Newsgroups: comp.lang.apl
From: bowman@apl.demon.co.uk (Dick Bowman)
Path: watmath!watserv2.uwaterloo.ca!torn!utnut!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!noc.near.net!uunet!pipex!bnr.co.uk!demon!apl.demon.co.uk!bowman
Subject: Re: Lack of APL Discussions 
Distribution: world
References: <C54DJr.3CA@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca>
Organization: Dogon Research
Reply-To: bowman@apl.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Simple NEWS 1.90 (ka9q DIS 1.21)
Lines: 48
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 15:14:27 +0000
Message-ID: <734371670snz@apl.demon.co.uk>
Sender: usenet@demon.co.uk

In article <C54DJr.3CA@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> LIEBTAG@STLVM20.VNET.IBM.COM writes:

>I too have wondered why there isn't more APL discussion.  I know in
>my case I either don't have time or like Bill Heagy I simply don't
>have questions.
>
>There's something that helps confuse me even more.  Within IBM we
>have our own bulletin boards.  At my last count, there are something
>like 250 groups dedicated to APL topics spread across 4 or 5
>bulletin boards.  At any given time, there are probably 10 to 20
>active groups.
>
>Given the activity on our boards, I am surprised that there isn't
>more activity on the comp.lang.apl group.
>
One of the things that gives me great difficulty when talking to clients is
that they've got it into their heads that APL is no longer a topic of any
interest to IBM.

The typical scenario is that IBM sold these large mainframe sites either
APL or products like IC/1 (or both) in the mid-eighties; the customers then
built a heap of stuff using it. When we talk to them today we find:
        the application code is awful, because illtrained people wrote it
        the user interface is appalling
        the management think it's all APL's fault
        the management think IBM don't want to know about APL any more
        the management don't want to know about APL any more.
Which makes it increasingly difficult to be Mr Fixit (and I don't want to
become Mr RewriteitinCobol - which has been suggested more than once). 

I am encouraged to see further evidence of significant APL activity and usage
within IBM

I think it would be an interesting group exercise (and beneficial to very
many of us) to try to set out The Arguments For APL As They Pertain In The
Mid-Nineties.

Any takers?
>
>Is it possible that APL has traditionally provided a nice safe
>environment that's pretty insulated from the operating system
>and many APLers never got outside the APL environment enough to
>find their way into things like the network?
>
>
>Regards,
>David Liebtag
>
