Choosing a programming language as a competitive tool

Grant Griffin not.this at
Thu May 3 06:43:04 CEST 2001

Steve Cooper wrote:
> Do you work for a publically held company?  Does it create software products?
> You don't actually have to answer (obviously :-)), although I confess to
> curiousity.  I'm just trying to bring up the reality that the above two factors
> are powerful, often irresistable forces in creating short-sited environments.

Personally, I think the main cause of short-sightedness is
short-sightedness.  Or maybe "not invented here".  Or maybe
incompetance.  Or maybe laziness.  Or maybe apathy.  Or more likely

I've found it amazingly hard to sell Python to people--for "The Amazing
Low Price of Absolutely Free".  You might think something like this
would cost a lot of money.  Or you might think it ran only on Windows. 
Or you might think that it would be hard to learn, or maybe hard to
use.  Or you might even think that it does one thing well, but if you
want to do something else, it's no darn good.  But it's none of those
things.  It's like a Swiss Army Knife, except useful.  (Still, I miss
that toothpick thingy <wink>)

So why won't people buy Python--for *free*?!  (OK, maybe I'm just not
the world's greatest salesman <wink>.)

Maybe it just comes down to Rule Number 4:

	"Improve your own system, but don't try to improve the Company's

I'm not quite sure why we have Rule Number 4.  I've never figured it
out.  All I can do is tell you that every time I indulge my evangelistic
instincts and violate Rule Number 4, I realize again just how wise Rule
Number 4 really is.

usenet-tends-to-attract-us-rule-number-4-violators-ly y'rs,


Grant R. Griffin                                       g2 at
Publisher of dspGuru                 
Iowegian International Corporation  

More information about the Python-list mailing list