I'm trying to convince someone that doing a project in Lisp is a good idea,
especially since the kind of things he wants to do would be difficult to do
in another language.
Of course, all of the various objections have been raised and answered.
But there is one issue he raised that I realized I didn't have a good
answer for. He wanted to know the actual size of the Lisp market and how
the market share was apportioned between the major commercial vendors -
maily because he feared the death of the commercial vendors. But it
occurred to me that there has probably been no studies done on the overall
Lisp market size since the end of the AI boom in the mid-80's. The fact
that all of the major commercial Lisp vendors are privately held and they
seem to hold their financial information very close to the vest makes this
information even harder to obtain.
The only info I've found on the web so far is a survey from 2000
(hhttp://www.itta.com/staffedit04.01.htm) which, although giving some
information, is a self-selected survey and gives no overall market size.
That being said, I am now at the point where I realize that I would like
this information, too - if for no other reason, out of genuine curiosity!
Does anyone have any ideas on how to gauge the current size of the
commercial Common Lisp market? Knowing the number of people working for
Franz, Digitool, and in the Lisp portion of Xanalys would help to give a
rough estimate. Do we have any idea how many customers there are out
there? How much money is there to be made selling stuff to them? Does
anyone think it makes any difference? I tend to think that having a public
figure associated with the market size could help. So, again, any ideas on
how to get one?
Thanks in advance...
faa
Hi Frank A. Adrian,
> I'm trying to convince someone that doing a project in Lisp is a good
> idea, especially since the kind of things he wants to do would be
> difficult to do in another language.
>
> Of course, all of the various objections have been raised and answered.
> But there is one issue he raised that I realized I didn't have a good
> answer for. He wanted to know the actual size of the Lisp market and
> how the market share was apportioned between the major commercial
> vendors - maily because he feared the death of the commercial vendors.
Wouldn't you only need to fear this if you were locked into using one of
the commercial vendor's products?
It's similar to fearing that I may put a lot of time into learning the
intricacies of a specific Linux vendor's product and then the product dies
or the vendor implements unacceptable policies. I sidestepped that issue
by implementing Debian. There's no reason your colleague can't sidestep
the issue of vendor lock in/death by starting development using a free and
well supported implementation of Lisp.
Futhermore commercial vendors may only be a small fraction of the
commercial Lisp market (investment in the packaged software market has
always been less than 30% of total investment in software [refer Figure 1 in
http://www.idei.asso.fr/Commun/Conferences/Internet/OSS2002/Papiers/Bessen.PDF]
--and the peak seems to have occurred in 1996).
There will be many software consultants available who implement
commercial Lisp solutions that are not tied to the commercial Lisp
vendors. So even if the commercial Lisp vendors died there would still be
a commercial Lisp market and possibly a greater pool of people available to
customise the free implementations.
> But it occurred to me that there has probably been no studies done on
> the overall Lisp market size since the end of the AI boom in the
> mid-80's. The fact that all of the major commercial Lisp vendors are
> privately held and they seem to hold their financial information very
> close to the vest makes this information even harder to obtain.
>
> The only info I've found on the web so far is a survey from 2000
> (hhttp://www.itta.com/staffedit04.01.htm) which, although giving some
> information, is a self-selected survey and gives no overall market size.
>
> That being said, I am now at the point where I realize that I would like
> this information, too - if for no other reason, out of genuine
> curiosity!
I would be curious to find out this information as well. And (with more
difficulty) calculate the significance of the commercial Lisp vendors in
relation to the size of the overall commercial Lisp market. And
furthermore, the significance of the commercial Lisp market in relation
to the total amount of commercial and non-commercial Lisp development.
> Does anyone have any ideas on how to gauge the current size
> of the commercial Common Lisp market? Knowing the number of people
> working for Franz, Digitool, and in the Lisp portion of Xanalys would
> help to give a rough estimate. Do we have any idea how many customers
> there are out there? How much money is there to be made selling stuff
> to them? Does anyone think it makes any difference? I tend to think
> that having a public figure associated with the market size could help.
> So, again, any ideas on how to get one?
...and don't forget that the number of people working commercially on
Lisp solutions but not working for Franz, Digitool and Xanalys may
eclipse these estimates.
Overall I see your colleague's concern and this exact information about
the size of commercial CL vendors as largely irrelevant to his/her decision
(unless you are trying to convince the colleague to implement a vendor's
product).
Regards,
Adam
Adam Warner wrote:
> Wouldn't you only need to fear this if you were locked into using one of
> the commercial vendor's products?
Yes. This is one of the issues I need to deal with. For whatever reasons,
customers often feel more secure dealing with an actual company, rather
than with open source. I know that - as far as base implementations go -
some open source implementations are as good as the commercial ones.
However, try telling that to a traditional customer. With the customer
wanting GUI's in Windows, as well, that leaves Corman, ACL, or LispWorks.
I have no real preference one way or another. But since there are very
nice commercial products out there, I find no reason to bang my head
against an open source brick wall.
But my original question stands - is there any actual knowledge of the
current Lisp market size, or is someone who implements in CL pursuing this
course of action based more on faith than on fact with respect to his
vendor eventually going the way of the dodo? If there is data, I wish
someone would enlighten me. I'd be willing to collect information from the
vendors and coallesce it without giving relative share data, if it would
help. At this point (and at extreme fear of being branded a troll) I'm
wondering why no one has or is willing to disclose this data (or even show
a neutral third party enough of this data to make an educated guess) - is
it that no one wants it disclosed for fear that it will show that the size
of the market has shrunk so far? Are the vendors so paranoid about each
other that they fear there are no neutral third parties able to assess the
data fairly or without leakage? What gives?
faa
Frank A. Adrian:
> But my original question stands - is there any actual knowledge of the
> current Lisp market size, [...]
i think there is. i doubt it will be posted here. i have seen detailed
market research on PL (a few years ago on java, c++ et al. but the name
of the group that did the work escapes me) but (a) you pay for that data
and (b) are not allowed to post all over the place. i know this is not
much help, but i think if you make contact with the industry research
companies that released PL data in the past, you may find some leads.
oz
--
a nought, an ought, a knot, a not easily perceived distinction. -- t. duff
"Frank A. Adrian" <·······@ancar.org> writes:
> But my original question stands - is there any actual knowledge of the
> current Lisp market size,
Well, I can't help you with any data either :-) but, if the fear is
to be tied to a vendor and having that vendor go under (a legitimate
fear, IMO) you can look into signing a contract to place the source
of the lisp you choose in escrow. Of course, you still lose your
"vendor support", but at least you're not up sh*t creek without a
paddle. (I guess, you're up sh*t creek _with_ a paddle).
I'm pretty sure most Lisp vendors would be willing to sigh such a
contract (at cost, of course). But insurance always costs.
My personal feeling is that the lisp market is small, but contains
sufficient number of players who just can't _afford_ to let lisp die
that I'm not too worried.
Adam Warner <······@consulting.net.nz> wrote:
> I sidestepped that issue by implementing Debian.
Wow! Thanks for Debian, Adam ;-)
--
John Paul Wallington
Hi John Paul Wallington,
> Adam Warner <······@consulting.net.nz> wrote:
>
>> I sidestepped that issue by implementing Debian.
>
> Wow! Thanks for Debian, Adam ;-)
:-)
Isn't a term for rolling out software within an organisation
implementation? Dangerous question to ask here so we better make it
rhetorical.
For the avoidance of doubt, no I did not design nor create Debian ;-) And
my first name isn't Deborah nor Ian.
Cheers,
Adam
I believe that
No John I didn't design, create or
"Adam Warner" <······@consulting.net.nz> wrote in message
···················@ID-105510.news.dfncis.de...
> Isn't a term for rolling out software within an organisation
> implementation? Dangerous question to ask here so we better make it
> rhetorical.
I think you mean "deployment" (an unfortunate but popular choice of words).
Hi Patrick,
> "Adam Warner" <······@consulting.net.nz> wrote in message
> ···················@ID-105510.news.dfncis.de...
>
>> Isn't a term for rolling out software within an organisation
>> implementation? Dangerous question to ask here so we better make it
>> rhetorical.
>
> I think you mean "deployment" (an unfortunate but popular choice of
> words).
Yes Patrick. Typically a military term which corresponds to bringing
forces into effective action. I'm unsure why the term slipped my mind.
To implement also means to "put (a decision, plan, etc.) into effect" so
the word has not been greatly misused.
Regards,
Adam
In article <··············@ID-105510.news.dfncis.de>, Adam Warner wrote:
> Hi John Paul Wallington,
>
>> Adam Warner <······@consulting.net.nz> wrote:
>>
>>> I sidestepped that issue by implementing Debian.
>>
>> Wow! Thanks for Debian, Adam ;-)
>
>:-)
>
> Isn't a term for rolling out software within an organisation
> implementation?
No, that is sometimes called deployment.
Rolling out changes within an organization is called implementation. ``We are
implementing a new plan to reduce costs.'' That is like software development,
if you view the policies and procedures of the organization as a piece of
software. ;)
So the deployment of software may be part of the implementation of some
new process.
According to Adam Warner <······@consulting.net.nz>:
> Isn't a term for rolling out software within an organisation
> implementation? Dangerous question to ask here so we better make it
> rhetorical.
The better term is "deployment."
But trust the XML crowd to dream up the "deployment descriptor" crapola.
I'd rather write my "deployment descriptors" in Lisp or Python any day.
--
Ng Pheng Siong <····@netmemetic.com> * http://www.netmemetic.com
Hi John Paul Wallington,
> Adam Warner <······@consulting.net.nz> wrote:
>
>> I sidestepped that issue by implementing Debian.
>
> Wow! Thanks for Debian, Adam ;-)
:-)
Isn't a term for rolling out software within an organisation
implementation? Dangerous question to ask here so we better make it
rhetorical.
For the avoidance of doubt, no I did not design nor create Debian ;-) And
my first name isn't Deborah nor Ian.
Cheers,
Adam
I believe that
No John I didn't design, create or