EnigmA Amiga Run 1997 July/EnigmA AMIGA RUN 20 (1997)(G.R. Edizioni)(IT)[!][issue 1997-07 & 08][EAR-CD IV].iso/lightwave/lwmlist/96.lightwave-0422/[e-mail] _Tue Apr 23 18:57:14 1996.msg

Internet Message Format | 1996-05-03 | 6KB

Received: from e55.webcom.com (e55.webcom.com [206.2.192.66]) by keeper.albany.net (8.7.5/8.7.5-MZ) with ESMTP id SAA20174 for <[e-mail]>; Tue, 23 Apr 1996 18:57:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost by e55.webcom.com with SMTP
    (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA057490177; Tue, 23 Apr 1996 15:56:17 -0700
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 15:56:17 -0700
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk
From: [e-mail] (Ty Sarna)
To: Multiple recipients of list <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: BML and Java
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Status: RO
X-Status:

In article <[e-mail]>,
robert hood <[e-mail]> wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Apr 1996, [e-mail] (Ty Sarna) wrote:
> > The only things you can do as an extension writer are to realize that
> > this is how the world works and be prepared...
>
> I'm sorry, but I cannot subscribe to such a fatalist viewpoint.

It's not fatalism, it's realism. I'm not saying "don't develop plugins",
I'm saying "don't be supprised if you get burned". If you're developing
something as an extension to another companies's product, you are
putting your fate in their hands to a certain extent. And if it comes to
an "us or them" decision, who do you think they'll choose?

Is this a cynical viewpoint? Yes, of course. But you have to have a
cynical viewpoint when making a decision like this. You can't just jump
in and expect everything to work out.

Given that almost anything computer related is an extension at some
level (even applications can be viewed as an extension of the OS),
everything is risky to a certain extent. Some more than others. Things
of limited interest are pretty safe. Or if you do something so good that
it's not worth the first party's effort to try to duplicate or surpass
it. If you do something that a package is crying out for (and any
application as powerful as Lightwave that doesn't have scripting
certainly is crying out for it), then that's risker. Of course, with a
greater risk, there may well be a greater reward, since the company may
decide to license your solution. Then again, they may not. It's
especially bad for something like a scripting language, because there's
really only room for one.

> NewTek opened the architecture of LightWave by adding plugins.  There was a
> definite business reason behind this: foster third-party development.  In this

No, the business _reason_ was to benefit NewTek.  The _method_ was to
foster third part development.  This is a key point.  NewTek is
interested in helping themselves primarily (like any business), and will
help third parties to the extent that NewTek can benefit. But they
aren't doing this out of kindness.

> case, third-party is defined as non-NewTek.  My "gripe" is with the possibility
> that NewTek might step into their own third-party market and become a
> competitor.  That is ugly and inconsiderate, and as you've observed, that's

But this is *inherent* in having a third party market.  Even when the
third party market is created by the first party (perhaps even
especially so), there will almost certainly be some competition between
the first and third parties.  And the first party has the upper hand, of
course.  That doesn't mean it's not possible to compete, just that it's
harder, and you have to be prepared.

> life.  However, should it come to that, nobody that knows me well would
> expect me to sit quitely with a grin on my face while somebody pisses down
> my back.

Nobody said you should.

> When LightWave 4.0 finally hit the streets, there were numerous email postings,
> questions concerning the availability of scripting on non-Amiga platforms.  On
> more than one occasion, Stuart Furgeson stepped in and responded that the
> plugin SDK was designed specifically to allow somebody to accomplish it.  He
> was making it subtly clear that, if scripting were going to be a possibility
> on all those new platforms, then it would be accomplished through a third-
> party.

Would have to _initially_ come from a third party, anyway.  Then the
first party changes their mind (or in some cases, was planning to use
the third parties as guinea pigs from the start anyway).  Microsoft
helped develop the Winsock standard, then introduced their own, then
eventually bundled it and is now clobbering all the third party winsock
offerings.  Being in the first wave is risky in itself ("You can tell
the pioneers by the arrows in their backs").  Consider that Microsoft
has made a business of being second (MS-DOS is a second CP/M, Windows is
a second Mac, Excel is a second 1-2-3, etc.).  Some first parties will
address this problem by letting their third parties be the pioneers.
Then the first party can roll in latter when they know what's safe.

I can't think of a case where a hardware or software company has created
a third party market and not encroached on it over time (other than
cases where they couldn't, because they went out of business, didn't
have enough resources, etc).  The relationship between first and third
parties is a kind of sick competitive symbiosis.  Both sides want each
other to do well, but not _too_ well.  And they tend to step on each
other's feet sometimes.  And the first party has bigger feet, so it
hurts more when they step on you.

Being a third party is like dancing with an elephant: You have to learn
to stay out of their way, and don't make the mistake of thinking you're
ever leading, because they may decide to change directions and trample
you.