In article <yd3esg6hqz.fsf@CLYDE.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU>, Scott Fahlman
> The Lisp Machines had a hellacious learning curve. If you could
> invest the months required to learn all their tricks, they provided a
> software-development environment that has still not been surpassed.
> But even some accomplished Lisp programmers never had time to get over
> "the hump", and non-Lispers faced a really frightening barrier.
> The documentation was designed for people who already knew the answer,
> and Symbolics was remarkably unhelpful unless you wanted to spend a
> week and a few thousand dollars for a training course.
Gee, the courses that Novell & many others teach cost as much or more,
and when you get out, all you know is some real niggly bit-pushing stuff.
I agree that the LispM documentation could have been better for beginners,
but I think that most would agree it left the documentation of most
competitors--including some pretty large companies--in the dust.