support are: OS/VS, VSII, Realia and ICL (U.K.).
> If anyone would like to donate source code to our
> beta testing it would be much appreciated.
> -- Michael Graz -- MDIS, Irvine California
> mg...@netcom.com
That old "DATE()=10000" business?
There's no future in it.
Get into the "MMDDYY = 123199" business.
* b...@rosenberg.org *
* probably the leading ex-Pick ex-consultant in Trenton NJ *
Henry Eggers
: : > : In article: <78929772...@jina.rain.com>
: : > : Actually, MDIS is commited to using Reality (at least the Unix
: : > : version, RealityX) along with PRO IV, C++, and a number of others.
: : > : They are a realistic and modern company, very well aware of the
: : > : risks of putting all one's eggs in the same basket.
: : >
: : > What'ch'you smokin', boy?
: : >
: : Having been inside MDC for a few (painful) years, I have to agree with
: : Henry MDC may indeed be aware of the risks of putting all their eggs
: : in the same basket, but it seems that their baskets are having a
: : little trouble too, and now all the eggs are broken all over the street.
: : They haven't got a clue what they have, or what they've lost.
: : They never did.
The following contribution from our coworker Frank Yeh brings up a
number of issues important to MDIS, the Pick industry, and the computer
industry in general, to most of which I am not going to speak herein.
At this point we must appologize to those not fans of 'As the
residue of Microdata turns' (General Applications, All My Software?).
: I'd like to think that there are still some of us who know what we have
: and what we've lost. I'm a Reality fan, but when times change, you gotta
: change with them or be left behind. I don't work with Reality anymore,
: and there are some things that I admittedly miss. However, there are
: many parts of Reality that I expected to really miss and found that
: what I ended up with was as good or better. There's also nothing to
: prevent this company from stripping out the O.S. trappings and making
: the parts they want available separately... Like ENGLISH!!!! (that
: was for you, Henry ;-).
In the light of Mr. Nelson's observation, "They haven't got a clue what
they have, or what they've lost," I note that Mr. Yeh responds that
it has to be abandoned. I wonder if this is exactly the point that Mr.
Nelson in making?
All things computer are apparantly rapidly obsoleted -- except that
software has an unnerving persistance. It's not clear when the time
of Reality/Pick -- terms to be used interchangibly -- was or is, or
is going to be, a topic which we can consider in the future. In
this context, the truth is probably that MDIS, with a unique cost
profile bred of being the world's most profitable Pick dealership,
resident the UK, for nearly 20 years, with the tradition of suppling
the whole application and service, rather than the horizontalware or
just the platform, and with the habit of going after very large single
sales, had neither the ability or the inclination to compete in the
'generic Pick' market. This has been rather clearly the case since
1986; the official position has been 'I don't want to spend a Penny
on ROS,' since mid '90. So, the times which changed were that MDIS
was not interested in being in this market.
But the implication is that one should change. Granted, that Mr. Yeh
likes Pro4 and does a good job with it. He liked ALL, (which is one
of the stages of Pro4 development), and did a good job with it. Pro4/ALL,
also known as Autocoder at GA some decades ago, it the descendent fruit
of the efforts of one Tom Price to create data-capture programs for a
key-to-disk business for small banks in Hawaii somewhere between the late
'60's and early '70's -- so the urban legend has it. He discovered,
as we all did, that, as he added customers, all he had to do
was change just a few things in the main program, recompile, and press
on. As we all did, he then parametrised this information, and had
a 'generic' application execute the parameter files. He took it
further than most, and the result is a 4GL data acquisition machine,
which utilizes a run engine separate from the application specification,
which run engine is implemented on a wide range of hardware platforms.
The charm of Pro4 to MDIS is that it offers the promise of being able
to implement big vertical applications which run on multiple hardware
platforms. The success of the company was based on the fact that it
built big verticals in the UK; the next version of the company is to
build big world verticals. In principle, a proprietary application
evironment promises the least 'surface area' to manage between
the applications and the underling environments, so it would seem to
be a good idea.
The company is also changing, it would appear, because Pick is
'known' and Pro4 isn't; and because Pro4 is the proprietary 'open'
solution, leaving the customers in the position MDISL and MDIS
prefer to have them in, rather than in the really open Pick
environment.
It is fascinating that both Pick and Pro4 are suitable for
minicomputer applications. I would think that as a matter of changing
to avoid being left behind, one would be getting involved in PCs
NT, et al, the issues of global networks, and the issues of post-
relational databases, rather than Pro4.
I would mention in passing that Pick has never been an OS -- it's
an application definition enviornment which demonstrates that an OS
is not necessary; and that cloning pieces of Pick into another
enviornment suffers from the problem that the primary characteristic
of the Pick machine is a consistent representation of data -- one which
ALL never adapted to, much less Pro4. In other words, most or all
is lost taking English into Unix, Windows or Oracle without the
underlying assumptions about the data.
: The thing I miss most is the guys who worked on Reality. I'm not about
: to get all sentimental over a piece of software no matter how much
: blood, sweat & tears I've put into it. It's still just software.
: What I lament over losing is the tremendous technical expertise that
: was pissed away when the product became passe. There's also a
: certain comraderie built up from years of working and drinking
: together that is irreplaceable. These are going to be sorely missed.
And no thanks for the crocodile tears. I did what I did with Reality
because it would be of use to the customers, not so that I could have
comraderie. Comraderie is not to be ignored in the process of
accomplising what one accomplishes. I note that we've not gone that
far away, as long as you can resist the temptation to tell me that
Reality is obsolete, for I shall then be able to resist the temptation
to tell you what I think of Pro4, as I am herein resisting.
: Being another current MDIS employee, I have to back poor Tim[sic] up
: when he says that the company isn't really putting all of its eggs
: in the PRO-IV basket.
We meant 'Mark', yes? I grant that all the corporate eggs are not all
in the Pro4 basket. Nor are most of the revenues or profits. But it
has also been the case that the only game in the corporation has been
Pro4 for the last four years, and the only reason why there was any
Reality development -- in which I explicitly I include CORA/RealityX,
and which I explicitly do _not_ include as development that
processof 'lateral development' called porting the software.
If the existing functionality of the machine is sufficient to a particular
application, it can run forever on the existing hardware or on the
presumably better price/performance successors to which the software may
be ported in the future. If anything more is wanted, the application will
have to decamp to a version which is still growing. What MDIS means by
it's 'commitment to Reality' is that it will still take revenues on
installed machines and existing applications, and it will take money
and deliver hardware running the current version of CORA. In general,
I think that it will continue to support the existing UK verticals in
BASIC/PQN, et cetera, since the revenues to be generated by rewriting
them in Pro4 just to say they've done it don't warrent the effort.
What we said, was that the last ability to extend Reality got riffed,
not that they'd stop cashing the checks. Reality is a classical
cash cow. As such, I would expect it to loom large on the bottom line.
Similarly, Pro4 is the 'next thing', it would be expected to loom large
the other way. The question is, will it go black?
Meanwhile, there continue to be rogue groups in the company which manage
to write pieces of applications in languages not approved by the
management.
: However, I've been around long enough to
: know not to swallow everything they tell us. Those of you who have
: worked here before should know what's going to happen... They'll
: get ready to officially bury the product until someone comes along
: with a couple million pounds or so and guess what? Instant
: resurrection! Remember how long it took 'em to bury the Sovereign line?
Yes, but selling old inventory is not development.
: To be fair, the company's official position is that its application
: business units (each of which owns a niche market application) will
: be converting their applications to PRO-IV and doing future development
: in PRO-IV. While this is the official position, many of the business
: units are not too eager to give up their current software vehicle,
: regardless of what it is. There is also a contract programming group
: in the UK that does a lot of windows programming as I understand it,
: and that's where C++ comes in to the picture. It should also be
: noted that the PRO-IV Windows Client is written in C++.
I would even expect Pro4 to be written C++ at some point. I don't
see the relevance of the comment to anything.
: Bottom Line is the bottom line. The product will be around as long as it
: generates enough revenue. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar or
: a fool.
I _hate_ being called a liar and a fool. The implication of the above is,
that because there is still a master tape from which another copy can
be made, the product is still around. This meaning is essentially vacuous.
Reality is not around in any other sense. Reality was terminated, as
are all products are, because of the view that, at some point in the
future it would cease to be profitable, and the resources which might
have been spent on Reality are being spent on Pro4 and associated
applications. The same thing happened with respect to Express.
And let us not forget the GP7.
Products are terminated by management because they are of the opinion
that another use of the resources will be more profitable in the
future. They may or may not be correct. But in the act of
'desupporing' a product's development, they have a great effect on the
ability of the product to generate revenue.
It is a peculiarity of Reality, and of the Pick market in general,
the customers have 'pulled' the product into the market over the
dead bodies of the management of the companies. The customers
have proven to be inordinately hard to dissuade. But seldom in
the context of no future.
: Obviously, these are my opinions and not those of MDIS. If they found out I
: had opinions, they might make me write marketing drivel (no! NO!! not THAT!)
: +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
: Frank Yeh, Jr. MDIS
: fy...@ca.mdis.com 18881 Von Karman Ave. Ste 1800
: Irvine, Ca. 92715-1589
Regards, hve.
Kevin Nelson
> > I'd like to think that there are still some of us
> > who know what we have and what we've lost. I'm a
> > Reality fan, but when times change, you gotta change
> > with them or be left behind ...
> > The thing I miss most is the guys who worked on Reality ...
> > ... Being another current MDIS employee, I have to back
> > poor Tim up when he says that the company isn't really
> > putting all of its egss in the PRO-IV basket.
> > -- Frank Yeh, Jr. -- MDIS Irvine, Ca. 92715-1589
> > fy...@ca.mdis.com
I couldn't agree more Frank. Times change and you have to move AHEAD.
However, Pro IV may be the only environment in the world today that makes
Pick look state of the art. Pro IV was an archaic mess even 10 years ago
when I had a glimpse at it. Pro IV provides 1% of the capabilities of
Reality; has 1% (maybe) of the installations of Pick/Reality; has 1% the
number of VAR/application developers as Reality; and is a completely
proprietary solution since MDC bought the company that originally developed
it. That doesn't sound like a formula for success in today's marketplace.
Throw in MDC's historic inability to sell anything they actually had, as
opposed to some hypothetical future super-product, and I can almost guarantee
failure.
I don't mean this as a slap to you. There have always been a number of good
people at MDC. Too bad management never knew what to do with them.
Kevin
------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin Nelson (Soon to be ex-) Stratus Computer, Inc.
Kevin_...@vos.stratus.com
kne...@deltanet.com
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin Nelson (Soon to be ex-) Stratus Computer, Inc.
Kevin_...@vos.stratus.com
kne...@deltanet.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Preston
American one. Although *your* Reality staff may have been laid off *ours* have
not.
jim w stephens
Henry Eggers <heg...@netcom.com> wrote:
>Reality is not around in any other sense. Reality was terminated, as
>are all products are, because of the view that, at some point in the
>future it would cease to be profitable, and the resources which might
>have been spent on Reality are being spent on Pro4 and associated
>applications. The same thing happened with respect to Express.
>And let us not forget the GP7.
But with express, at least it went on to some good use. It wasn't
shitcanned overnight, and the people shown the door (at least for some)
>Regards, hve.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Stephens j...@world.std.com Irvine, Ca
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Henry Eggers
: Frank Yeh Jr. <f...@mdcsc.ca.mdis.com> says:
: > Kevin Nelson (Kevin_...@vos.stratus.com) wrote:
: > : heg...@netcom.com (Henry Eggers) writes:
: > : > Mark Preston (Ma...@mpreston.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: > : > : Actually, MDIS is commited to using Reality
: Eggs? Baskets? Smoking? Clues? I dunno.
: Let me just say this: no comment. And don't quote me.
: Here's what's getting posted elsewhere from MDIS.
: Michael Graz <mg...@netcom.com> says:
: > Newsgroups: comp.lang.cobol
: > Subject: Cobol src needed for Reverse Engineering beta test
: > Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 19:58:27 GMT
: > Greetings to all.
: > We are nearing the completion of development of
: > a combination CASE/Reverse Engineering tool.
: > We need large amounts of generic non-proprietary
: > cobol source code for testing. The dialects we
: > support are: OS/VS, VSII, Realia and ICL (U.K.).
: > If anyone would like to donate source code to our
: > beta testing it would be much appreciated.
: > -- Michael Graz -- MDIS, Irvine California
: > mg...@netcom.com
Mike Graz is a thoroughly competent fellow -- C++ in nasty PC environments
only one of his capabilities -- who has been working on 'ProKit', an
'Upper Case' product which was developed for a decade at McDonnell
in St Louis, which was towed off by MDIS, and it's name 'Proized', and
which is now being towed off by its original developers in St Louis.
If anyone has a heap of preCambrian Cobol, this particular tool, which
feeds into the general '?kit' repository system, will shake it and
bake it quite nicely.
: That old "DATE()=10000" business?
: There's no future in it.
: Get into the "MMDDYY = 123199" business.
And don't forget the 123129 business.
: * b...@rosenberg.org *
: * probably the leading ex-Pick ex-consultant in Trenton NJ *
So noted.
Regards, hve.
Henry Eggers
: Minor point to G.D.Hildebrand - MDIS is now a *British* company, not an
: *ours* have not.
With all due respect, your 'Reality developers' are C programmers, not
Reality programmers; some of them can function in Reality assembler
in limited areas, and given a few years could become fluent in the system;
our very good friends in support, who will be asked to make patches, not
develop the system, and our other friends in Pontefract, who could probably
take the system in and do some interesting things with it, but will not be
allowed to.
[Our friends in Pontefract, which is in the north of the Midlands for
those of us not current on the subtlties of English Geography, are the
'RPQ' group, and have been the primary place in the English company
for people to learn to become fluent with the system. Historically,
however, they have written code outside of the system per se,
adding hooks into the system from time to time.]
The point, Mark, is that the experiential ability to extend the Reality
system -- not just to hack ports, patches or RPQs, or copy sysgen tapes --
was riffed. This is not to say that the Corporation couldn't change its
mind and allow a new 'crop' of Reality virtual programmers to arise
and carry on. It should be clear to those who have been watching the
non-development of traditional implements of Pick over the last two
decades that this is unlikely to occur quickly.
I assert that the Corporation does not intend this to happen.
Regards, hve.
Henry Eggers
: Henry Eggers <heg...@netcom.com> wrote:
: >Reality is not around in any other sense. Reality was terminated, ...
: But with express, at least it went on to some good use. It wasn't
: shitcanned overnight, and the people shown the door (at least for some)
I am happy to be able to note that _some_ people who worked on Reality
have been absorbed into the Pro4 development group, where they are
congtributing, achieving and accomplishing with the vigour and dedication
which they brought to their efforts in Reality's behalf.
One of the subtleties of this discussion is to skirt argument ad hominem,
since we're (almost) all friends at the end of the day, out side of the
particular questions of whether Pick is obsolete, whether Pro4 is the
right 'next step', and assuming that, whether Pro4 is being correctly
advanced. And _then_ there are the personnel issues, which are not
relevant to CDP and haven't been mentioned.
And the 'downsizing' of Reality has been going on since the Field
Serivce Company increased charges and decreased service to the Reality
customers in '86, I think it was, since Pick/Reality was not viewed as a
'growing business' at the time. (Does Vmark have any view on the growth
of the market after 1986? :-))
Ah, yes, and we hadn't mentioned that there is (was?) an intent to
use Reality as the database most suited to Pro4 customers. There is,
however, a certain amount of contention as to what that means. :-) :-)
Which is also not anent this group. Be aware that it may 'bubble up'
from time to time in the real world, if not in this group.
This is an instance of an interesting thread: First we thought Pick
was an OS, because everyone said you had to have one. Then we though
it was an application environment, because that's what you have after
you take out 'OS' and add some language support. Now, we come the
suggestion that it's really a database, once SQL access is added.
[Take a deep breath. Definitional anxiety could occur here.]
Actually, I'm inclined to think of it as a file system, that
'databaseness' is an overlay on a file system, and as such is part,
particularly in this case, of the application definition environment.
But this may just be a mutant thought.
Regards, hve.
Frank Yeh Jr.
: However, Pro IV may be the only environment in the world today that makes
: Pick look state of the art. Pro IV was an archaic mess even 10 years ago
: when I had a glimpse at it.
Well, I've spent the better part of the last 10 years improving this situation.
I would hope that if you had a look at it today, you'd find it a little less
archaic. Application software still does the same things that it did 10 years
ago, but the user interfaces, content, and media have changed. PRO-IV has been
extended to include a GUI type windows based client, SQL interface, filing system
interfaces with such databases as Oracle, Sybase, and Ingres, denationalization,
and more.
: Pro IV provides 1% of the capabilities of Reality;
That's because PRO-IV does not try to pass itself off as an operating system
and Reality does (flamebait if I ever saw it!). While the PICK application
environment can exist quite nicely on top of an operating system such as Unix,
traditional Reality installations exist on proprietary hardware where there is no
underlying operating system. This means that Reality must offer such capabilities
as a tape subsystem and communications where PRO-IV simply uses the underlying
O.S.'s functionality.
PRO-IV and Reality are like apples and oranges. More appropriate would be
a comparison of PRO-IV and ScreenPro.
: has 1% (maybe) of the installations of Pick/Reality; has 1% the
: number of VAR/application developers as Reality; and is a completely
: proprietary solution since MDC bought the company that originally developed
: it. That doesn't sound like a formula for success in today's marketplace.
MDIS's current direction is to become a supplier of major applications, a
systems integrator, and a facilities management provider. PRO-IV has been chosen
as the software vehicle for the company's applications. IMHO, it was selected for
some of the following reasons:
- Application programming productivity
- Portability of applications to more O.S./hardware combinations than anything
else out there that I've heard of.
- Access to a wide range of filing systems.
It all boils down to being able to create and maintain applications with a
minimum of programming effort and being able to take those applications to a
very broad range of hardware/O.S. combinations.
If you had to write an application that was to run on mainframes, rs6000s, Sun
sparcservers, HP9000s, DEC ALPHAs, SERIES 19, PC's, VAXes, ITT Bull DP series,
AS400, DG Aviion, Motorola 88k, NCR3000, Sequent Dynix, Tandem, Siemens Nixdorf,
Fujitsu and Toshiba boxes using Unix, SCO Unix, OSF1, AIX, VMS, MVS, Reality, DOS,
Windows, and Novell and accessing data from DB2, Oracle, Ingres, Sybase, CISAM,
Reality, PRO-ISAM, Btrieve, and RMS, what would you use?
PRO-IV allows our applications units to write their application once and have
it available on all of these platforms. The corporate buyer wants two things:
an application that makes his business run better and the ability to take that
application with him if he moves to another platform. Our applications groups
provide the first part, PRO-IV provides the second.
: Throw in MDC's historic inability to sell anything they actually had, as
: opposed to some hypothetical future super-product, and I can almost guarantee
: failure.
Unfortunately, I don't have a good rebuttal to this...
: I don't mean this as a slap to you. There have always been a number of good
: people at MDC. Too bad management never knew what to do with them.
: Kevin
or to this.
BTW Congratulations on the new business venture. Looks like you're moving
ahead too!
Regards,
Frank
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Frank Yeh, Jr. MDIS
fy...@ca.mdis.com 18881 Von Karman, Ste. 1800
"A witty saying proves nothing." -- Voltaire Irvine, Ca. 92715-1589
G. D. Hildebrand
: DEVELOPMENT [paraphrasing: is dead...]
[commentary about PRO-IV, REALITY, MDIS financials, etc., trimmed]
I believe you are right about that. My bits and peices of responses are
based upon several points:
1. To say, as Mr. Preston has, that there is a Reality
_development_ group is incorrect, IMHO.
2. To argue that PRO-IV is the way to go (versus Reality)
is not my idea of a good time, and I resist supporting it.
3. The end of Reality development, vis-a-vie the decimation
of the U.S. ROS Development group, really is the end of
an era, and should be so-noted, as it has been.
I am running out of desire to continue this particular discussion, but
suffice it to say that I find the whole PRO-IV thing a very large volume
of hot air. No direct offense intended, but that is how I see it.
I really feel that as there are only two companies who can license the
Pick/Reality (yes, Pick was called Reality before it was called Pick!)
OS, it is a damn shame that one of them has simply ignored that capability
all through history. But, that _is_ water over the dam, spilled milk,
closing the barn door after the horse is gone, and so on. I shan't go
on about it anymore.
It is clearly over at MDIS, at least as far as Pick/Reality goes, IMHO.
: Frank Yeh, Jr. MDIS
Regards,
gdh
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G.D. Hildebrand Systems Wrangler Internet Information Services Administrator
'Tis well to borrow from the good and the great; g...@ACM.ORG
'Tis wise to learn; 'tis god-like to create! --J.G. Saxe PQN Guru
Mark Preston
>
> Mark Preston (Ma...@mpreston.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> : not.
>
>
Glad to see reasoned discussion finds favour with one of your high intellect
Henry Eggers
: >I really feel that as there are only two companies who can license the
: >Pick/Reality (yes, Pick was called Reality before it was called Pick!)
: I do not believe that Microdata /MDIS got unlimited license rights to
: third parties, but unlimited rights to their copy.
I do so believe. But I believe that MDIS does not _want_ what it
perceives as competition for it's installed base, and that it does
not believe that there is sufficient revenue in the licensing business
to warrent the effort or entanglement. We must remember that MDIS was
a 450M$ business at the beginning of the '90's and remains in the
habit of doing deals which involve millions of dollars, rather than
thousands of deals which involve thousands of dollars.
At a simplistic level, the Pick business generated 500,000 seats of
business a year at the platformware level, at about $100 per seat
to the software source. That's 50M$ -- about 2% of the whole market
for hardware, platformware, applicationware, service, maintenance,
education, documentation.... MDIS has been quite happy to have about
80% of everything in the UK market, which is a lot more money and
a lot less competition, than the whole platformware market, world-
wide.
In a word, Pick has always given away too much for too little, and
won't be 'profitable' until someone figures out how to package
this stuff and sell it at 100 a pc to the whole Windows base...
Even then, the money will be in the applications which make businesses
go chuga-chug.
: I know that Unidata
: leveraged off of the MDIS license, but I think they had to make peace with
: Pick. Having seen some licenses (thought not MDIS's) and been in the
: wrangle of some disputes, some things are left unsaid by those who
: have the real story because they can't say due to contractural terms,
: and may let stories fly around rather than kill them off with facts.
And it has always been to Pick's corporate interest to suggest that
they are the sole source, and very much a part of Dick's self-definition
that he was the sole source, and MD had no interest in disagreeing.
So they didn't.
: I suspect that the fact that there is a sealed settlement between MDIS
: and Pick means there are facts that mean MDIS probably does not want to
: pursue the License market from that aspect.
I don't think it's sealed. It doesn't matter, given that MDIS does not
want to license in general. Never mind that their code was a long way
from licensable by 1985.
: I would also note that most Licensees are kaput would not make one rush
: into the fray.
You bet. It is impressive that there are six separate vendors of versions
of Pick which run on Unix, presuming that you can prise the code out
of MDIS's fingers for the Unix machine you want to use... Ignoring
the Sratus, Sequoia and Adds/Monolitic ports as not general enough to
count.
So, in summary, Pick and MD can both license. The former has made it
their business, and the latter have not. This situation will probably
persist, in both cases for good, well-articulated business reasons.
: Jim
: j...@world.std.com
Regards, hve.
Martin Golding
: : >I really feel that as there are only two companies who can license the
: : >Pick/Reality (yes, Pick was called Reality before it was called Pick!)
: : I do not believe that Microdata /MDIS got unlimited license rights to
: : third parties, but unlimited rights to their copy.
: I do so believe. But I believe that MDIS does not _want_ what it
: perceives as competition for it's installed base,
So far as I know, ADP is the sole MDIS licensee. One could argue that the
license was without substance, but one would have to explain the inaction
of Pick Inc. while we were delivering some three or four thousand instances
of our three different licensed products.
As their largest customer, we had the clout to get licenses for limited
performance machines. Digital engaged in negotiations with them but was
unable to reach a satisfactory conclusion. I'm with Henry; in the past,
at least, Reality was regarded as the Family Jewels, not to be given away.
I do wonder if, since they don't care to be in that market any longer,
a Deal could now be Struck.
Ride safe, post dangerously,
Martin
Martin Golding | Live to ride,
DoD #236 BMWMOA #55952 SMTC #2 | ride to work.
mar...@plaza.ds.adp.com Portland, OR
G. D. Hildebrand
: Henry Eggers (heg...@netcom.com) wrote:
: : jim w stephens (j...@world.std.com) wrote:
: : : G. D. Hildebrand <g...@ACM.org> wrote:
: : : >I really feel that as there are only two companies who can license the
: : : >Pick/Reality (yes, Pick was called Reality before it was called Pick!)
: : : I do not believe that Microdata /MDIS got unlimited license rights to
: : : third parties, but unlimited rights to their copy.
: : I do so believe. But I believe that MDIS does not _want_ what it
: : perceives as competition for it's installed base,
: So far as I know, ADP is the sole MDIS licensee. One could argue that the
: license was without substance, but one would have to explain the inaction
: of Pick Inc. while we were delivering some three or four thousand instances
: of our three different licensed products.
: As their largest customer, we had the clout to get licenses for limited
: performance machines. Digital engaged in negotiations with them but was
: unable to reach a satisfactory conclusion. I'm with Henry; in the past,
: at least, Reality was regarded as the Family Jewels, not to be given away.
: I do wonder if, since they don't care to be in that market any longer,
: a Deal could now be Struck.
So, it would appear to be a viewpoint, at this point, that MDIS could
license their version, Reality, as was originally asserted at the start
of this thread. Good. That makes things more interesting, it seems to me.
I like Martin's observation that perhaps now, a deal could be struck.
: Ride safe, post dangerously,
Cool. ;->
: Martin
: Martin Golding | Live to ride,
: DoD #236 BMWMOA #55952 SMTC #2 | ride to work.
: mar...@plaza.ds.adp.com Portland, OR
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G.D. Hildebrand Systems Wrangler Internet Information Services Administrator
'Tis well to borrow from the good and the great; | g...@ACM.ORG
'Tis wise to learn; 'tis god-like to create! --J.G. Saxe | It's been future!
Frank Yeh Jr.
: So far as I know, ADP is the sole MDIS licensee. One could argue that the
: license was without substance, but one would have to explain the inaction
: of Pick Inc. while we were delivering some three or four thousand instances
: of our three different licensed products.
Well, I don't know if they really count as a Reality licensee, but UniData
did actually get a license from MDCSC. As I recall, they didn't want to deal
with Pick's licensing policies and lawyers, and found out that MDCSC had the
rights to license Reality.
In fact, I believe that Martin was an in-house guest at Reynolds working on
the Eagle project when the UniData people were visiting us to work out the deal.
: As their largest customer, we had the clout to get licenses for limited
: performance machines. Digital engaged in negotiations with them but was
: unable to reach a satisfactory conclusion. I'm with Henry; in the past,
: at least, Reality was regarded as the Family Jewels, not to be given away.
I don't believe you'll find them giving it away today either.
: I do wonder if, since they don't care to be in that market any longer,
: a Deal could now be Struck.
Which market is that? MDIS will continue to sell Reality as it is the cash
cow of the company. They may not be planning to extend it any further, but that
doesn't mean they don't want to be in the market. Heck, if they ever put 7.3
on the streets, there probably wouldn't be a requirement to extend it for a
few years... 7.3 is THAT GOOD IMHO.
If, by some stroke of common sense, they decided to strike a deal, I think
the ex-Reality hacks would come out of the woodwork in a hurry.
Henry Eggers
: : So far as I know, ADP is the sole MDIS licensee. One could argue that the
: : at least, Reality was regarded as the Family Jewels, not to be given away.
: I don't believe you'll find them giving it away today either.
: : I do wonder if, since they don't care to be in that market any longer,
: : a Deal could now be Struck.
: Which market is that? MDIS will continue to sell Reality as it is the
: cash cow of the company. They may not be planning to extend it any further,
: but that doesn't mean they don't want to be in the market.
Well, it seems to me that what's the cash cow is the collection of
applications which run on Reality, which MDIS owns. I've never understood
why there is a conflict between MDIS shipping Reality under it's
applications while someone else ships derivative of the same source
as platformware in other markets... Because, at this point, MDIS is
selling little to no Reality, including as RealityX, per se. Perhaps
there is a concern that the installed maintenance might be threatened
by the 'possible' migration path. I would expect that our friends
at Vmark support (almost) everything that occurs in a Microdata
application throught the late '80s' now.
: Heck, if they ever put 7.3 on the streets, there probably wouldn't be
: a requirement to extend it for a few years... 7.3 is THAT GOOD IMHO.
Thanks, Frank. But to be sort of current, not even to the level of
AP to which JR alludes, one would need basic in dictionaries, and
'overlap fold'....
: If, by some stroke of common sense, they decided to strike a deal, I
: think the ex-Reality hacks would come out of the woodwork in a hurry.
Uhhhh, could happen.... As I remember it, most of the Reality people
who went away, didn't go away because it was Reality they disliked.
Regards, hve.