On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 07:08:31AM -0400, Andrew C. Greenberg wrote:
> > in these areas.  Squeak actually has a much better chance, since 
> > most 
> > of the bits and pieces already exist (key bindings, customizable 
> > LAF, 
> > OS interfaces, GUI widgets, help system); with Squeak, it's less 
> > about 
> > programming and more about packaging. 
>
> I don't get this.  Why is Squeak "more about packaging?"  To me, Squeak 
> is more about the amazing power it has under the hood.

Ummm... you misunderstood; what I was suggesting was: "making Squeak more
beginner-friendly is more about packaging existing pieces, rather than
programming a lot of new functionality, because the pieces themselves
already exist and do not need to be written from scratch (unlike, say,
if you had to do the same for Java)".

Thomas.