Dan Ingalls wrote:
> I'm split on this topic.  From the inside it looks this way, but
> at this point, we have few resources, few funding sources, and
> not exactly a dominating position in the world.  So I see a need
> for a coherent focus if we want to become a going concern.  I
> sure wouldn't want to try "driving" the thing, but it may be
> worth trying to coordinate things better than we have done so far.

I'm in agreement on this point.  It is always best to focus on a particular
problem domain to start, then once you achieve momentum, branch out into
other areas (the "beach head" cliche).  It is at that point where the more
practical concerns addressed by StSq become critical.  Squeak seems well on
it's way to improving the medium for mind amplification, and squeakland is
an excellent place to showcase it all.  Squeak will gain recognition for its
unique approach to computation, and it needs efforts like StSq to make sure
that when the tires get kicked, the shiny new car doesn't come crashing down
in a heap of metal.

It's all very exciting to witness.

- Stephen