> Most people don't have this deep insight in Java (a lot of > even don't want to) and still can create greate applications.

Without meaning to sound petty, I've yet to see the first great Java application, even one created by someone with deep insight therein or thereto.  I've seen a fair amount of toy demos, and some reasonable server-side work, but very little that I would consider to be a great (or even servicable) application.

Nor can I agree that the Javadoc base is so all-fired wonderful.  There is little information available in Javadoc that I can't get with a few keypresses in Squeak, and I can always printOut if I need to get something static on paper.  Moreover, my experience with browsers is that they are slow, clunky, and only give me some of what I want.  In Squeak, I can browse, execute, inspect, explore and sub-browse pretty much at will.

No reasonable person can say that the Squeak documentation is great.  It isn't, and needs much improvement.  But it is getting there, books are being written, folks are undertaking to write more doco, and in time will do fine.  Sun spent a small fortune on techwriters for Java as part of their promotion, and it paid off.  There is no such constituency in Squeak.

On the other hand, I'm not convinced that Java can or will ever realize its promises -- performance is still spotty, platform-dependance beyond trivial programs is almost as difficult in Java as in C, and its not so easy to write Java code, IMHO.  Squeak has already exceeded my expectations in many of these areas.

And squeak is fun to boot!