Re: What really killed WebDNA?
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2007
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 69364
interpreted = N
texte = Will I would put it down to a complete lack of marketing skill SMSi wanted a puppy that could bark for itself not one that they needed to teach. Plus the fact that they were pitched against the uprising of PHP, which due the fact that it was free, has eclipsed the internet world. Such a shame, WebDNA is such a wonderful product, I would dearly like it to have a larger following so that I could easily hire staff and freelancers that understand the product and quickly and easily contribute to development without a long induction phase. I just wish SMSI would either kick start it or give it away so that some enterprising people could create the NEXT PHP uprising ! Come one SMSI - you probably never read this anyway - pull your fingers out and do something, don't just sit there and watch the puppy die - I may just have to sic Ellen Degeneres on to you, she likes dogs :) http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i7MvEzdF86Zql6X4yrF29gUnUJcw On 19 Oct 2007, at 12:42 PM, Will Starck wrote: > Hello- > > So, I've finally come to terms with the fact that WebDNA died round > about > 2004 give or take a few days. > > Aside from the fact that SMSI was always a terrible fit for this > product (my > apologies SM, but it's true), I've often wondered-what exactly was > it that > killed WebDNA (btw, I always hated that name)? > > I've always been curious about that question. > > Was there a technical reason (i.e. inability to integrate it to > emerging web > development trends, lack of new potential features that would justify > further upgrade cycles) or did SM just lose interest, or is/are > there some > other reason(s)? > > I'd be interested in your theories - is there any reason to push > for an open > source version, or should this dead horse stay dead because it is > irrelevant? > > Your long suffering friend, > > Will Starck > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list
. > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to digest@talk.smithmicro.com> > Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
Will I would put it down to a complete lack of marketing skill SMSi wanted a puppy that could bark for itself not one that they needed to teach. Plus the fact that they were pitched against the uprising of PHP, which due the fact that it was free, has eclipsed the internet world. Such a shame, WebDNA is such a wonderful product, I would dearly like it to have a larger following so that I could easily hire staff and freelancers that understand the product and quickly and easily contribute to development without a long induction phase. I just wish SMSI would either kick start it or give it away so that some enterprising people could create the NEXT PHP uprising ! Come one SMSI - you probably never read this anyway - pull your fingers out and do something, don't just sit there and watch the puppy die - I may just have to sic Ellen Degeneres on to you, she likes dogs :) http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i7MvEzdF86Zql6X4yrF29gUnUJcw On 19 Oct 2007, at 12:42 PM, Will Starck wrote: > Hello- > > So, I've finally come to terms with the fact that WebDNA died round > about > 2004 give or take a few days. > > Aside from the fact that SMSI was always a terrible fit for this > product (my > apologies SM, but it's true), I've often wondered-what exactly was > it that > killed WebDNA (btw, I always hated that name)? > > I've always been curious about that question. > > Was there a technical reason (i.e. inability to integrate it to > emerging web > development trends, lack of new potential features that would justify > further upgrade cycles) or did SM just lose interest, or is/are > there some > other reason(s)? > > I'd be interested in your theories - is there any reason to push > for an open > source version, or should this dead horse stay dead because it is > irrelevant? > > Your long suffering friend, > > Will Starck > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to digest@talk.smithmicro.com> > Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/
Stuart Tremain
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
WebCat2b12 Mac.acgi--[searchstring] bug (1997)
WebCatalog/WebMerchant 2.1 (1998)
Help with Shipping Costs (1997)
Cache Access Error (2000)
[WebDNA] reply vs. new (2009)
Secure server question (1997)
Date format problems (1997)
Running webcat 6 on Windows XP Prof. (2005)
Redirecting some image requests ... (2003)
Serial Number Question (1997)
Your Pay (2004)
Re:Review comparison by PC Magazine: Open for On-line Business (1997)
Attention SM: Trigger Bug? (2000)
Help! WebCat2 bug (1997)
Upgrading old WebCat Database Files (1997)
The [shownext] limitations (2002)
RE: IIS4b2 and WebCatalog b19 (1997)
WebCat Beta NT 18 (1997)
Looking for a Manual (1997)
WebDNA Solutions ... sorry! (1997)