IMPORTANT!!!! This Letter was never sent to VIScorp due to the negitive facet contained in it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jason Compton VIScorp 111 N. Canal Street Suite 933 Chicago, Illinois 60606 RE: Observation and comment 10-10-96 Mr. Compton, I just received the AAi Workbench newsletter and noticed the request and specs. for doing the VIScorp logo. What is of note is the "We'd like this to be a community project." As a reference point, you might find it helpful to contact local design houses and colleges (art departments of these) and ask what they might think of a "community project to design a logo". More specifically what the success rate might be for producing a successful logo (reference to successful logos, the design process and organizations/design firms producing them). I only mention this due to a logo design being a rather small project. Typically such a project will actually be done by one person with perhaps input/feedback from a limited number of individuals. It's all a matter art direction and design consistancy/style. You might find using what I have sent (logo design and text about) as an example for others to consider/be inspired by, helpful. It's ok by me if you do this and list me as an anonymous user. It won't be the first time I've done something as anonymous for the amiga community, though there are and will be a few whom know. The point is, is to inspire others to not only come up with a design for a logo but to help others understand the functionality of a logo and to apply a depth of thought into it and to document this, the why for this and that of a logo. Yet to keep the design simple. I did communicate my design and text to a few members of AAi but don't know how far it may have spread. Perhaps doing so has helped spark more interest and detail to submissions? I don't know but do know that this would be of no supprise to me if so. Personal experience tells me that I have a talent to inspire others into action and often into an action of creativity. Also the only place I have seen the VIScorp logo w/the stripped "o", is on the business card I got from you. It would be fair to make this logo better available, perhaps on the web site. On the subject of "community project" the logo might well be to small a project for many to really feel they are a part of, given the chosen logo (yet to be decided?) once published. Don't want to stir up negitive feeling amoung users. If this appears to be becomming such, or shows a likley potential, then consider the possibility of displaying the summitted logos (web site) and allowing not only a voting for, but user feedback on why they think a given logo is good. Perhaps what will result is an accumulation of good concepts that may be integrated into a final working logo all will really feel a part of. VIScorp has requested input/feedback of all sorts. Though the logo may ultimately fall into the hands of one person to produce, other feedback is such that it ultimately falls into the hands of VIScorp to decide and do. Of this, is of course, the product improvements and packaging. Certainly user feedback is important here but when it comes down to it, it's not really a community project but a business directional meter. On the level of community projects, there is such a potential project that can and without conflict, be such a community project that has room for everyone. A project that actually needs the efforts of users to accomplish. Weither the users are doing so from a business perspective, doing so from a user group(s) perspective, or even the perspective of the individual hobbist user. Not to leave out other perspective like research, experimentation, education, etc.. Everyone can contribute whatever they will, whenever they will. And it can all accumulate into a versatile integration of interaction and very unlike anything we have today. Of course I'm refering to the V.I.C. for it has three levels of development. The first level is simply the tool set, the functionality to allow level two and three to happen. Level two and three are indeed and clearly open to all to do. The more contributing, the more that will come to happen, the faster things will happen. As far as the development of level one goes, perhaps it will happen by the efforts of only one person, but for myself this will likley mean a longer time than thru teamwork. On a teamwork level of producing level one, a community effort may also hinder or slow the time to completion. This should be clear in understanding that it is typically a very small team that successfully produces such tools. To do so on a community level would require a great deal more effort to teach/train others to all see from a common perspective than to have a small team come to a common perspective and produce it. (Jokingly but seriously) the V.I.C. is not intended to become another ADA language but quite the opposite, that of a small, easy to lean and apply tool set. A tool set that is intended to allow virual interaction to happen, weither it be interaction of that which is hidden from the user such as system level functionallity, applications interaction, or that which includes the interaction of the user(s). There is plenty of room for all on level two and three. There is only nine commands and these commands are a result of determining WHAT MUST BE to allow for virtual interaction. Nine commands based on long known programming concepts and integrated so to produce the needed versatility required of virtual interaction. Knowledge, information, data comes in two forms, static and active. Static being like text and active being the process, cycle or movement of the static. The dictionary is a example of static as is other books of reference. Applying this static information is the process. It is static knowledge, information, data and the activity of processing it which is what level two and three are about in the V.I.C.. Level one is only a small integrated tool set that allows level two and three to happen. You might say it is like the carrier signal of your favorite FM station or any other broadcast. A carrier that allows communication to happen. However with the V.I.C. it is a bit more than a simple carrier signal, you might say that the information, data, is in part, telling the carrier what frequency to run at and change to. Community Project? The logo may be to small a project and short lived, to the point of decission. Product suggestions are important and ongoing but not quite a community project. The V.I.C., well it requires the community of users in order to evolve and it certainly has the potential to go far beyond what is available on any system today and in many ways. Jason, it's ok by me, should you decide to use my contribution towards the logo design as an example for others to be inspired by. And to do so listing me as an anonymous user. But please do consider what is required in generating or starting up and successfully pursuing a community project. With the recognition being given as it has been, to the users, a project all can really participate in and make a real contribution means such a project that inherently excludes no-one, regardless of their interest, belief, or color. Nor does it force anyone to use the efforts of others in what they do. Also I am considering presenting the level one development stage to AAi as a project but I also know that this level of development would be much better to do in an environment more intune with the internal opperations of the Amiga hardware and OS. Within such an environment it would be much easier and direct to develop/translate such data/knowledge bases and processes (level two and three) to allow end users and developers to more quickly take advantage of the benefits of making use the V.I.C. while inherently giving many examples of V.I.C. use. I know that in the event level one becomes complete and distributed, I would find myself performing the function of teaching/ inspiring others on how the V.I.C. may be used to solve their problems. Hopefully I would also find the time to perhaps establish what I would call "constants" on level two. Of which I suspect do exist and once established, will lead to even larger steps in advancing computer use and how used. Mr. Compton, I'm thirty-nine years old. I don't want to be 40, 50 or older when this thing finally happens. And it will happen, simply because technology evolves and so do people (generations), and if for any one reason - because it is based on "WHAT MUST BE in order for virtual interaction to happen!" In order for software value added reselling to happen. In order for the cronic software development problem to be turned around. As a side note: I once attended a Borland Delphi 2 conference and although the example subject matter was very boring to me, I found the abilities of Delphi to be very interesting. But, and unlike the Amiga community, the speaker, in his talk about the type of user that might use delphi, mentioned many types of users that wouldn't. In his list he mentioned carpenters. And it was here where I realized I had the power to embarrass him, granted I don't follow the mind set of most carpenters but the fact is, is that it is the various types of users of the Amiga that cause the Amiga to stand out as a different creature. No, I didn't embarass him, but I recognized his ignorance. Truth is, I'm still tempted to buy Delphi 2, even though I personally don't own a system Delphi 2 will run on, nor do I know pascal. However, I have worked in such environments using such Delphi compatable systems and know I could be productive in using Delphi. But I also believe most of my temptation to buy Delphi is in looking for something that will do what the V.I.C. can. Probably a habit I picked up from years of looking for such programs, tools, etc.. that will or can function in a manner of the V.I.C. or help me produce it. The current level of interaction between programs and between programs and users really is just a scratch. Programs are designed specifically to interact with a given program(s) as plug-in. AREXX is wonderful and great to have but to really make use of it and do something new (not using the code some else wrote) requires learning the language and often trial and error. And although there are a few programs that can help an end-user write AREXX code, a few the user need know nothing about AREXX, these programs are both application specific and inherently have a ceiling on expandability to both other applications and ease of use or automation. The V.I.C. easily has the ability to allow users to see the AREXX port accessable functions and commands of various programs as the particular programs "port vocabulary." And to access this vocabulary in a manner that might be to aid learning, for reference, or application/use. Imagine typing in on the command line "Draw me a ball in lightwave and render it out with a gold surface. Then import it to Imagefx and distort it with oil paint having a brush size of 3. Then print it out to the color printer." To have the system respond back with "how big of a ball (relative to the screen size)?" Once answered the system simply does it. Difficult? Not at all! The data or knowledge bases might/can be in the form of what the dictionary uses. Complete with definitions for education, reference, application. Also containing the processes. Considering how we all use the dictionary "for peices we put together" it's really not to difficult to create such data/knowledge bases or even incorporate the data/knowledge bases of many others into a functionable data/knowledge base set(s). And the above example can be done with minimal use of the V.I.C. (via use of keywords only) or it might be done using natural language processing methods of parsing and syntax checking. In addition to this the user might define a single word (spoken into a mic via that library which name excapes my mind at the moment and an audio digitizer) to cause the above example to happen. Of course one of the first sets of processes to likley be produced for level two would be that of "teaching" or in reality inputting knowledge/data definitions and processes. Making it easier for the end user to expand and contribute to the knowledge/data/process base(s). Jason, excuse me for my apparent rambling on, but I figure if I can get you to understand the usability of the V.I.C., it's level of user ease of use, the ability to integrate the efforts of many, etc.. You as the spokesperson for the Amiga community to VIScorp will be in a much better position to communicate to the development team the functionality and importance of the V.I.C.. Not only to VIScorp but the Amiga and the Amiga Community. In no way, shape or form is this anything like the false promise of the AI industry. It is nothing like the CLIPS programming environment nor is it so complicated as learning simple programming languages like basic or AREXX. It is a simple integrated dos level tool set that makes use of text based files of which contain definitions and sub definitions. Text being the most used form of communication and definition the most used form of reference, meaning the use of the V.I.C. will have an initial short learning curve to acheive/increase productivity. While leaving the door open to more complex evolution of V.I.C. applications/use. The completity of producing the V.I.C. is only in the proper integration of simple and long known computer and programming concepts. The integration into a versatile, exception free configuration. WHAT MUST BE for virtual interaction of programs, devices and USERS. Community Project. Q: How big? A: World scale! Language translation certainly has a place here and it would certainly have a motive given the users have the tools set to do it. Thanks for reading, Mr. Compton. Tim Rue timrue@mindspring .com P.S. I've been watching the VIScorp stock on the web site lately but these last two days there has been no listing and I don't know what "nan" means. Hope it doesn't mean VIScorp is out of the picture. Also, I do realize posting info on the web site regarding the logo might be a bit to bold if matters haven't yet been settled with ownership of the Amiga. On the other hand I hope this matter of the Amiga ownership doesn't go the way of this past year of US government budget setting (failure to do). As I've said in my paper on the V.I.C., "copyrights and patents are a product of mans imagination and produce constraints more often to profit financially. Legalities can produce a mess that prevents any advancement." And this I wrote back in 1994, or was it earlier? I really hope this matter is NOT going to be the proof of my statement! The matter seems to be nearing an additional month and I know I'm not the only one who see this. Given the past broken promises, this does not look good, it doesn't look good at all. Perhaps the particular investor holding things up needs to be enlightened as to the very real damage they are contributing to, the damage they are doing to their own investment potential. The US government spent alot of non-productive tax-payer dollars in their act of shutting down the government, more than once, and then paying back pay to all the employees. I don't mean to be long winded but if the investors cannot settle the matter then they will, in short time, have nothing left to settle with. And it seems to be very clear to me, that is the message, the decission, the Amiga community of users need to clearly and strongly communicate. Hard as it may be, can you spell b-o-y-c-o-t-t? *** This is why the letter was never sent. As of this note, and to the best of my knowledge, VIScorp DOES NOT HAVE THE AMIGA. And If VIScorp has no product to boycott then there is nothing to boycott VIScorp with, but again they don't have it.******** Anyone care to mention the particular investor(s)? Mr. Compton, I don't want this, no Amiga user does, but other things have been tried, many have ridden the Amiga in abuse and greed. Boycotting would indeed include all involved in efforts to stall and degrade the potential and growth of the viable unique tool that the Amiga is. A tool that fills a need that other systems don't and cannot, by their inherent nature. The pointless destruction to kill the phillips head screwdriver in order to force everyone to use the flathead screwdriver. Just say no to using any screwdriver at all! In this case it might be don't buy any more computer equipment. Add on hardware and software for the Amiga, would be fine. Just no new systems of any kind, IBM, Mac, Alpha, etc... Actually this would not be a bad Idea for the whole of all computer users to do, having the objective of forcing those creating the systems to remove the growing non-productive development expence. Force them to solve the problem they have created themselves instead of passing it off to the user to deal with, at the expense of the user. Deep down I think we all know this is the ultimate answer to the problem, to force the matter to be settled. Settle it or lose it all. The fact is, alot more is invested in the Amiga from the user end than any other end. If this wasn't so, then the Amiga would have died a long time ago!!! A easily provable matter of profit generation of which the Amiga has never been said to deny being. Failure of companies having the Amiga has always been due to something other than the Amiga. In other words, the Amiga has apparently been supporting/offsetting business failures not generated/created by the Amiga. Where would the Amiga be if all it had to support was itself? Granted Amiga Inc. ran out of finances but that was before it was market ready, in development. A typical case of underestimation of time and resources needed, but clearly these were found, to some degree unfortunatly with some greed. Am I wrong or is the Amiga the only computer in history that actually went up in value when the owning company (in this case Commodore) went out of business? I won't be the one to start any boycott, but should it happen, I'll certainly support it. Actually this may be a boycott that will happen anyways. The concept of three strikes and your out. Amiga Inc. was a foul ball (the ball never went into the playing field) Commodore didn't make it around the bases fast enough. ESCOM got a bit to egotistical and struck out quick. That's two outs and a foul. Seems VIScorp may be holding two strikes. One more pitch to go (sales pitch that is). The next pitch better be a hit and at least a base hit, better yet a home run, otherwise alot of the crowd is going to leave and stop supporting the team. 30 more days and it won't be extended! It's well past thirty days. Is this another strike-out? And if so, will anyone look back with hindsight and see there where at least three companies with apparent finances that couldn't work together. Yet the Amiga consisted of at least three co/processors that did work together and accomplished wonderful things. If this is the message the investor(s) responsible for holding things up needs to hear, then let it be communicated and strongly using the documentable proof of what has already been happening. Many have already left and the remaining are pulling together like has never been done before, in a team-work effort. So how is it that those with the most to invest, and willingness to do so (the remaining users) can so easily outdo the teamwork spirit of those few (in comparison) whom have control? With such a team spirit of the users, those whom ultimately have the ability to turn the power switch OFF, a boycott would be easy! I do believe the threat of a boycott is becomming a viable option. I don't think users are going to listen to many more excuses, regardless of any validity behind them. Imagine this: no more Amigas being produced. The repair and expansion business of the Amiga and commodity of owning an Amiga grows. Those who own the technology to produce more Amigas have absolutly nothing to gain unless they get together and do so and on an acceptable level set by the users. The boycott being something that becomes stronger and something else due owners of an Amiga realizing supporting the boycott increases their Amiga commodity resale value.... And certainly there are users whom have gotten a taste of this already. But the funny thing about this is that technology will eventually devalue the technology. Simply because any advancement in the base technology will expose something quite nasty. Greed is a nasty thing!!! It is not my intention to be negitive, rather the intent is of simple honesty about the potential that is likley building.
Copyright © 1988, 1994, 1996 Timothy V. Rue