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.
Email: timrue@mindspring.com
Copyright © 1988, 1994, 1996 Timothy V. Rue