And none of the XML and web technologies sell as much as Angry Birds and Candy Crash Saga :D
I think you underestimate people. True Web is very popular, but lets not forget all the promises a decade ago that we will completely move to the cloud in a few years and we are still desktop all the way. Only desktop has moved to mobile devices which none could predict it at the time. On the other hand Smalltalk was not rejected because it was beautiful , it was rejected because it failed to adjust to current demands. It remained a good proof of concept and not much more than that. It opened the door , but never truly entered the room. On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 6:01 PM, Andreas Wacknitz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Am 07.02.2015 um 16:18 schrieb David T. Lewis <[email protected]>: > > > > On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 01:54:51PM +0100, Marcus Denker wrote: > >> > >>> On 05 Feb 2015, at 10:12, Marcus Denker <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 05 Feb 2015, at 10:04, Marcus Denker <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>> Another way to see it: How would the original Smalltalk be designed if > they would have had 4GB RAM in 1978? > >>> > >>> What fascinates me still is that Smalltalk used the existing resources > (even building their own machines) to an > >>> extreme, while today we are obsessed to find reasons why we can not do > anything that makes the system > >>> slower or use more memory than yesterday. And that even with resources > growing every year??? > >>> > >>> This is why we e.g. now have a meta object describing every instance > variable in Pharo. I am sure there are people > >>> who will see these ~7000 objects as pure waste??? while I would say > that we have already *now* the resources to be > >>> even more radical. > >>> > >> > >> Seemingly I still can not explain what I mean in away that people get > it, so please just ignore this mail. > >> > >> Marcus > >> > > > > Your point makes good sense to me. In 1978, a system in which a low-level > > integer was represented as an object with behavior would have been > perceived > > as a rediculously wasteful idea. And can you imagine someone seriously > > suggesting something so wasteful as automatic memory management? > > > > So if the "same" system was being designed today, it might very well > include > > new concepts that today are perceived as wasteful. Some of those concepts > > might turn out to be very good thing once we get used to them. > The times have changed. Today waste seems to be a requirement. > Whatever application you have - reimplement it using „web technologies“. > Whatever data you have - store it in „the cloud“ and tunnel its > transportation over port 80, > gain extra points for using XML here. > > Today, beautiful small things like Smalltalk are ignored by the masses and > being laughed at. > > Andreas >
