There are a number of comments in this thread that remind me of Mark 
Twain's famous aphorism:  "It's not what we don't know that hurts us, 
it's what we know for certain that just ain't so".

<soapbox on>

First, on acronyms and initialisms.  Both are made up of the initial 
letters of words.  The Oxford Modern English Dictionary gives Ernie, 
laser and Nato as examples of acronyms, capitalized just in the way 
that I have shown.  (Ernie, the Electronic Random Number Indicator 
Equipment, selected the winners in a weekly British government 
sponsored "investment" lottery.  I'm still waiting for my number to 
come up ...)  Clearly, just because something is an acronym does not 
imply that it must be written in all caps.  The difference between 
acronym and initialism is that an acronym is intended to be 
pronounced as a word, whereas an initialism is intended to be 
pronounced as a sequence of letters.  So, BBC and DCE are initialisms.

Hence, Algol, Fortran and Lisp are not acronyms -- they are invented 
words, inspired respectively by Algorithmic Language, Formula 
Translation, and List Processing.  They were written in all capitals 
by their originators, but the modern practice is capitalize them, and 
not to give these languages a distinction that we deny to Roosevelt 
or Churchill.

Second, on converting C++ programmers to Smalltalk.  The difficulty 
is that C++ programmers often believe that they know how to do 
Object-oriented programming., and are thus resistant to learning.  A 
child who has no such illusions is often easier to teach.

Third, on Bertrand Meyer's book.  It doesn't worry me in the 
slightest that Bertrand doesn't know some detail about Algol 68.  He 
knows a lot about good OO design, and that makes his books very 
worthwhile.  But id does bother me a lot that rather than saying "I 
don't know", or better still, finding out, he would write something 
that is incorrect.  I would be interested in seeing his "glaring 
errors about Algol 68 and ... other languages"

<Soapbox off>