From: Patric Jonsson
Subject: Re: Why lisp failed in the marketplace
Date: 
Message-ID: <5eisg0$5t0@peppar.nada.kth.se>
In article <·············@acm.org> ······@acm.org writes:
>OK, guys, I do not have the evidence.  But, Lisp did fail in the market
>place.  If you don't like my reasons, what are yours?

Half the programmers that exist at any point are worse than median (dumber or
stupider).  Windoz and Visual-Basic work fine for them.

-- 
Patric Jonsson,·······@nada.kth.se;"always mount a scratch monkey"-jargon-file.
From: Sin-Yaw Wang
Subject: Re: Why lisp failed in the marketplace
Date: 
Message-ID: <330DEE28.5027@acm.org>
Patric Jonsson wrote:
> >OK, guys, I do not have the evidence.  But, Lisp did fail in the market
> >place.  If you don't like my reasons, what are yours?
> 
> Half the programmers that exist at any point are worse than median (dumber or
> stupider).  Windoz and Visual-Basic work fine for them.

So, hi-jacking your concept with my words (I tend to put words in
other's mouth), "Lisp failed from not addressing the mass market."

Agree?

-- 
Sin-Yaw Wang, ······@acm.org
http://www.concentric.net/~sinyaw/
From: George J. Carrette
Subject: Re: Why lisp failed in the marketplace
Date: 
Message-ID: <01bc206a$7016dce0$0f02000a@gjchome.nis.newscorp.com>
Sin-Yaw Wang <······@acm.org> wrote in article <·············@acm.org>...
> So, hi-jacking your concept with my words (I tend to put words in
> other's mouth), "Lisp failed from not addressing the mass market."
> 
> Agree?

No. Didn't you read my post that started off this current nasty little
flame thread?

I was trying to explain that lisp failed in the marketplace because it did
not
address the needs of the most sophisticated users at the time.
Those users with commercial products to ship using lisp.

If you screw your early adopters, you are in trouble.

Pretty simple really.
comp.lang.lisp / 1997 / feb