Some days a I really would love not to love smalltalk...
> On 30 Apr 2014, at 20:52, Jimmie Houchin <[email protected]> wrote: > > But that is the point. This kind of marketing is false. It denies who we are. > > As soon as they look at Pharo. Learn to use and then learn that Pharo is a > Smalltalk and that we are liars. > > Did keeping silent about Pharo help in the Reddit thread. No. > Did the current marketing explain well what Pharo is. No. > Read the thread. People were confused. > And regardless of the marketing attempt, the fact of Pharo being a Smalltalk > did not remain suppressed. So therefore, those who were closed minded against > Smalltalk have then been alerted, and they can close their minds. Attempting > to not make it plain was an abject failure. > > People who understand the value of Smalltalk and of a modern open source > implementation will come. > > > I guess none of the commercial Smalltalks are alive? Nobody knows of > them. They are going broke? > > Gemstone, VisualWorks, ... > > What is this new thing that people are using? > > Clojure based on Lisp. Not new. > Python 23 years old. > Lua 21 > Ruby 19 > > Clojure based on Lisp but adding modern functional features disproves any > thought that an old language with lots of baggage can't attract new users. > From the Clojure home page. """Clojure is a dialect of Lisp""" > They embrace their heritage and are better for it. They also detail their > value proposition and being a Lisp is part of it. > > > I am all agreeable to attracting people to our community. But falseness isn't > the way. > > Not everybody is closed minded and ignorant. Those that are we can wait > until they are not. > > But Pharo has to offer people the proper value proposition. When it does, I > believe it will attract sincere people. When the value of Pharo meets the > needs of the people, it will attact the appropriate people. But until then, > we can market it however we want and they will not care. Right now Pharo is > working hard to reach that point that it can offer them something they will > value. For some it already does. For others not yet. That not yet, it a > bigger obstacle than Pharo being marketed as a Smalltalk and telling the > truth. > > We need to embrace being a Smalltalk and sell our value proposition in terms > that mean something to somebody who doesn't already get Smalltalk. We failed > at that. Too vague, too ambiguous. It confused some of the Reddit people. > People to whom we are supposedly intending to attract and market to. > > Jimmie > > >> On 04/30/2014 01:22 PM, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >> Again… you are missing the point. >> nobody here doubts Pharo is a Smalltalk. >> nobody outside our small world believes Smalltalk is alive. >> >> And yes… you can argue all what you want. But you are scratching where it >> does not itch. >> >> We choose not to *market* Pharo as a Smalltalk, because each time someone >> outside our small world hear about Smalltalk believes that is a long time >> dead language. No matter how much effort you put into explain that is not >> true, people will not believe it. And people is always more willing to try >> something new than something old (except in the case of wines and fine >> alcohols, of course). >> So… we prefer to track people to our community and let them notice wat WE >> ALL KNOW: Smalltalk is not dead, and Pharo is a proof of that. >> >> Esteban >> >>> On 30 Apr 2014, at 20:07, Jimmie Houchin <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> In the Smalltalk heritage. Pharo comes from Smalltalk 80. >>> >>> But we don't want to be stuck in 1980. We want Smalltalk 2014. >>> Smalltalk 80 was modern for 1980. They didn't want to be stuck in 1976. ... >>> >>> And Smalltalk isn't unique to this. Is C11 not a C because it is not K&R, >>> or C89, C90 or C99? >>> Is Python 3.x not Python because it is not fully compatible with Python 2.x >>> which is dominant? >>> >>> Pharo wants to be a modern Smalltalk able to empower people in this era to >>> do things that we do in 2014. We need appropriate modularity in the image. >>> We need the image to be clean. We need to learn the lessons we as >>> Smalltalker's have learned in the last 24 years and apply them to Pharo >>> Smalltalk. And I believe that is much of what Pharo is attempting to do. >>> >>> Noel in his talk said that Smalltalk doesn't play well with others. And >>> with Pharo it still isn't as easy as in other languages like Python, Ruby, >>> Lua, etc. But with NativeBoost we have a tool which enables us to do much. >>> And NativeBoost isn't finished. I believe when NativeBoost is fully mature >>> and the vm/image has sufficiently changed to enable us. We will have one of >>> the best plays with others well stories. >>> >>> I know in the app I am writing, NativeBoost's current condition struggled >>> with my library. It often crashed. This library has to deal with a C >>> Thread. Which is why I am spending my current time studying C. >>> >>> Whether or not the Smalltalk Inspired crowd likes it, the moment some else >>> declares that Pharo is a Smalltalk the Smalltalk Inspired marketing is >>> tanked. The cat is out of the bag. >>> >>> The Reddit thread demonstrates this. People went to the new website. They >>> read the current marketing and were confused. What is this Pharo thing. And >>> in the thread it comes out that Pharo is a Smalltalk. Lets make that clear >>> up front. Then lets define what it means to be Pharo Smalltalk. >>> >>> Here is an unfortunate quote from that thread. >>> >>> """ >>> emaringolo 1 point an hour ago >>> Pharo is aimed to do serious/business development, and it's been reshaping >>> itself since its conception (several years ago when it forked from Squeak). >>> It doesn't want to have any backward or "historic" compatibility with other >>> Smalltalks. >>> You can see its changelogs and the roadmap for future versions to see how >>> it is different, and how it will be different. >>> """ >>> >>> This makes it sound like Pharo wants remove compatibility simply for the >>> sake of not being a Smalltalk. As opposed to what I believe Esteban meant. >>> And yes I understand that English is not his native language, and there are >>> many for whom it is, who still use it poorly. What I believe he meant, is >>> that Pharo will not be constrained by backward compatibility. If a change >>> or feature that is of value to Pharo Smalltalk. That feature will be done >>> even if it means breaking backward compatibility with other Smalltalk 80 >>> based Smalltalks. We are moving forward. But this does not invalidate Pharo >>> being a Smalltalk. As has been stated before, breaking changes happened in >>> Smalltalk 76 and 80. >>> >>> Smalltalk has a wonderful heritage. It is not without its issues. However >>> the good of Smalltalk is enormous. Take a look at this chart >>> http://exploringdata.github.io/vis/programming-languages-influence-network/ >>> Smalltalk is a big influence in the history of programming. This is >>> something worth being a part of. Be proud of it. >>> >>> Pharo needs to define what one vision of a modern Smalltalk is. Let us >>> educate people of what our vision for Pharo Smalltalk is. And guess what >>> folks its 2014. Before long it wont be. And before long the vision of Pharo >>> 2014 will no longer be any more modern than Smalltalk 80. But neither >>> Smalltalk 80 nor Pharo 3.0 constrain what it means to be Smalltalk. >>> Smalltalk inspires vision and inspires people to do things which change the >>> present and the future. Lets build on that heritage and >>> take it forward. What does a modern Smalltalk snapshot 2014 mean. Lets >>> educate and communicate. Others (non-Smalltalkers) don't get to define what >>> Smalltalk is. We do. >>> >>> Let us learn from them what they think Smalltalk is. Where they are wrong, >>> educate them. Where they are right and we have an issue. Let's learn a >>> lesson and improve our Smalltalk. >>> >>> Computer science/art is young. This is a journey. Lets make it a good one. >>> >>> Jimmie >>> >>> >>> >>>> On 04/30/2014 11:12 AM, [email protected] wrote: >>>> Pharo := Smalltalk ++ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Jimmie Houchin <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> On 04/28/2014 11:12 AM, Marcus Denker wrote: >>>>>> … more a Smalltalk one using Pharo: >>>>>> >>>>>> MountainWest RubyConf 2014 >>>>>> >>>>>> Noel Rappin: "But Really, You Should Learn Smalltalk” >>>>>> >>>>>> Smalltalk has mystique. We talk about it more than we use it. It seems >>>>>> like it should be so similar to Ruby. It has >>>>>> similar Object-Oriented structures, it even has blocks. But everything >>>>>> is so slightly different, from the programming environment, to the >>>>>> 1-based arrays, to the simple syntax. Using Smalltalk will make you look >>>>>> at familiar constructs with new eyes. We’ll show you how to get started >>>>>> on Smalltalk, and walk through some sample code. Live coding may be >>>>>> involved. You’ll never look at objects the same way again. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.confreaks.com/videos/3284-mwrc-but-really-you-should-learn-smalltalk >>>>> >>>>> In this thread and many others there is this debate as to whether Pharo >>>>> is a Smalltalk or is Smalltalk Inspired. >>>>> >>>>> I find the Smalltalk Inspired arguments to be unpersuasive. To be >>>>> Smalltalk Inspired is to say that you are not a Smalltalk. It is to say >>>>> that Pharo is not Smalltalk but inspired by it. >>>>> >>>>> I find that reasoning patently false. >>>>> >>>>> First of all everything in Pharo begins from a Smalltalk image. It comes >>>>> from Squeak Smalltalk which comes from Apple Smalltalk. etc. >>>>> >>>>> Pharo has an isA relationship with Smalltalk, not an isInspiredBy >>>>> relationship. It may change and add features, but as has been stated >>>>> before, Smalltalk isn't a static idea or artifact. It has always been a >>>>> dynamic live environment in which to change itself into something it >>>>> believed to be better. By removing features and by growing them. >>>>> >>>>> Smalltalk (an instance of SmalltalkImage), SmalltalkImage, >>>>> SmalltalkImageTest, SmalltalkEditingState are all part of the Pharo >>>>> Smalltalk image. >>>>> >>>>> The Pharo image is a Smalltalk image. It says so inside the image itself. >>>>> >>>>> Where are we hosting are source code? Would that be SmalltalkHub? >>>>> Lets see something. >>>>> http://www.smalltalkhub.com/#!/~Pharo >>>>> >>>>> Okay, Pharo might be doing things that would break compatibility with >>>>> other Smalltalks. And that causes some people pain and grief. However >>>>> that does not make Pharo not a Smalltalk. Was Smalltalk 76 constrained by >>>>> backward compatibility with Smalltalk 72? Or Smalltalk 80 with either >>>>> Smalltalk 76 or 72? No! >>>>> >>>>> Is it a requirement of Pharo to be constrained by other Smalltalk >>>>> implementations in order to still be a Smalltalk. No! >>>>> >>>>> And then there is the argument of the outside worlds perception of >>>>> Smalltalk. Since when does the perception of the outside world change >>>>> whether or not Pharo is a Smalltalk? If the outside world changed their >>>>> mind and decided Smalltalk is wonderful, does Pharo then all of the >>>>> sudden become a Smalltalk? Ugh! >>>>> >>>>> We are who we are. Our roots are our roots. Pharo should be happy and >>>>> proud to be a Smalltalk. A Smalltalk that is continuing the heritage of >>>>> innovation. A Smalltalk that is continuing the >>>>> heritage of inventing the future. >>>>> >>>>> We have decided to be marketing driven. Marketing is important. But >>>>> marketing should determine who we are. And we should engage in >>>>> disingenuous marketing practice trying to hide our roots >>>>> or who we are. >>>>> >>>>> Why do we things distancing ourselves from Smalltalk advantages us? Just >>>>> because there are lots of uneducated people who have the wrong idea about >>>>> Smalltalk. Clojure embraced its Lisp heritage and is thriving. Lisp has >>>>> every bit as much baggage. >>>>> >>>>> This talk which inspired this thread called Pharo as Smalltalk. He said, >>>>> Pharo Smalltalk throughout the presentation. So in the mind of the >>>>> presenter and now in the mind of the audience at the conference and of >>>>> the video, Pharo is a Smalltalk. So now are we to go about re-educating >>>>> all these people that Pharo is not a Smalltalk but is rather Smalltalk >>>>> Inspired? >>>>> >>>>> We don't require the outside world's permission. We don't need their >>>>> approval. We would like to have a reasonable and sufficient number of >>>>> them to catch the Pharo Smalltalk vision and become a part of the family. >>>>> Do we really desire everybody. No. Do we desire those people who are so >>>>> closed minded that the mention of Smalltalk closes their mind because of >>>>> their ignorance. I don't think so. >>>>> >>>>> Smalltalk is different. Pharo is Smalltalk and is different. There will >>>>> be those who don't like it because of the >>>>> baggage they bring, not the baggage we bring. And that is okay. All of us >>>>> think different. People need to embrace what empowers them and quit >>>>> complaining about what empowers somebody else. We need to embrace >>>>> empowering people who understand Smalltalk not the people who don't get >>>>> it for whatever reason. Let those people go and be empowered somewhere >>>>> else. We and they will both be better off. >>>>> >>>>> Feel free to shred and destroy my arguments. I am proud to use Smalltalk. >>>>> And currently Pharo is the Smalltalk I am choosing to use. Currently I am >>>>> studying C. A C library is required for my project and in order to use >>>>> Pharo and use this library, I need sufficient C skills. >>>>> >>>>> My opinion unapologetically. >>>>> >>>>> And if the powers that be who are in charge of Pharo decide that >>>>> Smalltalk (in name) is baggage and Pharo is not Smalltalk. And that >>>>> marketing Pharo as Smalltalk is bad. Then please be honest and change all >>>>> references in the image of Smalltalk to Pharo. Also change SmalltalkHub >>>>> to PharoHub or SmalltalkInspiredHub. >>>>> >>>>> If if not, be sincere and embrace Pharo Smalltalk. >>>>> >>>>> Long live Smalltalk. >>>>> >>>>> Jimmie >
