Making Squeak more accessible and used - reversing the trend

All,

I've been wondering how to show the power of objects and the power of an
environment like smalltalk to everyday users. Probably the best way is
to provide features within the environment that they can really use
every day - right out of the box. The idea is secondary to my
(motivated, but not much action) desire to make Squeak available and
usable to everyday users.

Today, popular applications are vertical and on disparate OSs. There are
some applications that talk to one another using different forms of
communication, depending on the OS. Some mainstream type apps are cross
platform - like firefox, Thunderbird. But, this bandaid is not the
vision Alan, Dan, and the rest of the Xerox PARC Learning team had for
the personal computer and dynabook. I'm sure they can be improved, but I
really like their ideas. I know I'm preaching to the choir!

It would be nice to reverse the trend, or at the very least provide a
usable alternative. The world missed a great opportunity in the early
80s. Today people really can't customize their environment to their
needs - and the dynabook vision was just that. I want to see that work.

If the squeak community could provide leadership by creating and
producing significant features that most people need today, we might get
the ball rolling for users to start using squeak and for developers to
see the richness of the environment - and thus start the development
cycle to provide more features for everyday users. (apps like seaside
are doing significant work in this area for developers.)

I believe the top applications used today, in popularity order, are:

1. Email (including calendaring)
2. Web
3. Word Processing
4. Spreadsheet
5. Presentation

Maybe I missed something, or maybe I'm wrong -- this is off the top of
my head. Sounds right, though. (4 of these apps are in the MS Office
product and 3 in the OpenOffice package.)

If we could concentrate on the first two that included critical modules
that provided the popular features of an email app and a web browser (so
users could mix and match and see the greatness of objects working in
the environment), I think we would have gone a long way to starting this
re-revolution. And, nothing is stopping us from creating new features
that would be a boon to productivity. Just think of the cool things
people could do if the basic building blocks (and examples of how to
utilize them) were present in squeak? They may do things with email and
browsing that we never thought of. And, we would be teaching them the
power of the environment.

Maybe this is a wild idea. But, I actually believe this has been already
cited - most likely in this mailing list. It seems extremely doable.
There's nothing technically hard about it. It's more of a coordination
issue and, of course, a time issue (maybe we can come up with something
to help the time issue for developers.)

Crazy idea? Is it worth trying to get some people excited about this
idea and creating some of these modules? Maybe you have a better idea to
show people the power of the object and a real workable dynabook?

How could we get this rolling? A dedicated team? I can certainly provide
time for the management of the project(s).

what do you think?

--
brad fuller
www.bradfuller.com

Brad, you read my mind! IMHO Squeak does not cater for the "casual
user" or anyone not immediately interested in programming. There is an
unhealthy bias in the community towards improving the guts of Squeak
while the needs of casual/non-programming users are almost completely
ignored.

I like your list of applications but would like to suggest these:

- A web browser where elements of the page can be dragged out into
user defined pages and retain their context. User page/s may then be
available for browsing by friends.

- Media management for music, photo's and video's.

- Multi-mode Communications: something that makes it easy say to grab
email/phone messages/ home web cam images, etc, and route to different
formats/channels.

- Social networking tools

I think the above just about encapsulates what most people are up to
and/or interested in doing. Combined with a graphical method of
routing data between objects (Connectors/Fabrik-like but in a way that
delays having to tackle Smalltalk until requirement demand it) I
believe this would entice a lot of new users and that a fair
percentage would then happily go on to investigate the rest of the
environment. And even if they don't, this type of effort can only help
to increase Squeak/Smalltalk visibility.

I'd happily join any team effort but at the moment I am still at the
stage where I even struggle to find explicit information on Morphs,
Players, Costumes and the like :-(

That would be nice :)
>
> - Media management for music, photo's and video's.
I 'd like either a good files management system... maybe tagging
files/directory on the computer and why not on remote places...

I've always liked the small size of squeak seeing all its
capabilities... If we could have neat applications, ready to use for
people not knowing squeak, that would be excellent... ;)

Cédrick

On Jan 31, 2007, at 3:05 AM, Brad Fuller wrote:

During my summertalk[1], I started working on a web based iCalendar  
application in Squeak, using Seaside, Scriptaculous and the ical  
model and exporters/importers.
The application is working, I just finished adding a todo list and  
fixed a few bugs. It's not perfect, but it's a first step I think.  
There is some work being done on recurrence rules also, and I hope we  
can merge them to get an icalendar application that respects the RFC  
and offers *much more* than the existing applications (google  
calendar, ical, sunbird aka mozilla calendar ...).
I'd be happy to help to make a non-web interface for the icalendar,  
but I couldn't do it on my own, lack of time to do it, and lack of  
time to learn and play with Morphic.

I think that by offering web applications that possess similar  
features that well known (but not installable) web application -I'm  
thinking of google calendar for example, that people can't install on  
a local server, as opposed to SummerTime (it's the name of my app)-  
we could have users in : companies, schools, universities ... that  
want to be able to use such technologies but don't want to use a  
public service.

But that isn't using squeak for the user, it's using squeak like  
people install python or java on their server to run this or that  
application. Unless we build a GUI in Squeak , instead of using only  
seaside apps.

One thing I would find fun to both code and use, is a drop bag where  
you can drop anything in your OS. For example a bag on the desktop  
(let's call it a dock), where you can store applications, files,  
documents, webpages, images, network volumes, menus, widgets ... It's  
something Apple has already started with the dock in OSX, but imo  
they haven't pushed it all the way... a bag where you can store  
anything, as long as it's an object :) It would probably require a  
lot of interaction with the OS, making it less portable (or at least  
less easily portable). just an idea.

Yann

[1] http://www.squeaksource.com/iCalSummerTalk.html

Celeste is an e-mail reader.  Scamper is a web browser.  Both need
improvement before they are killer apps, though I think some people
ues Celeste every day.  See http://map.squeak.org

Croquet is in some ways a radical rethinking of what the web could be
like.  Sophie is very definitely a radical rethinking of what a book
could be like.  You should take a look at those projects.

Squeak is more likely to attract people by doing something unique like
Croquet or Sophie than by trying to compete with the rest of the world
with e-mail and web browsing.  But, if you can get people to make
Celeste or Scamper good enough that a lot of people use them every
day, more power to you!

-Ralph

El 1/31/07 9:48 AM, "Yann Monclair" <[hidden email]> escribió:

> For example a bag on the desktop
> (let's call it a dock), where you can store applications, files,
> documents, webpages, images, network volumes, menus, widgets ... It's
> something Apple has already started with the dock in OSX, but imo
> they haven't pushed it all the way... a bag where you can store
> anything, as long as it's an object :)


You could made a alias to any file or app in Mac for eras, not start with OS
X.

I imagine what Xerox Parc could have some of this , but not sure, any could
tell ?

Edgar



       

       
               
__________________________________________________
Preguntá. Respondé. Descubrí.
Todo lo que querías saber, y lo que ni imaginabas,
está en Yahoo! Respuestas (Beta).
¡Probalo ya!
http://www.yahoo.com.ar/respuestas

Ralph Johnson wrote:
Thanks all for your comments.

I completely agree that competition with today's email and browser apps
would be tough considering the competition and the ingrained usage and
preferences of users. I was only thinking of the best way to motivate
new users to squeak with something they already understand but with much
cooler features.

Another way is to create a squeak app that satisfies an unfulfilled user
need but make it extremely easy to use (so they don't give up because
it's "too radical".) I like this approach better, but that requires more
brain power on the frontend of the squeak community.

So, it came down to a decision of what could be successful.

There's nothing wrong, though, in doing both, like Yann's idea of the
multipurpose bag that eliminates the usage of a filesystem or Derek's
multimedia management system or social networking tools coupled with
Scamper and Celeste completion.


--
brad fuller
www.bradfuller.com

Hi all,

I'm going chime in with my $0.02 here, for what it's worth.  I'm
positive that Brad is on the right track here.  But it seems to me,
being that Smalltalk and hence Squeak is such a radical approach to
computing, that the ideas behind the applications we're considering
here change completely within the context of this platform.  I know
that no one's suggesting this, but I would hate to have the team put
their blood, sweat, and tears into replicating the same use-paradigm
within which these applications normally manifest themselves on their
current technology stacks.  That is to say, what Squeak/Smalltalk is
to computing, it's applications should be to their problem domain.
I'm sure those are high standards, but that is just what will make
this work so well.  We should not be afraid to make paradigmatic
improvements to the idea of an email application, say, or a
word-processor, or a calendaring application.  IMHO, it would would
only be in keeping with the spirit of the Dynabook and Squeak itself.

That being said, it's a wonderful idea we're discussing.  I'm
certainly not saying that I have any genius ideas, but this group as a
whole, I think, could make some great improvements.

Cheers,
Michael


On 1/31/07, Brad Fuller <[hidden email]> wrote:

--
http://clembie.livejournal.com
http://shadowofaculture.blogspot.com
http://deadlylittlepills.com

mike clemow wrote:
Exactly.

Maybe it shouldn't be called email or a web browser, because these evoke
images of current functionality, and that's not what I'm after. Maybe
think of the email app as a "time-shifted correspondence object engine".
And do more than text, but embed squeak objects. Sure, it could read
standard ASCII text (and html, since scamper would be improved.) The
transportation of morphic objects within a squeak "email", for example,
would be easy since a lot of this is already set up in squeak. You could
still correspond with others in standard email, but if both were using
the new improved Celeste, all kinds of things are possible. I really
haven't thought about it, this is just off the tip of my fingers.

The only thing I cringe about a squeak web browser is that web browsing
is so backwards - it's just a slightly better static paper magazine
page. Alternatively, it would be great to have a seaside browser within
squeak. A browser that could browse typical web pages with no problem
but when it came across a seaside site, would have additional squeak
features that wouldn't be available in your standard browser such as
Firefox. These features could increase the popularity of both seaside
and squeak.

And if these two engines were partitioned well within squeak, you could
utilize them together.



--
brad fuller
www.bradfuller.com

Hi Brad,

It sounds to me (and appologize if I am guessing wrong) is that your goal is
to make Squeak more wide spread, and bring underlying ideas into wider use
and awarness. My theory is for a software product to achieve that is to:
        - attract more users
        or
        - atract more developers
and I think the recent history (Java, Microsoft's tools, Ruby) shows that
attracting more developers is the way to do it. Also it may be that creating
web browsers, email and office suites is the old territory, also, penetration
against established products would be very difficult. I am not saying let us
not do it, just speculating on options. I feel that for Squeak its power is
in unchartered territories, things like Croquet and Tinlizzie (which I
understand is generally direction of future eToys-like system).

I think currently Squeak, mostly via eToys, is one of the very few great tools
for children and non-developers which is great, but I would wish there are
more developers attracted to Squeak. I read recently that if all the Squeak
developers are gone, there will be noone developing the tools for kids. Going
back for a minute to "succeed via attracting more developers", obviously if
more developers can make some of their living from Squeak, that would be
great. Also, for _new_ developers, it seems that the development environment
fell behind it's apprentices, tools like KDevelop, Eclipse, Netbeans are far
more pleasant and (cough) productive (I am coming from that direction, so
cannot compare objectively, but feel that is the case). I guess overall I am
trying to say better developer tools and PR may be a shorter way for Squeak
promotion, but that does not mean the next great killer app could not be a
web browser :) .

Milan

On 2007 January 30 21:05, Brad Fuller wrote:

LOL, this has been happening to me a lot lately. This is looking
exactly the sort of thing I had in mind in my first reply and I swear
I have never heard of it before today: http://www.zoho.com/notebook/

I guess you could say that where we use "DoIt" these guys use "DoneIt"
(joke, bad taste but I couldn't resist)

Regarding "attracting more developers": before appearing critical I'd
like to say that *I see* the potential in Squeak/Smalltalk but I'm not
sure it is immediately apparent to many others (meaning those yet to
encounter Squeak/Smalltalk). This is not to say I have any sort of
special insight or anything but because of years of relying on other
developers to one extent or another it is refreshing to work in an
environment where each new nugget of learning contributes to my
knowledge of the *total* environment. There's no technology barrier at
which point I have to re-tool to gain deeper control of the
environment (beyond the obvious topic of customising the VM but even
this would be transitory (do it then just use it)). My only regret is
that I didn't "discover" it years ago. I'm also grateful that
experienced developers continue to improve Squeak but... (you knew it
was coming :-) )...

Squeak/Smalltalk has been around for years with I guess large numbers
of interested developers at one time or another but still has almost
*ZERO* mindshare in the general computer using population and, I would
also guess, close to zero in those that can or want to program. This,
IMHO, is not simply a pubilicity problem, it's a presentation problem.
Framed crudely: Squeak/Smalltalk *is* a great development environment
but a dire *user* environment. Yes, Morphic is way cool but most user
oriented "applications" are mashed up with non-application elements
and many an answer to newbies questions begin with "Open up a
workspace, type "blah new openInWorld", right-click, select "DoIt"...
I mean, COME ON! What century are we in? I say this somewhat
tounge-in-cheek because if you have convinced a newbie to do this then
you can immediately claim that they have written and executed their
first Smalltalk program ("there, that wasn't hard was it?" LOL).

So to get specific: should the focus be on attracting more developers
or more "casual" users, and are better development tools needed or
more end-user applications? In truth there is no correct answer and it
is a bit of a chicken-n-egg situation. Any answer depends on the state
of affairs at the time it is given. Today there are developers (I'm
not sure how many) but I argue that there are *no* casual users and
that end-user applications are needed. If the question is "who cares
about casual users?" then I say that these, not developers, are future
life-blood of Squeak/Smalltalk development, they will generate the
demand that ensures Squeak/Smalltalk continues to exist and improve. I
could also question the role of developers without end-users and
postulate that if there were more end-users today then there would
also be jobs for Smalltalk developers... and everyone would be happy
:-P

A few final points:

- I pay homage to EToys, Seaside,  Scratch, Sophie etc but none of
these are what I would class as In-Squeak user-based applications.
Croquet of course offers potential but I would say not for general
consumption until high speed comms and 3D hw acceleration become so
standard that suppliers/manufacturers list them in their basic specs
(if only people would not dream to buy machines without hw 3D!)

- I recognise the wealth of code in the image but question the
accessibility of this to casual users or even wanna-be programmers. In
the case of the former presentation is very much key, for the latter
the amorphousness of Smalltalk interfaces lack the "sign-posts"
provided by well-documented API's in other environments.

- Squeak is an ideal place to challenge peoples concepts of what a GUI
is and what they should be able to with it. A much better environment
for *any* sort of experimentation than say "Proce55ing". I have a few
ideas that I'd like to throw into the pot, depending on what direction
Brad takes this conversation.

- To the hardcore Smalltalk developers: despite any apparent
criticisms above, I LOVE YOU! WE LOVE YOU! Carry on coding dudes! :-)

Hi all,
I'm new in this list, at least as a writer... I'd been reading the posts for awhile and I'm very interested in squeak development... and yes, I would like to see squeak all around the world, not being used just for a few developers.
I totally agree with Milan, the key is to atract more developers to Squeak world... and through them to the managers :)
Ok, then... this days, many software applications are web applications. In fact, it has been several  years  since I develop a "normal" application (of course, It's just my life, but I think many programmers could say the same), so, I really believe that Seaside is the killer framework for web applications... and I think throug Seaside (and developing new tools and components to harness it ) we can "conquer the web".
Another thinks I think we need:
a) better ORMs to propietary data bases, particularly Oracle and MSSQL: ODBC is not really a good way to do this, because our applications get tied to Windows.
b) a better system to distribute objects (rST?), or better: a way to connect images running so we can cluster web applications in the easy way.

Thats my 2 cents.

Cheers,
Esteban

pd: I'm very sorry if this is no news or not interesting for the members of the list... I'm new and don't know older debates.
ppd: I know... my english sucks, so, I'm sorry for that to.





--
"Querer es suscitar las paradojas"
Camus. El míto de Sísifo.

Derek O'Connell wrote:
> LOL, this has been happening to me a lot lately. This is looking
> exactly the sort of thing I had in mind in my first reply and I swear
> I have never heard of it before today: http://www.zoho.com/notebook/
>
> I guess you could say that where we use "DoIt" these guys use "DoneIt"
> (joke, bad taste but I couldn't resist)

(and it looks like it's only for windows.)



--
brad fuller
www.bradfuller.com

Hi Derek,

I should mark this OT, or ask Ken to setup squeak-advocacy list. Anyway, I
should say that I agree with much what you said, considering the difference
how I'd describe a user vs. developer. A few comments on it inline...

On 2007 February 1 05:38, Derek O'Connell wrote:
By "user" I ment a person using a application, such as web browser or office
suite, which is what started the debate. I probably was not clear even for
myself but by developer I ment anyone using Squeak for developement or
playing, or simply interacting with it. From this perspective, what you are
complaining about (rightly!) is in the _developer_ scope, not _user_ scope. I
could write much about Squeak (Morpic) UI feeling awfully inconsistent ,
illogical and complicated (to me at least), so just one example: Line up 4
(partly overlaping) elements:a Workspace window, a Morphic Project Window, a
Pinned Menu and a Book Morph. Each of them behave completely differently in
terms of a) how to bring them to front and b) how to pick them up and move.
(thanks for the halo that is the only consistent interaction!) For new
developers (ok, users, in your view) this must be a complete turn off. the
complexity of menus is another thing. I am not sure there is a way to "fix"
this, as it would require to define some UI rules first, I am thinking that
using something like Tweak is probably the way out of it.

>
> So to get specific: should the focus be on attracting more developers
> or more "casual" users, and are better development tools needed or
> more end-user applications? In truth there is no correct answer and it
> is a bit of a chicken-n-egg situation.

yes i agree completely. What I am not sure about (but will have no problem to
be wrong, and not discouraging ) is whether developing large scale end user
applications that exist today (and have many man-years development invested
in them), is a practical way to gain user base.

Milan

> yes i agree completely. What I am not sure about (but will have no problem to
> be wrong, and not discouraging ) is whether developing large scale end user
> applications that exist today (and have many man-years development invested
> in them), is a practical way to gain user base.
>
> Milan

Milan, I agree, there is no point *just* recreating what has already
been done, and in most cases done very well. It would also be a very
risky exercise, I'd say "doomed to fail". Hopefully I can clarify my
position but first I'm going to refer anyone reading this back to
Brad's original post, otherwise we could be in danger of playing
Chinese Whispers, and make a few points upfront...

- Best to leave this thread on the devs list for now. We need their
buy-in since who else will be implementing whatever emerges from this
discussion? If there is a more appropriate forum then ok but AFAIK
there is no distinction between dev's focused on fundamental aspects
of Squeak/Smalltalk and any dev's that may be mainly focused on the
"user experience". Getting circular here since this is the main topic
of this thread no? :-)

- I'm not complaining about Morphic, quite the reverse, although of
course there are areas that can be improved. In some/most cases though
it is not a Morphic issue but a presentation issue, eg, menu
layout/usage-policy.

- I'm going to be unashamedly dogmatic in my definition of a "user" vs
"developer". My definition of "user" is someone who may, quite
rightly, castrate you if you even dare to mention "coding". I can't
think of a better way to make this point more explicit :-) Well,
maybe, just try getting your girlfriend/ mother/ grandparent/ CEO to
write a Smalltalk program, you'll soon feel like you have been
castrated :-))))

- A "casual" user is one that does not even expect to have to adapt to
a new environment, simply expects paradigms found elsewhere.
Unfortunately that typically means what they find in MS Windows but I
don't see this as unreasonable nor something that isn't already
do-able with what exists in Morphic. It's just that it may not done
very well and/or consistently as your example makes clear.

- Of course we still hope to make converts of everyone but, if I
understand Brad's motivation correctly, we can "hope" but not "expect"
(this should be a guiding principle).

- Personally I don't need convincing that Squeak lacks "something"
from the perspective of a user and would benefit by attracting more
ordinary users, but I also don't think the Squeak community in general
can admit it, or is willing to admit, or in some cases even care. More
fundamentally, why should they care if their interest is CS specific
or driven by personal requirements? The challenge underpinning this
particular discussion is to convince  the community that
attracting/serving ordinary users would benefit everyone! It appears
self-evident to me but maybe it would be useful debate this aspect
further (I may have expanded on this topic below but this reply is
already looking too long, I have but one life and predicting the
future is an uncertain business :-) ). Enough to say ordinary users
surprise and challenge and get "real" value from software... and if
that's not enough then maybe the idea that more users = more chance of
getting paid to do what you like to do will, which I assume is
Squeak/Smalltalk development (personally I'd rather get paid to
snowboard but life sucks so I'd settle for getting paid to develop
(but only using Squeak/Smalltalk)).

- I am reminded of the essay "Cult of the Dead"
(http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/2950) and muse on the ironic twist that
"dead" is exactly how Squeak must look from outside this community. If
fact it did to me before my curiosity got the best of me.


Now, anyone reading this may be thinking that all the above is my
reply and that this is my concluding paragraph? Sorry to disappoint
you but I'm just beginning (lol).

Assuming for now as fact that we *want* to attract more users, ie,
more casual/ordinary users, that this is a *Good Thing*, that large
app's are impractical/risky... what to do? We could do endless
comparisons such as RoR vs Seaside, SL vs Croquet and now
Zoho-Notebook vs Sophie, etc, and/or we could promote-like-hell all
the potential benefits users could have IF ONLY THEY WOULD LEARN
SMALLTALK, GRRRRRRR! (joke, just to keep the mood light). Comparisons
happen naturally anyway and promotion is now being formed into a
concerted effort and while this is also good neither tackles the
central issue of what would make an *ordinary* user use Squeak instead
of any other more focused, better developed, better presented,
better... well just *better* applications out there... and we may as
well admit there/they *are* many and they increase almost daily. Time
to pack up and go home... I grunt, throw all my stuff in my bag, shrug
on my coat and make for the door... but half way through I pause
and...

I'm going to go out on a limb here and claim that I can categorise 99%
of ordinary and not-so ordinary users daily computer activity in two
words, and I don't even know 99.99999'% of those users! Drum
roll....."Breaking Barriers" (BB). You name it and I'll take bets that
it falls under the BB heading. Yeah, ok, come up with a broad enough
classification and this trick leaves the audience unimpressed and
heading for the door. I could have equally said "Human Things" in
which case I would hold the door open for you AND give a refund as you
leave... but I didn't so now you have to stay in your seat and hope it
was worth it (LOL (with an evil twist)).

I could set about creating a formal-ish definition of BB but I'm sure
with a moments thought most people would agree with me so I aim to
spare you this pain. However, I will offer some examples so I can't be
accused of dodging the issue and so others will have concrete examples
with which to crush me if they feel I am way off the mark. First close
to home and very recently: Croquet provides portals with a border and
icons to open/close etc... new user immediately wants to lose the
border and icons, make portals large so that they are effectively
invisible, transparent... borderless... barrierless (I deserve a point
for this example surely!). The web breaks many barriers, not least
that preventing the ordinary person from
publishing/disseminating/retrieving information. Website creators put
great effort into page design... someone creates ad-blockers, someone
creates GreaseMonkey effectively allowing the viewer to dictate the
design and content... content can be annotated... Web2 buzzes around
(as buzz-words do) promising to make all this type of thing
easy-peasy... Web3 is touted as allowing the user to re-organise the
*web* itself as they see fit. In other words form, content and even
substate are increasingly seen as artificial barriers, to be broken
down. Man, those Website creators must be fuming LOL!

On a less web-centric level, IRC usurps the lag inherent in email,
VOIP usurps landline costs (very artificial by the way), P2P usurps
monopolies and in general where protocols aim to restrict new
protocols arise to provide freedom. Even programming itself is an
activity largely rooted in the need to regain control where suppliers
have attempted to artificially restricted what the user can do (think
"scripting").  It's almost paradoxical that most programming, with the
best of intentions, ends up producing artificial barriers under the
guise of "convenience" - why is it that I'm still looking at and using
a GUI severely constricted by the physical display on which it
appears!!!! I mean G'DAM WHAT CENTURY ARE WE IN! (oops, I'm getting
repetitive :-) ) Which brings us back to Squeak which, if you listen
carefully, is saying "not me!", too right little fella, there, there.

Concluding (yes, at last): attract normal users, hope but don't expect
they go further, provide user-centric app-level features, features
that clearly demonstrate existing Squeak strengths (think "mash-up's"
rather than full blown apps). Use "Breaking Barriers" as a theme/guide
to what sort of new apps should be provided. I also suggest a friendly
competition (in-house or not, preferably not, good for promotion), two
stages, "ideas" then "development" (allowing crucial input from
non-developers). I would also put my money where my mouth is and
contribute to a prize pool.

Phew! Thanks for reading :-)

Correction: think "mashable-mash-ups", ie, using existing features but
in a way that allows users to "re-wire" if you like. I imagine
Connectors would play a major role in this type of thing.

Hello,

I thought that in Squeakland, the division between the _developer_ and
the _user_ is supposed to be blurred, if not completely gone.  I think
that the only benefit to putting the time into developing applications
like the ones that Brad was talking about was to exemplify the idea
that this line is blurred through familiar types of applications.  The
kinds of people who are going to be attracted to Squeak, no matter
what we do, are going to be the kinds of people who are comfortable
with this blurred line.  If we set a precedent for making easy the
exercising of the kind of power that Squeak allows through familiar
environments like email and office applications, I think that more of
these people will be able to quickly understand and experience the
paradigm that Squeak represents.

Derek, I think your Breaking Barriers speech (which I enjoyed reading
:) ) is right on point.  Although you remain safely dogmatic in your
distinction between "user" and "developer," however, I think that this
Barrier needs to be broken down as well.  I really believe that this
is in keeping with what Brad had in mind from the beginning.  I'm glad
that this conversation is taking place to further refine these themes.

Cheers,
Mike


On 2/2/07, Milan Zimmermann <[hidden email]> wrote:

He he :-) Yes, it may seem that I have shot myself in the back with my
own arrow... but it only "seems" that way. I inserted a
paradox-breaking clause in a previous post which magically allows a
slimey git like to also dodge other peoples arrows ;-)

Glad you liked the speech Mike! And, seriously, I also agree re
breaking the user/developer barrier but see it as a problem requiring
a C-bridge as in A-to-B via C. (told ya: "slimey" is my middle name)

The original motivation was finding ways to evangelize the benefits of
smalltalk and how to bring more people into the squeak fold. My use of
the phrase "everyday users" was meant to define those who have not had
the privilege to use an environment like smalltalk, or at least the
promise of the smalltalk environment.

My understanding, and my intent, is that the dynabook world does not
differentiate between users and developers. They are one in the same and
the differentiation is only in their skill set. One of the coolest
features of smalltalk is the idea of molding the environment to one's
personal needs.


--
brad fuller
www.bradfuller.com