I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
32 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

MartinW
Just a thought on the discussions about Smalltalkhub beeing down and people would love to use Gibhub instead:

I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

And there is all this talk about building a business with Pharo - why not make a business from Smalltalkhub? The thought of course is that when Smalltalkhub would be a business, it’s makers could spend more time and effort keeping it up and running and adding new features.

This may have been quoted a lot but still:
"The lesson: People are happy to pay for things that work well. Never be afraid to put a price on something. If you pour your heart into something and make it great, sell it. For real money. Even if there are free options, even if the market is flooded with free. People will pay for things they love.“
From: http://37signals.com/svn/posts/2794-how-to-get-good-at-making-money
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

Uko2
Hi.

You’re right in general. But for me the main question is: can Monticello work well? This thing was not evolving for years. Something has to be done.

Uko

On 03 Nov 2013, at 13:22, MartinW <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Just a thought on the discussions about Smalltalkhub beeing down and people
> would love to use Gibhub instead:
>
> I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.
>
> And there is all this talk about building a business with Pharo - why not
> make a business from Smalltalkhub? The thought of course is that when
> Smalltalkhub would be a business, it’s makers could spend more time and
> effort keeping it up and running and adding new features.
>
> This may have been quoted a lot but still:
> "The lesson: People are happy to pay for things that work well. Never be
> afraid to put a price on something. If you pour your heart into something
> and make it great, sell it. For real money. Even if there are free options,
> even if the market is flooded with free. People will pay for things they
> love.“
> From: http://37signals.com/svn/posts/2794-how-to-get-good-at-making-money
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/I-would-rather-pay-for-Smalltalkhub-than-use-Github-for-free-tp4718690.html
> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

kilon.alios
In reply to this post by MartinW
Well I am for one promoting the use of Gihub mainly on the grounds of promotion of Pharo efforts. the more projects are uploaded on github the more exposure Pharo gets.Its also possible to have both Smalltalkhub and Github, we could use Github as a fallback, a backup system for Smalltalkhub and have monticello automagically commit to both with a press of a button. 

Github also offers a nice convenient way for issue tracking, bug reports, feature request and forums. Gist is excellent for generating code examples on the fly. Leveraging existing technologies means we can concentrate on new features and new ideas. Also not having to maintain Smalltalkhub from an operational basis is good news. We need to acknowledge that we are a very small community that needs to take to account that we dont have the manpower to afford Pharo specific solutions for everything and anything. Especially for such demanding task as versions control. Every user that comes to Pharo will ask "what new Pharo gives me to justify abandoning my existing favorite choice ? ". 

I take a look at previous experiments like squeaksource and I find little justification to not support Github. But then I am not against Smalltalkhub or other repos being available to Pharo. The more the merrier.  

On the matters of payment , sure you can do that too, but as I said , we are a very small community we need to be realistic about these things. 

I think it depends on how you see Pharo for yourself. I see Pharo not as a replacement but rather as an extension of available technology and I would love to see Pharo play better and better with existing technologies not just Github. Pharo is doing already this with Athens (Cairo) , NBOpengl (as well as previous opengl implementations) , Amber (though external to pharo , deeply related to it) and many more.

Saying that, I am also a fan of Pharo precisely because is not afraid to do things its own way, try new fresh experimental ideas, go against the flow and brake some rules in the process. So I think the secret of success for Pharo is between being a good supporter of existing technologies but also a ground for bringing newones to the users. I will also love to see Smalltalkhub expand and improve and I even see myself why not contributing with my small effort to it. 

As we say in Greece "anything done with precise measure is perfection" .


On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 2:22 PM, MartinW <[hidden email]> wrote:
Just a thought on the discussions about Smalltalkhub beeing down and people
would love to use Gibhub instead:

I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

And there is all this talk about building a business with Pharo - why not
make a business from Smalltalkhub? The thought of course is that when
Smalltalkhub would be a business, it’s makers could spend more time and
effort keeping it up and running and adding new features.

This may have been quoted a lot but still:
"The lesson: People are happy to pay for things that work well. Never be
afraid to put a price on something. If you pour your heart into something
and make it great, sell it. For real money. Even if there are free options,
even if the market is flooded with free. People will pay for things they
love.“
From: http://37signals.com/svn/posts/2794-how-to-get-good-at-making-money



--
View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/I-would-rather-pay-for-Smalltalkhub-than-use-Github-for-free-tp4718690.html
Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

Stephan Eggermont-3
In reply to this post by MartinW
Kilon wrote
>I take a look at previous experiments like squeaksource and I find little justification to not support Github. But then I am not against Smalltalkhub or other >repos being available to Pharo. The more the merrier.  

I see some very strong arguments against depending on github:
- it is centralized infrastructure, essentially unsuitable for use with a distributed version control system;
- it doesn’t support working at the right granularity;
- the smalltalk community is too small to have any influence on the directions github is taking.
  It is a commercial organization that can decide to do something we don’t like at any time.
  It is free, so we are the product. Just take a look at sourceforge;
- we can do much better than github (but don’t have enough time). We should be using a P2P,
  bittorrent like system for version control.

Stephan



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

Uko2
But why?

On 03 Nov 2013, at 15:52, Stephan Eggermont <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Kilon wrote
>> I take a look at previous experiments like squeaksource and I find little justification to not support Github. But then I am not against Smalltalkhub or other >repos being available to Pharo. The more the merrier.  
>
> I see some very strong arguments against depending on github:
> - it is centralized infrastructure, essentially unsuitable for use with a distributed version control system;
It’s now. Git is decentralised. And Guthub helps to use that even more with forks, pull requests, etc.

> - it doesn’t support working at the right granularity;
I don’t get the point.

> - the smalltalk community is too small to have any influence on the directions github is taking.
true

>  It is a commercial organization that can decide to do something we don’t like at any time.
>  It is free, so we are the product. Just take a look at sourceforge;
> - we can do much better than github (but don’t have enough time). We should be using a P2P,
>  bittorrent like system for version control.
I think we should think about that. Monticello bothers me a lot. You have a lot of duplications, no safety for previous versions, etc. I don’t like an idea of snapshots. Storing changes looks much better to me.

>
>
> Stephan
>
>
>

Uko
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

Camillo Bruni-3
In reply to this post by Stephan Eggermont-3

On 2013-11-03, at 15:52, Stephan Eggermont <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Kilon wrote
>> I take a look at previous experiments like squeaksource and I find little justification to not support Github. But then I am not against Smalltalkhub or other >repos being available to Pharo. The more the merrier.  
>
> I see some very strong arguments against depending on github:
> - it is centralized infrastructure, essentially unsuitable for use with a distributed version control system;
> - it doesn’t support working at the right granularity;
> - the smalltalk community is too small to have any influence on the directions github is taking.
>  It is a commercial organization that can decide to do something we don’t like at any time.
>  It is free, so we are the product. Just take a look at sourceforge;
> - we can do much better than github (but don’t have enough time). We should be using a P2P,
>  bittorrent like system for version control.
github != git and whether we use github or now does not matter at all.
What matters is that we use technology that is robust and that we have a versioning
system that works decentralized. All of that is solved by git.

With filetree we have the proper granularity (methods)
With github we have an awesome website, such as we have an aweseome website with smalltalkhub, execpt that monticello should be modernized. Sadly the community is too small to achieve that, and inventing yet another versioning tool/system won't help on the short run. Maybe, yes someday in the future we can have our own fancy fully object-oriented versioning system, but IMO that is wasted effort, as git/mercurial come very close to something ideal.

I am happy to give more insight into git, because I think you have quite a wrong picture about it :)


signature.asc (457 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

kilon.alios
In reply to this post by Stephan Eggermont-3
You will need to explain because  I don't understand what you mean by centralized vs distributed , does not support working at the right granularity. 

Influence the way Github goes is besides the point at this point since we dont have a better alternative and I will be a great oracle to predict , or not, that we wont have one in the next decade. Unless something extraordinary happens and Pharo goes super popular. 

Being a commercial application has not stopped tons of open source projects porting to it. But hey what do they know. I am not sure what you mean about sourceforge, I see still loads of open source project using it. 

The thing I see right now, is that I already use Github with Filetree and Monticello-GIT and it works. Can see the commits I made manually to git and create git commits. The only thing it does not do is push though thats also pretty much a matter of adding the code. So it looks like monticello is already there. It could be polished and sophisticated git interaction be integrated but I think with time we will see those things as well hopefully I can give a helping hand. 

And if Git is good enough to version control Linux source, I dont see why it would be a big problem to Pharo. But even if it is should not be faster if we make extensions to git via monticello to work around these potential problems instead of doing a huge project from scratch ? 

I will keep trying Monticello-GIT , if it works as well it seems to work I will probably stick with it. I would love also to extend it when I become familiar with its internals. Big thanks to people behind this. 

I think being against git is perfectly fine, wanting to trying your own thing is awesome, focusing on pharo specific solution is of course a good thing. But then not wanting to do that and use what is already out there can be as wise.


On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Stephan Eggermont <[hidden email]> wrote:
Kilon wrote
>I take a look at previous experiments like squeaksource and I find little justification to not support Github. But then I am not against Smalltalkhub or other >repos being available to Pharo. The more the merrier.

I see some very strong arguments against depending on github:
- it is centralized infrastructure, essentially unsuitable for use with a distributed version control system;
- it doesn’t support working at the right granularity;
- the smalltalk community is too small to have any influence on the directions github is taking.
  It is a commercial organization that can decide to do something we don’t like at any time.
  It is free, so we are the product. Just take a look at sourceforge;
- we can do much better than github (but don’t have enough time). We should be using a P2P,
  bittorrent like system for version control.

Stephan




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

philippeback
In reply to this post by Uko2
Monticello is quite good, especially with Metacello associated to it.

I'd like to have the MetacelloToolBox working nicely with FTP repos and will spend a while on that in the coming weeks, but frankly, that's great to use to keep things in sync.

I'd pay for STH but for private projects and with the bells and whistles of GitHub (Wiki, issues, teams, non smalltalk files etc).Long story short, GitHub is good also. Maybe consortium members fees could get into have STH supported.

Phil


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

James Ashley
In reply to this post by kilon.alios
I'm really just a fairly uninterested bystander who's been eavesdropping.

I don't much care one way or the other, except that I'd *love* to see
Pharo explode
into the popularity that it deserves.

On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:34 AM, kilon alios <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Influence the way Github goes is besides the point at this point since we
> dont have a better alternative and I will be a great oracle to predict , or
> not, that we wont have one in the next decade.

Alan Kay once said something along the lines of "The best way to
predict the future is to create it."


> Unless something
> extraordinary happens and Pharo goes super popular.

I think that may be the wrong attitude. Even if it doesn't, the best
ideas will filter
down to inferior languages/environments. Things like Visual Studio and Resharper
are still trying to bring Smalltalk into the mainstream...though in a
very limited
scope.

If someone creates something that's a significant improvement to github, and
it's generally useful, it won't matter what technology created it. It
either will
supplant github or github will extend and embrace the ideas.

Either way, the ecosystem improves.

I could probably write a thesis about the actual economics and morality and
sanity of using closed source created by a company
like github vs. something like squeaksource (which I loved), but (AFAICT)
the community is faced with exactly that sort of crisis.

It takes time and effort to maintain and improve anything. People who are making
money doing so are in a better position to make that "anything" nicer
and friendlier
to end-users than people who are working on it in their/our spare
time. It's a sad
fact of life: most of us don't get to be Richard Stallman (or maybe
that's a happy
fact...whatever).


> Being a commercial application has not stopped tons of open source projects
> porting to it. But hey what do they know. I am not sure what you mean about
> sourceforge, I see still loads of open source project using it.

Have you checked out sourceforge lately?

It was obnoxious for years. Which is probably the main reason that so
many projects
have moved to github. The last time I tried to download anything from
it, I had to wade
through 3 pages of "Download and install this malware to do things you
already can!"
searching for the "Never mind, just let me download the thing I want"
link that was
buried in all the crap. In the end, I *still* wound up with 3 things I
didn't want.

I can only assume they'd have tried to auto-install if I were running Windows.

I found out the next day that they'd been acquired by some new company. I intend
to avoid them like the plague from now on.

Github might wind up in the same boat, but I think that would require some major
redesign on their part. It seems like it'd be pretty tough to insert
adware into the
`git clone` process.


> And if Git is good enough to version control Linux source, I dont see why it
> would be a big problem to Pharo.

Several years back, when people were starting to realize that tools
like Source Safe
and SVN suck, I was involved in a long conversation sort-of along these same
lines in one of the lisp communities.

Everyone was looking for the next big thing in source control. At the
time, Darcs looked
like the thing that should win, but wouldn't. Git was too big, nasty,
scary, and didn't
work on Windows, so it didn't even seem to be a contender.

Every option available was focused around old-school line-based
diff's. Which seemed
totally asinine from a lisp perspective: that was really about
modifying leaves and
branches in a tree. I probably got flamboyant about this at the time.

Finally, someone politely suggested that I go ahead and write it
myself if I thought it
was such a great idea. So I tried, and it turned out to be a lot
tougher than I'd expected.

Most of what I learned from that experience was the basic lesson that
I didn't have a
clue about lisp.

But the experience seems at least a little relevant here.

Git seems like a horrible tool for tracking changes to a smalltalk...I
dunno. I'm
such an outsider and newb here that I'm not even sure about the proper
terminology. Package, maybe? Whatever. Group of classes that you write and
maintain that implements some sort of useful batch of functionality.

At the same time...would it be worth the effort to implement something in the
same realm that would be competing with an established opponent?

Then again, sooner or later, *something* will come along that makes git look as
obsolete as git did to CVS/SVN.


> But even if it is should not be faster if
> we make extensions to git via monticello to work around these potential
> problems instead of doing a huge project from scratch ?

FWIW, I'd vote for that sort of approach. If I had any right to a vote here.
Evolution beats revolution.

Then again, I've dabbled around with what that actually means (I've been
trying to come up with a decent way to visualize branches in my very limited
spare time), and git seems to be pretty nasty to deal with under the covers.


> I think being against git is perfectly fine, wanting to trying your own
> thing is awesome, focusing on pharo specific solution is of course a good
> thing. But then not wanting to do that and use what is already out there can
> be as wise.

Git sort of arrived in the middle of a perfect storm. Everyone was feeling the
pain of source control systems that truly sucked. Linus felt that pain and
threw a solution together. Its victory may be
another great example of the way "less beats more", or it might be a
testimony to name brand inertia. Or maybe it's just that intellectuals don't
understand the wisdom of the market.

Be that as it may. I still get riled up enough about source control to
write long
rants like this one when I have better ways to spend my time. Git sucks, but
so does everything else. I don't have the time to invest in making it better.
I'm too busy working on problems that I consider more interesting.

I suspect this is the simple reality of what's going on here. If someone *does*
care enough about the ecosystem to truly invest in a VCS that makes more
sense than git, well, power to you. In the meantime, it seems like building
beautiful and intuitive UI's on top of github's existing architecture would
be more productive.

Hmm. Now there's an idea to explore.

Going back into lurk mode.

Respectfully,
James

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

Marcus Denker-4

>
> Alan Kay once said something along the lines of "The best way to
> predict the future is to create it."
>

I always joke that he forgot “The only way to have a future is to finish something”  ;-)

        Marcus



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

James Ashley
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>>
>> Alan Kay once said something along the lines of "The best way to
>> predict the future is to create it."
>>
>
> I always joke that he forgot “The only way to have a future is to finish something”  ;-)
>
>         Marcus

Nice. I may steal that corollary and blog about it someday. -- James

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

Marcus Denker-4

On 03 Nov 2013, at 18:42, James Ashley <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Alan Kay once said something along the lines of "The best way to
>>> predict the future is to create it."
>>>
>>
>> I always joke that he forgot “The only way to have a future is to finish something”  ;-)
>>
>>        Marcus
>
> Nice. I may steal that corollary and blog about it someday. — James

explanation: “something” means really that: You do not need to “reinvent everything” to
*have* a future. You finish something (trivial, boring), and than you use that to build on top.

Yes, it will be trivial. But the, in the end tragic, fact is that anything you can *do* in the sense of really
making in real will be trivial. Else you could not do it. If you wait for that amazing thing that will be so great
that it even amazes you yourself who made it real: Sorry, this will never happen. *Everything* you can make real
will be trivial and boring by definition. “Now I know how to do it”. Yes!, so finish, and than build on top.

        Marcus





Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

Uko2
In reply to this post by Marcus Denker-4

On 03 Nov 2013, at 18:35, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>>
>> Alan Kay once said something along the lines of "The best way to
>> predict the future is to create it."
>>
>
> I always joke that he forgot “The only way to have a future is to finish something”  ;-)
>
> Marcus

Made my day

>
>
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

kilon.alios
In reply to this post by Marcus Denker-4
Yeah I cant say I agree with Mr Kay my answer to his quote will be that he is wrong and that "the best way to predict the future is to create a monopoly" . After all Windows had and still has a very predictable future. But I can understand why he said that, and I most certainly would motivate this kind of thinking which I find it as the foundation of Smalltalk culture and why I love to use Smalltalk.  

Its kinda ironic that bigger (market share wise) something is the less mobile it becomes. 

To the rest of your reply, I cant really argue so deeply. Personally I am just a dude that does very basic things with git. As to why sourceforge lost some of its crowd to Github, for me its dead obvious that Github is a much more clean and well designed solution. I always saw sourceforge as too messy, and If sourceforge was our only alternative option then I would be pushing for improvement to Smalltalkhub. 

Unfortunately I am not interested into source control. I am mainly a GUI , graphics and sound / music coder. Maybe one day like you , after I have used it for much more projects, I will hate git, but so far it has worked great for my very simple needs.  


On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Alan Kay once said something along the lines of "The best way to
> predict the future is to create it."
>

I always joke that he forgot “The only way to have a future is to finish something”  ;-)

        Marcus




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

Marcus Denker-4

On 03 Nov 2013, at 18:54, kilon alios <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Yeah I cant say I agree with Mr Kay my answer to his quote will be that he is wrong and that "the best way to predict the future is to create a monopoly” .

Yes, in 2007, the iPhone showed that “We can not do anything because Microsoft” was just wrong.

        Marcus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

Marcus Denker-4
In reply to this post by Marcus Denker-4

>>> I always joke that he forgot “The only way to have a future is to finish something”  ;-)


“One of the sad memories of my life is a visit to the celebrated mathematician and inventor, Mr Babbage. He was far advanced in age, but his mind was still as vigorous as ever. He took me through his work-rooms. In the first room I saw parts of the original Calculating Machine, which had been shown in an incomplete state many years before and had even been put to some use. I asked him about its present form.
‘I have not finished it because in working at it I came on the idea of my Analytical Machine, which would do all that it was capable of doing and much more. Indeed, the idea was so much simpler that it would have taken more work to complete the Calculating Machine than to design and construct the other in its entirety, so I turned my attention to the Analytical Machine.’”

“After a few minutes’ talk, we went into the next work-room, where he showed and explained to me the working of the elements of the Analytical Machine. I asked if I could see it. ‘I have never completed it,’ he said, ‘because I hit upon an idea of doing the same thing by a different and far more effective method, and this rendered it useless to proceed on the old lines.’ Then we went into the third room. There lay scattered bits of mechanism, but I saw no trace of any working machine. Very cautiously I approached the subject, and received the dreaded answer, ‘It is not constructed yet, but I am working on it, and it will take less time to construct it altogether than it would have token to complete the Analytical Machine from the stage in which I left it.’ I took leave of the old man with a heavy heart.”

– Lord Moulton

(and if someone says “but he invented the modern computer": No, he did not. We know about him because Ada Lovelance helped him publishing theoretical results (after removing lots of random ramblings  about the evil
state of research funding). Babagge is *irrelevant* for today. He was rediscovered later after people re-invented his computer. If he would have finished (or just made sure to delegate it, being so trivial that should
have been really easy?) he truly would have changed *everything*.

“Sometimes you need to finish that damn trivial calculator” — me

        Marcus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

kilon.alios
In reply to this post by Marcus Denker-4
I fail to see how Windows prohibited iPhone from appearing or anything in my quote saying that. They are not even in the same market. Well there is windows mobile and now windows 8 for phones and tablets but both are far from monopoly products. Plus iPhone is not even an OS unless you were referring to iOS. I was talking about desktop's future. 

For your quote to work it would imply Microsoft having monopoly to anything. Fortunately that is not the case. They are big but nowhere near that big. But if they did, well you would be agreeing right now with me ;) 


On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 03 Nov 2013, at 18:54, kilon alios <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Yeah I cant say I agree with Mr Kay my answer to his quote will be that he is wrong and that "the best way to predict the future is to create a monopoly” .

Yes, in 2007, the iPhone showed that “We can not do anything because Microsoft” was just wrong.

        Marcus

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

Marcus Denker-4

On 03 Nov 2013, at 19:11, kilon alios <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I fail to see how Windows prohibited iPhone from appearing or anything in my quote saying that. They are not even in the same market.

Yet, that old market is now in a very bad shape and people talk about the “death of the desktop”.
You do not need to be in the same market if you can make the old one obsolete.

        Marcus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

Uko2

On 03 Nov 2013, at 19:17, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 03 Nov 2013, at 19:11, kilon alios <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I fail to see how Windows prohibited iPhone from appearing or anything in my quote saying that. They are not even in the same market.
>
> Yet, that old market is now in a very bad shape and people talk about the “death of the desktop”.
> You do not need to be in the same market if you can make the old one obsolete.
>
> Marcus

I think that we should be passionate about what we are doing. Look at Scala for example. It’s becoming quite popular, and it was developed for 10 years. Pharo still has a lot of time to attract people, but we need to push something new. It’s not java like smalltalk, or something smalltalk-inspired that looks like C. For me Pharo is what had to happen to Smalltalk: evolution. Usually Smalltalk is mentioned with “80” suffix. Pharo is Smalltalk2013. And we can make it really cool, but we should stick to smalltalk philosophy. Having tools, working with objects, etc...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I would rather pay for Smalltalkhub than use Github for free.

kilon.alios
In reply to this post by Marcus Denker-4
Are those the same people that a decade ago were proclaiming Java dead ?  It only takes a walk to TIOBE INDEX to see how much of a threat mobile market is to desktop. 


I am sure Angry Birds and Candy Crash Saga are substantial opponents to Desktop but I don't see Windows sweating from agony any time soon. 


On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 8:17 PM, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 03 Nov 2013, at 19:11, kilon alios <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I fail to see how Windows prohibited iPhone from appearing or anything in my quote saying that. They are not even in the same market.

Yet, that old market is now in a very bad shape and people talk about the “death of the desktop”.
You do not need to be in the same market if you can make the old one obsolete.

        Marcus

12