[groby_b]

Broken example - the Kalashnikov is still very much available, while HyperCard is at best a historical curiosity. And it _has_ been upgraded to the AK74, which means it's a quarter century. It also has been transformed into the Type 56, the SG550 or the Galil.

Where is that progress with regards to HyperCard?

[asciilifeform]

Mikhail Kalashnikov did not regard the 74 as an improvement. The project was moved forward against his objections.

And HyperCard did indeed end up reincarnated as cheap imitations, just like the Chinese Type 56. The analogy holds.

Can't comment on the other two -- small arms aren't really my field.

[pyre]

  > Mikhail Kalashnikov did not regard the 74 as an
  > improvement.

Does that mean that it really wasn't an improvement? First you argue that popularity defines success, but then you switch gears and appeal to the inventor's opinion.

Seems like the True Scotsman fallacy. If someone had upgraded the HyperCard, but the original creator(s) felt it wasn't an improvement, would you argue that it wasn't a "true HyperCard."

[masklinn]

> If someone had upgraded the HyperCard, but the original creator(s) felt it wasn't an improvement, would you argue that it wasn't a "true HyperCard."

In fact, he implicitly does: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SuperCard

[asciilifeform]

This wasn't meant to be a general statement about the opinions of original creators.

I happen to respect that particular inventor (Kalashnikov). And I agree with the reasons he gave. (Going into them here would be going too far off subject. Google is your friend.)