[Ocaml-biz] Why should they believe us?

[Brandon J. Van Every]

Martin Jambon wrote:
> Brandon J. Van Every
>
> > OCaml offers superior high level language features,
> > superior type safety, and performance.
>
> Right, but people will not believe us easily because we don't show any
> proof that OCaml is so great.

When I woke up this morning, I was reminded that people believe what
they want to believe.  Over my radio floated an ad for the Duxiana bed.
Yes, I'd like a better bed.  Unfortunately, I've spent $2000 on trying
different beds, so I'm pretty up on the physics of what's possible and
impossible, likely or unlikely.  Most people aren't, so they might buy a
bed based on an image of what's supposed to be better.  They might even
convince themselves it's better after they've made the purchase.  I
spent money, I'm stuck with it, it *must* be better...

Why did the Duxiana bed sound good to me?  'Cuz I was still waking up
with a small amount of pain.  I'm not convinced any bed could really
alleviate it, but it sure would be nice if it could.  People still using
C++ are often in pain.  We don't want to go after the ones who are happy
as clams, who love STL and all that.  We want the ones who are
suffering.  We need to appeal to the people who are suffering.

That and early adopters who are into geek toys.  "Language wonks," I
call those people.

When I cranked up my computer this morning, I got a security bulletin
from Microsoft about GDI+.  I'm curious what OCaml can offer in the
security dept?  Any demonstrable whitepapers or case studies?  One could
also prey upon people's insecurities, if OCaml does actually have
something substantial to offer here.  Of course, this argument typically
has to be made against Java and C#, so an understanding of their
security issues is important too.


Cheers,                         www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every               Seattle, WA

20% of the world is real.
80% is gobbledygook we make up inside our own heads.