Sorry Jim!
Your reply tell me that we are probably on different "threads".
If you don't understand what I mean then let's us leave it at that. Someone
else may.
I cannot give you any links to any material that could solve the seeming
paradox that you perceive.
Yours respectfully
Justin
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Benson" <jb at speed.net>
To: <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 10:35 AM
Subject: [OT] Re: I have a dream


> 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
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>