Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Walter Banks Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: Old Forth implementations Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 12:41:11 -0400 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 64 Message-ID: <5411D0A7.D25138A2@bytecraft.com> References: <15cd8f91-915a-4241-acf3-5bf3d9708b93@googlegroups.com> <2IednaUdDZRooJLJnZ2dnUU7-b-dnZ2d@supernews.com> <8a84854b-1a5e-4b87-bf45-e25371a4850e@googlegroups.com> <7ae28fc2-7b67-430d-b931-32b8d9bd71b4@googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: gSAY0Ht+CrRKtKmytZLJ/g.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD479 (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.forth:33357 hughaguilar96@yahoo.com wrote: > On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 2:29:55 AM UTC-7, Just Ian wrote: > > Elizabeth D. Rather said: > > > I have discussed releasing the listings and manual for polyFORTH with > > > Leon Wagner, the current President of FORTH, Inc., and he is potentially > > > interested (though we have no time frame), but even that would take a > > > fair amount of work at this point. > > > > Well, the reference manual is out there and it is extremely good. (I suspect you know that already!) > > Wow! That is some major brown-nosing! Maybe there is a reason why you don't give us your name --- you're an employee of Forth Inc., aren't you? > > Realistically, Forth Inc. will never release source-code for PolyForth. Elizabeth Rather > and her sycophants have repeatedly stated on comp.lang.forth that PolyForth was not > limited to 64K on the 8086 (64K for application code, application data, compiler, > dictionary, editor --- everything!). If they now released the source-code for PolyForth, > it would be obvious to everybody that they have been lying, and that PolyForth really > was limited in this way. Nobody at Forth Inc. was able to figure out how the segment > registers worked on the 8086 --- now they just want to put PolyForth behind them --- > they don't want to shine a spotlight on the failure of PolyForth, as it is not producing any > money anymore, and they are selling SwiftForth now. > > > > Leon and our other staff depends on FORTH, Inc. for a living; we have > > > to prioritize doing what keeps the company afloat, which means supporting > > > our current customers and products the best we can. > > > > Definitely. > > I paid over $400 for SwiftForth-v2, and it had major bugs. For example, (LOCAL) > would crash the system when used. Forth Inc. does not support its customers. Elizabeth Rather > has tried mightily (on the Forth-200x mailing list) to sell me an upgrade to SwiftForth-v3 > that supposedly has all of these bugs fixed. At Forth Inc. there is no distinction between > "support" and "sales" --- if a customer calls Forth Inc. and points out that the product they > paid for is full of bugs, the Forth Inc. staff sees this as a sales opportunity (so much better > than cold-calling, as the potential customer has called them indicating an interest in their > product) --- also, because the customer has already given them money, the customer > must be of low intelligence, and can hopefully be talked into giving them more money. > At Forth Inc., it is all about scamming people out of money --- anybody who thinks > that Elizabeth Rather cares about anything else, is deluded. And the objective of this email is ?