[ANN] Smalltalk Chronicles
Locked
123
123
 
|
To all contributors to this thread,
I do not dispute the importance of the debate, nor do I expect to be able to change too many minds on the subject. However, speaking for myself, I respectfully ask that this discussion be limited to comp.lang.smalltalk and comp.lang.smalltalk.advocacy. We worked hard to charter comp.lang.smalltalk.dolphin for discussion of Dolphin issues. With that said, I do not pretend to speak for all members of c.l.s.d, so if its readers want to keep this cross-posted to c.l.s.d, that's ok by me. Happy Smalltalking! Bill -- Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D. [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by John Gale
"John Gale" <[hidden email]> wrote in
<[hidden email]>: > >Terry Raymond <[hidden email]> wrote in message >news:Xns90857B042traymondcraftedsmall@207.126.101.100... >> Bob Nemec <[hidden email]> wrote in >> <[hidden email]>: >> >> >Seriously though: I've read many of your postings and I try to >> >understand your point without letting their inflammatory nature cloud >> >my judgment (as both Alan Kay and Dave Thomas said: we are a smug >> >group). >> > >> >What does the Smalltalk community need to do to 'grow up'? >> > >> >I have a vested interest in making Smalltalk more popular, which is >> >why I keep the Toronto Smalltalk User Group going. But Smalltalk's >> >lack of penetration into the larger development world is an ongoing >> >source of frustration. >> > >> >We all seem to feel that Smalltalk is not a popular as it should be, >> >and that anyone that does an unbiased review would agree (smug smug >> >smug). >> > >> >What *should* we do to sell Smalltalk? >> >> It needs to be promoted on several fronts. >> >> One reason that Smalltalk is not easily accepted is that it is >> not familiar. To change this, we need to get the schools to teach >> with it. So it seems that a logical first step would be to >> promote it with instructors and professors. One way to do this >> is to write more articles in journals that explain the features >> of smalltalk and present its advantages. > >I couldn't agree more about the need to get Smalltalk into the schools >Terry. There is however a nasty Catch 22 situation where schools will >often teach only that which they deem will be useful after graduation. >It also seems that there are few instructors to teach the courses >properly. I think you have a very good idea about putting out more >articles. My thought is to capture people's interest. I hope that schools still teach courses that are intended to provide a broad understanding of computer languages. If smalltalk is introduced in these courses it would be a big plus. One problem with the acceptance of Smalltalk is that it is different. If students are introduced to it in school it will not be so different when it is examined at work. -- Terry =========================================================== Terry Raymond Smalltalk Professional Debug Package Crafted Smalltalk *Breakpoints* and *Watchpoints* for 19 Tilley Ave. VW and ENVY/Developer Newport, RI 02840 (401) 846-6573 [hidden email] http://www.craftedsmalltalk.com =========================================================== |
|
|
Terry Raymond <[hidden email]> wrote in message
news:Xns9086D9D55traymondcraftedsmall@207.126.101.100... > "John Gale" <[hidden email]> wrote in > <[hidden email]>: > snip > > >> It needs to be promoted on several fronts. > >> > >> One reason that Smalltalk is not easily accepted is that it is > >> not familiar. To change this, we need to get the schools to teach > >> with it. So it seems that a logical first step would be to > >> promote it with instructors and professors. One way to do this > >> is to write more articles in journals that explain the features > >> of smalltalk and present its advantages. > > > >I couldn't agree more about the need to get Smalltalk into the schools > >Terry. There is however a nasty Catch 22 situation where schools will > >often teach only that which they deem will be useful after graduation. > >It also seems that there are few instructors to teach the courses > >properly. I think you have a very good idea about putting out more > >articles. > > My thought is to capture people's interest. I hope that > schools still teach courses that are intended to provide a broad > understanding of computer languages. If smalltalk is introduced > in these courses it would be a big plus. One problem with > the acceptance of Smalltalk is that it is different. If students > are introduced to it in school it will not be so different when > it is examined at work. How very true. Unfortunately the schools I have spoken to respond to the student's clamourings for things that will help them get empolyment. It seems that the idea of getting a solid foundation is not greatly in vogue. Smalltalk is seen as a fringe language. And after all "Object concepts can be taught just as well using C++." Perhaps the best thing we can do is to publicize the projects that use Smalltalk and to also let it out that Smalltalkers are needed to help people those projects. Junior Smalltalkers are badly needed. In fact, this absence causes most of the resistance to using the language that I have encountered. John Gale Procedium Software |
|
|
In reply to this post by jtuchel
Joachim Tuchel <[hidden email]> writes:
>Hi > >A SERFer schrieb: >> >> "James A. Robertson" <[hidden email]> writes: >> >> >That niche is currently filled by two vendors - Object-Arts (Dolphin) >> >and ObjectConnect (Smalltalk/MT). So the space has better competition >> >than it did in 'the good old days'. >> >> Only if you are a Windows developer. I develop for Windows, Linux, >> and Solaris. > >Do you know Smalltalk/X from exept? If not, check http://www.exept.de > >Maybe you will find what you are looking for. >Smalltalk/X supports your platforms, is free for non-commercial use and >has proved to be suitable for a very interesting range of projects. Look >at it, you'll probably love it. > >Joachim Yes - I have seen it, and it looks very good, and it is not expensive for commercial use, but development of it seems to have stopped: I have seen notices about versions on future platforms that have been saying 'coming soon' for over a year. Also, I don't see any reasonable support for ODBC under Windows. Finally, there seems to be no clean and simple way to deploy applications. Please correct me if I am out of date, and I'll take another look! Steve |
|
|
In reply to this post by Eric Clayberg
"Eric Clayberg" <[hidden email]> writes:
>"A SERFer" <[hidden email]> wrote in message news:[hidden email]... >> >> >> >> The VisualAge for Java cost is a once off. No percentage of >> >> product revenue, no annual fees. >> > >> >And at $2K for the high-end enterprise version and ~$7K for the ultra >> >high-end generator version, IBM makes good money off of it. Don't forget >> >annual support and upgrade fees either... >> > >> But that annual support and upgrade fees are NOT part of the initial >> purchase - they are *optional*, unlike with VisualWorks. > >Realistically, they are hardly optional if you are a big customer and need >support, upgrades and bug fixes. Even with VW, they are optional in the >sense that you could always stop using VW or stop getting updates or >support. Some folks are perfectly happy using VW 3.x and not paying Cincom a >dime. The bottom line is that, if you want the latest versions and the >latest bug fixes, you are going to pay for them on a recurring basis one way >or another. So I could use VW3.x, and develop commercial applications, without further payment to Cincom? > >-Eric > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Eric Clayberg
"Eric Clayberg" <[hidden email]> writes:
>"A SERFer" <[hidden email]> wrote in message news:[hidden email]... >> >> The Digitalk 'niche' included reasonable portability to OS/2 and Mac: > >To OS/2, yes; to the Mac, no. ST/V Mac was quite different from ST/V Win & >OS/2. Not so different I didn't manage to port code across. > >Although Digitalk did work on a Unix version for a long time and promised it >for years. > >-Eric > > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Steve Zara
"A SERFer" <[hidden email]> wrote in message news:[hidden email]...
> > So I could use VW3.x, and develop commercial applications, without > further payment to Cincom? If you owned a copy of VW 3.x, I would suppose you could (since VW 3.x was an ObjectShare product and whatever license that was effect at the time would apply). -Eric |
|
|
In reply to this post by Steve Zara
"A SERFer" <[hidden email]> wrote in message news:[hidden email]...
> > > >To OS/2, yes; to the Mac, no. ST/V Mac was quite different from ST/V Win & > >OS/2. > > Not so different I didn't manage to port code across. By that definition, ST/V, VSE, VAST and Dolphin provide "reasonable portability" between each other. That is certainly the case with VSE and VAST (I do that all the time and run VAST code unmodified in VAST quite frequently), and I know of lots of folks who have ported to Dolphin as well. -Eric |
|
|
In reply to this post by Steve Zara
"Eric Clayberg" <[hidden email]> writes:
>"A SERFer" <[hidden email]> wrote in message news:[hidden email]... >> > >> >To OS/2, yes; to the Mac, no. ST/V Mac was quite different from ST/V Win >& >> >OS/2. >> >> Not so different I didn't manage to port code across. > >By that definition, ST/V, VSE, VAST and Dolphin provide "reasonable >portability" between each other. That is certainly the case with VSE and >VAST (I do that all the time and run VAST code unmodified in VAST quite >frequently), and I know of lots of folks who have ported to Dolphin as well. A fair point, I concede. Steve > >-Eric > > |
Re: [ANN] Smalltalk Chronicles
|
|
In reply to this post by Steve Zara
A SERFer schrieb:
> > > Yes - I have seen it, and it looks very good, and it is not expensive > for commercial use, but development of it seems to have stopped: No, that's not true. > I have seen notices about versions on future platforms that have been > saying 'coming soon' for over a year. Also, I don't see any reasonable That means nothing :-) > support for ODBC under Windows. Finally, there seems to be no clean That's sadly true ... > and simple way to deploy applications. Please correct me if I am ST/X is quite different from other Smalltalk in this aspect and one has to be quite used to this way of application delivery. Marten |
Re: [ANN] Smalltalk Chronicles
|
|
In reply to this post by Steve Zara
A SERFer wrote:
> "Eric Clayberg" <[hidden email]> writes: > >>"A SERFer" <[hidden email]> wrote in message Hi: >>news:[hidden email]... >>> >> >>> >> The VisualAge for Java cost is a once off. No percentage of >>> >> product revenue, no annual fees. >>> > >>> >And at $2K for the high-end enterprise version and ~$7K for the ultra >>> >high-end generator version, IBM makes good money off of it. Don't >>> >forget annual support and upgrade fees either... >>> > >>> But that annual support and upgrade fees are NOT part of the initial >>> purchase - they are *optional*, unlike with VisualWorks. >> >>Realistically, they are hardly optional if you are a big customer and need >>support, upgrades and bug fixes. Even with VW, they are optional in the >>sense that you could always stop using VW or stop getting updates or >>support. Some folks are perfectly happy using VW 3.x and not paying Cincom >>a dime. The bottom line is that, if you want the latest versions and the >>latest bug fixes, you are going to pay for them on a recurring basis one >>way or another. > > So I could use VW3.x, and develop commercial applications, without > further payment to Cincom? Yes! And it used to, and might still, be for sale on digital river for $495 USD. Just Windows and Linux vm, though. > >> >>-Eric >> >> > -- Thanks!! Joseph Bacanskas [|] --- I use Smalltalk. My amp goes to eleven. |
Re: [ANN] Smalltalk Chronicles
|
|
In reply to this post by Bob Nemec-3
In article
<[hidden email]>, Bob Nemec <[hidden email]> wrote: > In article <[hidden email]>, [hidden email] says... > > Smalltalk got HUGE publicity when it was available > > on the very small scale, and cheaply, as Smalltalk/V. > > So true. > > That's how I got my start with Smalltalk in 1990. We used Smalltalk/V > for DOS for an advanced AI class at York University. Makes you wonder > where Smalltalk would be today if it had not been for Digitalk. Yes, I love Smalltalk/V I used it on the PC and on the Mac. It just worked. Whatever happened to ST/V? Joe. -- Everything is beautiful in its time and the Lord God has put enternity in the hearts of men. Ecc 3:11 |
Re: [ANN] Smalltalk Chronicles
|
|
In reply to this post by Steve Zara
> And, if I buy a development tool, why should I expect it to be tied in
> with profit? If I buy some other business tool, such as a car or > photocopier, do they expect part of my profit? I think the reason st is not a popular with the masses is that there is no good entry level version. Remember when BASIC came free on everyone's PC. Business people could use it to write a little ten-liner, and print it and show it to a client. The little ten-lines grew into hundred-liners and then systems. Then you can start charging big bucks for a complete developement environment. The thing is can someone put together a simple st development environment that will be small, easy to use and good for quick ten-liners? Then profs will start using it in college, and business people will start using it when spreadsheets fail and then you will benefit by the people who outgrow the simple. Joe. -- Everything is beautiful in its time and the Lord God has put enternity in the hearts of men. Ecc 3:11 |
Re: [ANN] Smalltalk Chronicles
|
|
"Joseph J. Alotta" wrote:
> > > And, if I buy a development tool, why should I expect it to be tied in > > with profit? If I buy some other business tool, such as a car or > > photocopier, do they expect part of my profit? > > I think the reason st is not a popular with the masses is that there is no > good entry level version. > Sure there is! You can get -- VisualWorks non-commercial free -- Squeak (open source) free -- Dolphin from Object-Arts for a couple of hundred -- Smalltalk/MT for a couple of hundred see http://www.goodstart.com for links > Remember when BASIC came free on everyone's PC. Business people could use > it to write a little ten-liner, and print it and show it to a client. > > The little ten-lines grew into hundred-liners and then systems. Then you > can start charging big bucks for a complete developement environment. > > The thing is can someone put together a simple st development environment > that will be small, easy to use and good for quick ten-liners? Then profs > will start using it in college, and business people will start using it > when spreadsheets fail and then you will benefit by the people who outgrow > the simple. > > Joe. > > -- > Everything is beautiful in its time and the Lord God > has put enternity in the hearts of men. Ecc 3:11 -- James A. Robertson Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom [hidden email] <Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library> |
Re: [ANN] Smalltalk Chronicles
|
|
In reply to this post by Steve Zara
A SERFer wrote:
> > "James A. Robertson" <[hidden email]> writes: > > >> Smalltalk is not cheap for me. I'm writing client-side apps which use > >> ODBC. Price? If I used Forte as the IDE, nothing at all. (I actually > >> use VisualAge for Java, but that is not expensive). > > > >$500.00 per year per developer, plus 5% of product revenue (based on the > >revenue of the Smalltalk portion of the product - we are flexible there > >as well). The percentage shrinks if you are willing/able to pay more up > >front on an annual basis > > > >Small Developer models (limited to 100 or 200 deployed seats > >respectively) - cost $1999.00 or $3999.00 per year, up to three > >developers. > Unless you want support, of course. <nothing> is free > The VisualAge for Java cost is a once off. No percentage of > product revenue, no annual fees. > > > > > > > > >-- > >James A. Robertson > >Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom > >[hidden email] > ><Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library> -- James A. Robertson Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom [hidden email] <Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library> |
|
|
"James A. Robertson" <[hidden email]> writes:
>A SERFer wrote: >> >> "James A. Robertson" <[hidden email]> writes: >> >> >> Smalltalk is not cheap for me. I'm writing client-side apps which use >> >> ODBC. Price? If I used Forte as the IDE, nothing at all. (I actually >> >> use VisualAge for Java, but that is not expensive). >> > >> >$500.00 per year per developer, plus 5% of product revenue (based on the >> >revenue of the Smalltalk portion of the product - we are flexible there >> >as well). The percentage shrinks if you are willing/able to pay more up >> >front on an annual basis >> > >> >Small Developer models (limited to 100 or 200 deployed seats >> >respectively) - cost $1999.00 or $3999.00 per year, up to three >> >developers. >> > >Unless you want support, of course. <nothing> is free A meaningless statement! GNU software is free. Squeak is free. And... VisualAge for Java is inexpensive if I don't want support. Yet again, on yet another project, VisualWorks has lost a potential sale to me due to price and licencing. I'm still weighing up Java vs Smalltalk for this project, as the only suitable Smalltalk for this other than VisualWorks is MS Windows only, and we are migrating our server systems from NT to Linux and Solaris... > > >> The VisualAge for Java cost is a once off. No percentage of >> product revenue, no annual fees. >> >> > >> > >> > >> >-- >> >James A. Robertson >> >Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom >> >[hidden email] >> ><Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library> > >-- >James A. Robertson >Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom >[hidden email] ><Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library> |
«
Return to Dolphin Smalltalk
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |