From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On
Behalf Of Eric Armstrong
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 10:35 PM
Subject: Re: Article on Ozzie's Groove (Was: defining what we mean by
Hey, Bob. Grooves look pretty good (within limits, as always).
Are you subscribed to unrev? I posted a couple of reviews
BW: No, I'm just on this list, though I can look at the archives sometime.
the concepts in Groove a lot but I also saw serious issues in my brief
Not only is the platform not an open one (e.g. their security is not
open to inspection) but there present intent is to be the sole service
provider for the platform which may limit the market traction somewhat.
The outlining and other interactive tools were quite primitive, slow
and not well thought out, even when running as a single user. I imagine
one sees further degredation in collaborative modes. This was on a 64Meg
RAM Windows 98 laptop bought new last year.
They went with C++ on implementation and used hard to read symbol naming
conventions (no underscores) making extensions much more work than they
need to be. A better solution would have been a much better, efficient
OO language coupled together with a higher-level but still fully general
But a lot of work is going into this platform so hopefully by release 3.0,
will be quite useful. The third time is the charm in many system releases.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Aug 21 2001 - 17:58:02 PDT