<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Club Squeak</title>
	<link>http://squeak.funkencode.com</link>
	<description>Community and Code for Squeak Smalltalkers</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 17 May 2008 09:46:21 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Darwin Among the Prototypes by Laurence</title>
		<link>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/02/10/darwin-among-the-prototypes/#comment-281</link>
		<dc:creator>Laurence</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2008 01:43:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/02/10/darwin-among-the-prototypes/#comment-281</guid>
		<description>@Randal - you're right, I knew about it - our buddy Dan was big on it but I had a Sony MagicCap and never played with the Newton  

@Alan - true if one takes a very broad view of machines as transformers of energy. From that perspective all organic things and many larger inorganic(oceans, planets, stars etc.) bodies are clearly machines as well.  Even &lt;a href="http://croquet.funkencode.com/2006/08/04/the-virtual-is-real-just-follow-the-money-or-the-physics/" rel="nofollow"&gt;bits, being made up of the same real physical stuff as humans&lt;/a&gt;, are machines - science and religion may have more in common than either likes to admit :-) In any case I'm all for expanding the narrower, industrial-era view of machines as long as we &lt;a href="http://www.meshverse.com/2008/01/31/humans-in-the-loop/" rel="nofollow"&gt;keep strictly biological humans in the loop&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Randal - you&#8217;re right, I knew about it - our buddy Dan was big on it but I had a Sony MagicCap and never played with the Newton  </p>
<p>@Alan - true if one takes a very broad view of machines as transformers of energy. From that perspective all organic things and many larger inorganic(oceans, planets, stars etc.) bodies are clearly machines as well.  Even <a href="http://croquet.funkencode.com/2006/08/04/the-virtual-is-real-just-follow-the-money-or-the-physics/" rel="nofollow">bits, being made up of the same real physical stuff as humans</a>, are machines - science and religion may have more in common than either likes to admit <img src='http://squeak.funkencode.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> In any case I&#8217;m all for expanding the narrower, industrial-era view of machines as long as we <a href="http://www.meshverse.com/2008/01/31/humans-in-the-loop/" rel="nofollow">keep strictly biological humans in the loop</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Darwin Among the Prototypes by Alan Lovejoy</title>
		<link>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/02/10/darwin-among-the-prototypes/#comment-279</link>
		<dc:creator>Alan Lovejoy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 23:57:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/02/10/darwin-among-the-prototypes/#comment-279</guid>
		<description>People are machines, too!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>People are machines, too!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Darwin Among the Prototypes by Randal L. Schwartz</title>
		<link>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/02/10/darwin-among-the-prototypes/#comment-271</link>
		<dc:creator>Randal L. Schwartz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 05:33:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/02/10/darwin-among-the-prototypes/#comment-271</guid>
		<description>You missed one of the more interesting applications of prototypes: the Newtonscript programming language for the Apple Newton!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You missed one of the more interesting applications of prototypes: the Newtonscript programming language for the Apple Newton!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Darwin Among the Prototypes by Javascript - Still Object-Oriented :: Darwin Among the Prototypes</title>
		<link>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/02/10/darwin-among-the-prototypes/#comment-270</link>
		<dc:creator>Javascript - Still Object-Oriented :: Darwin Among the Prototypes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 04:06:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/02/10/darwin-among-the-prototypes/#comment-270</guid>
		<description>[...] my interest in prototypes that I found Javascript appealing! The name of this entry is taken from a post on my Squeak blog that traces my history of exploring prototype-based programming. One thing that most of these [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] my interest in prototypes that I found Javascript appealing! The name of this entry is taken from a post on my Squeak blog that traces my history of exploring prototype-based programming. One thing that most of these [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Smalltalk Reloaded: Missing Bits &#038; The Achilles Heel by John</title>
		<link>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/01/29/smalltalk-reloaded-missing-bits-the-achilles-heel/#comment-241</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2008 15:37:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/01/29/smalltalk-reloaded-missing-bits-the-achilles-heel/#comment-241</guid>
		<description>I agree that there should be a high degree of integration between the different builds/frameworks.  Fragmentation is not productive.

I can see that ST companies might have missed an opportunity, but Sun was a BIG presence in the dot-com era and was in a position to effectively support and promote Java (including adding networking).

It seems to me that the next major opportunity, and maybe a more serious failing by ST companies, was web development tools/framework as captured by Ruby/Rails. We are only now seeing effective commercial offerings like GLASS from Gemstone.

Clearly successful business models can be based on open source software.  Commercial ST vendors don't seem to have fully embraced the potential of that business model.  This is unfortunate because part of what OSS-commercial vendors sell is access to innovation and ST is a great environment for innovation.   

In addition to providing better tools for professionals, commercial ST vendors could help to promote ST/Squeak as an educational platform for kids/teens.  Funding some kind of educational coordinator/evangelist would be a big help.  ST/Squeak already has some traction in this area.  Kids can be surprisingly innovative and once they start on traditional programming education with procedural languages it becomes MUCH more difficult to attract them to ST.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that there should be a high degree of integration between the different builds/frameworks.  Fragmentation is not productive.</p>
<p>I can see that ST companies might have missed an opportunity, but Sun was a BIG presence in the dot-com era and was in a position to effectively support and promote Java (including adding networking).</p>
<p>It seems to me that the next major opportunity, and maybe a more serious failing by ST companies, was web development tools/framework as captured by Ruby/Rails. We are only now seeing effective commercial offerings like GLASS from Gemstone.</p>
<p>Clearly successful business models can be based on open source software.  Commercial ST vendors don&#8217;t seem to have fully embraced the potential of that business model.  This is unfortunate because part of what OSS-commercial vendors sell is access to innovation and ST is a great environment for innovation.   </p>
<p>In addition to providing better tools for professionals, commercial ST vendors could help to promote ST/Squeak as an educational platform for kids/teens.  Funding some kind of educational coordinator/evangelist would be a big help.  ST/Squeak already has some traction in this area.  Kids can be surprisingly innovative and once they start on traditional programming education with procedural languages it becomes MUCH more difficult to attract them to ST.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Smalltalk Reloaded: Missing Bits &#038; The Achilles Heel by Administrator</title>
		<link>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/01/29/smalltalk-reloaded-missing-bits-the-achilles-heel/#comment-231</link>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 00:09:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/01/29/smalltalk-reloaded-missing-bits-the-achilles-heel/#comment-231</guid>
		<description>@Patrick
I agree. But thinking back on those days in the Smalltalk community there was a real “corporate” feel to Smalltalk. Squeak was not really out yet, everything was VW and Digitalk… multi $K USD products because they thought they were going to save IT from itself and make some scratch at the same time.

There was the big corp pull but Digitalk still had the independents who had bought at $99 - my company happened to be located a few floors up from Digitalk in the early days and I went downstairs and handed Jim Anderson a check - it didn't feel so corporate then.

"Back in those days “web” and “corporate” were two different things."
true

"As I understand it, Sun went to ParcPlace to get VW Smalltalk to be the “Oak” language for “Set Top Boxes” and such (remember, this was before Java was targeted at the web. Everyone was all about “Set Top Boxes”.) Apparently PP wanted to license it for more than an arm and a leg, and the rest is history. This is anecdotal but heard from more than one source."
I'd heard this too and always felt it was at least somewhat accurate</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Patrick<br />
I agree. But thinking back on those days in the Smalltalk community there was a real “corporate” feel to Smalltalk. Squeak was not really out yet, everything was VW and Digitalk… multi $K USD products because they thought they were going to save IT from itself and make some scratch at the same time.</p>
<p>There was the big corp pull but Digitalk still had the independents who had bought at $99 - my company happened to be located a few floors up from Digitalk in the early days and I went downstairs and handed Jim Anderson a check - it didn&#8217;t feel so corporate then.</p>
<p>&#8220;Back in those days “web” and “corporate” were two different things.&#8221;<br />
true</p>
<p>&#8220;As I understand it, Sun went to ParcPlace to get VW Smalltalk to be the “Oak” language for “Set Top Boxes” and such (remember, this was before Java was targeted at the web. Everyone was all about “Set Top Boxes”.) Apparently PP wanted to license it for more than an arm and a leg, and the rest is history. This is anecdotal but heard from more than one source.&#8221;<br />
I&#8217;d heard this too and always felt it was at least somewhat accurate</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Smalltalk Reloaded: Missing Bits &#038; The Achilles Heel by Administrator</title>
		<link>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/01/29/smalltalk-reloaded-missing-bits-the-achilles-heel/#comment-230</link>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 00:03:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/01/29/smalltalk-reloaded-missing-bits-the-achilles-heel/#comment-230</guid>
		<description>“I guess I’m corrupted by Emacs. ”
well since you said it :-) ... 
somewhere in the late 80's I got a Mac with 2 19in monitors(late 80's I think) and was doing a bunch of work in Smalltalk and Macromedia Director - that's when screen real estate came home to me ... using keyboard macros and commands are great supplements for me, but wetware is primary</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>“I guess I’m corrupted by Emacs. ”<br />
well since you said it <img src='http://squeak.funkencode.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> &#8230;<br />
somewhere in the late 80&#8217;s I got a Mac with 2 19in monitors(late 80&#8217;s I think) and was doing a bunch of work in Smalltalk and Macromedia Director - that&#8217;s when screen real estate came home to me &#8230; using keyboard macros and commands are great supplements for me, but wetware is primary</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Smalltalk Reloaded: Missing Bits &#038; The Achilles Heel by Administrator</title>
		<link>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/01/29/smalltalk-reloaded-missing-bits-the-achilles-heel/#comment-229</link>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 23:49:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/01/29/smalltalk-reloaded-missing-bits-the-achilles-heel/#comment-229</guid>
		<description>@Jonathan - my pleasure! Flipping back thru your book was fun!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Jonathan - my pleasure! Flipping back thru your book was fun!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Smalltalk Reloaded: Missing Bits &#038; The Achilles Heel by Administrator</title>
		<link>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/01/29/smalltalk-reloaded-missing-bits-the-achilles-heel/#comment-228</link>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 23:47:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/01/29/smalltalk-reloaded-missing-bits-the-achilles-heel/#comment-228</guid>
		<description>@John Isn’t Seaside a framework and not an “incompatible build?” 
well maybe in theory, but last I checked(probably fall) Seaside was running on Squeak 3.7 while Croquet, Sophie are Squeakland 3.8 but with different images and/or VMs - they don't work together out of the box and there's no guide or tool for integrating them other than a very big hammer. Don't mean to sound too cynical - I'm really not, it's just that peole keep tossing out ideas that people very reasonably(as in your case) take at face value. 

@Before the internet took off, networking was secondary.
True, but there were several commercial Smalltalks that had every opportunity to jump on the bandwagon before Java ever got on the scene. 

@It seems to me that ST’s business case is “making the difficult easy, and impossible possible”. The complexity of the solutions that programmers tackle keeps increasing. (Is there a law for this yet?) FORTRAN and COBOL were tools for fast computations and accounting with well defined inputs and outputs. Then C and soon C++/Java took over and allowed more complex systems to be modeled. ST has been head of its time.

If you check my other posts, you'll see that's not how it happened. ST did make the business case you mention in the late 80's early 90's and had clearly beaten C/C++ mindshare wise before Java ever arrived. IBM had blessed it and during that era $99 was like open source so a growing community of individuals had gathered around Digitalk as well. I agree that the commercial entities should support Squeak and GNU ST better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@John Isn’t Seaside a framework and not an “incompatible build?”<br />
well maybe in theory, but last I checked(probably fall) Seaside was running on Squeak 3.7 while Croquet, Sophie are Squeakland 3.8 but with different images and/or VMs - they don&#8217;t work together out of the box and there&#8217;s no guide or tool for integrating them other than a very big hammer. Don&#8217;t mean to sound too cynical - I&#8217;m really not, it&#8217;s just that peole keep tossing out ideas that people very reasonably(as in your case) take at face value. </p>
<p>@Before the internet took off, networking was secondary.<br />
True, but there were several commercial Smalltalks that had every opportunity to jump on the bandwagon before Java ever got on the scene. </p>
<p>@It seems to me that ST’s business case is “making the difficult easy, and impossible possible”. The complexity of the solutions that programmers tackle keeps increasing. (Is there a law for this yet?) FORTRAN and COBOL were tools for fast computations and accounting with well defined inputs and outputs. Then C and soon C++/Java took over and allowed more complex systems to be modeled. ST has been head of its time.</p>
<p>If you check my other posts, you&#8217;ll see that&#8217;s not how it happened. ST did make the business case you mention in the late 80&#8217;s early 90&#8217;s and had clearly beaten C/C++ mindshare wise before Java ever arrived. IBM had blessed it and during that era $99 was like open source so a growing community of individuals had gathered around Digitalk as well. I agree that the commercial entities should support Squeak and GNU ST better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Smalltalk Reloaded: Missing Bits &#038; The Achilles Heel by Jonathan Pletzke</title>
		<link>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/01/29/smalltalk-reloaded-missing-bits-the-achilles-heel/#comment-227</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Pletzke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 19:34:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://squeak.funkencode.com/2008/01/29/smalltalk-reloaded-missing-bits-the-achilles-heel/#comment-227</guid>
		<description>Thanks for taking me back in time to the good ole days. Dave Simmons was my Smalltalk mentor, and he is a very sharp guy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for taking me back in time to the good ole days. Dave Simmons was my Smalltalk mentor, and he is a very sharp guy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
