>>The term toy, whether Stefan intended it to be negative or not,
>>simply isn't accurate or appropriate.
>
> Could you please suggest a better name which puts the emphazise the
> following scenario:  According to my definition, a model railway is a toy.
> People create large installations for their own enjoyment, exploring the
> world of trains and rails.  Now model railways are seldom used as a device
> to solve some special problems.  They're used as something to which you add
> some rules to create your own private game.  On the other hand, a hammer is
> typically a tool.  You can use it as a toy (again by combining the toy with
> rules to create a game) but most often, people use a hammer in a greater
> task of construction (perhaps to nail tracks of rails on a board).


In the interest of avoiding a flame war, suffice it to say that I 
disagree with the applicability of Stefan's analogy to a "model 
railroad," though I agree joyfully that Squeak can be used in this 
way.

As noted in my prior posting, I have used Squeak to create a complex 
application remarkably quickly using a plurality of development 
hardward seamlessly, and the experience has convinced me that 
Stefan's characterization of Squeak as a "toy" is, at best, naive. 
If he is inclined to try using the tool to his own ends, and 
hopefully to improve it, he is welcome to do so.

Having said that, I note that while we have had some points of 
agreement and disagreement in our postings, it seems unlikely that 
further discussion will do more than rehash old ground to no positive 
end.  As such, I am inclined to simply agree to disagree on this 
point.