Justin,

In this OS as Squeak Schema you describe, how do you answer this question?

If a hen and a half lays an egg and a half in a day and a half, how many
waffles does it take to cover a dog house?

Jim

PS: Justin, you may need to supply some links to other material in an
appropriate manner here.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Justin Walsh" <jwalsh at bigpond.net.au>
To: <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 3:16 PM
Subject: Re: I have a dream


> For Smalltalk to be an OS it must recognise who it is Operating for:
> The  Three Threads that a true OS must serve are:
>
> Designers   "none available"
> Logicians    "none available"
> Builders     "components and objects" ,com > .net
>
> Let's face it bricklaying (components and objects) is an important skill
> but,
> insufficiant for Designers and Logicians.
>
> "......
> To me, the importance of both of these lies more in their approach to
> stating and rationalizing design principles, rather than the particular
> decisions that were made".
> A.K.
> Is Smalltalk to remain an OO and GUI version of the old CP/M?
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jimmie Houchin" <jhouchin at texoma.net>
> To: <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
> Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 8:56 AM
> Subject: Re: I have a dream
>
>
> > Smalltalk/Squeak being the OS is a nice idea and in many arenas very
> > reasonable. The difficulty is in using non-Smalltalk software in such.
> >
> > My wife and I homeschool our children. There are many educational titles
> > which my wife requires. I can't even move her to Linux until I satisfy
> > that requirement. :)
> > Plus the a few of her personal apps with features she's accustomed to.
> >
> > For me the strong appeal of Squeak is its full programming capabilities
> > and its graphical abilities.
> > I can do much of what I want with Python, OCaml or something similar.
> > The problem instantly becomes what to use for the GUI. If I were only
> > interested in Linux or Windows, I could happily go my merry way. However
> > I like Macs better than Windows. I use Windows at work. I bought 4 Macs
> > and 1 Linux box. Crossplatform means something to me. This limits my GUI
> > choice. Then what happens with then next great OS arrives. What GUI
> > platform then. I have reasonable faith that Squeak will be there or can
> > go there.
> >
> > I think on the desktop it would be difficult for Squeak to be the OS for
> > these reasons. But I'm all for it. :)
> >
> > I would like to see Squeak as the OS as a choice. There will be those of
> > us who could live within its constraints. Those who do will expand the
> > boundaries of Squeak thereby opening the doors for others to make that
> > choice.
> >
> > I would love to see a good performing handheld with Squeak as OS with
> > all the proper apps.
> > I just read this today. Can Squeak compete?
> >
>
http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/main/0,14179,2821294-3,00.htm
> l
> >
> > What about Squeak as the OS for the server?
> >
> > Jimmie Houchin
> >
> >
> > "C. Gable Watts" wrote:
> > >
> > >>I have a dream.
> > >>In my mind I would like to see many of the productivity type apps
> > >>with a high quality Squeak implementation.
> > >>Email, web-browser, word-processors, spreadsheets, PIM, etc.
> > >>At work I am on a WinME machine, at home LinuxBox, wife and
> > >>children on Macs.
> > >>
> > >>Squeak supercedes the OS. Squeak can provide for reasonably seemless
> > >>transition from one OS to another. As anyone who has used computers
> > >>for any length of time can attest, OSes come OSes go. However Squeak
> > >>can remain because it can ride on the wave.
> > >>
> > >>It would be nice if most of the truly important or critical apps
> > >>were Squeak based.
> > >>Anyone else share this dream. :)
> > >
> > >I think all of us that have been Smalltalkers for a long time share
> > >this dream.  I've always stated it slightly differently.
> > >I want to use a machine where Smalltalk IS the operating system
> > >(as it was designed and as Squeak is fully capable of being).
> > >And, of course, to have that I'd need all my usual apps built in
Squeak.
> > >Many other have had this dream and have implemented huge parts of it in
> > >Squeak and in other Smalltalks.
> > >
> > >There was even several Smalltalk-based computers.
> > >Only one that I know of (Momenta) made it into production but I know of
> > >people who worked on other ones.
> > >
> > > C. Gable Watts
> > > Web:  http://members.shaw.ca/Gable
> >
> >
>
>
>
>