This Letter was never sent to VIScorp due to the negitive facet contained
in it.

 Jason Compton
 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
     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
      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