Frank Lesser wrote:
> 
> Squeak is an island of software, how to attract people to come to this
> island ?
> Software-gurus, Smalltalkers, AI'lers will manage.
> 
> But an ordinary programmer ?
> 
> Our idea was to enable Native-Windows Programming for Squeak.
> 
> So an ordinary programmer can do some ordinary programming work for
> MS-Windows.
> But then he will have opportunity to discover the "rest" of Squeak.
> 
> By not ignoring Windows, we can convince programmers much easier.
> 
> Some ideas for getting more and more people to Squeak:
> 
>         Don't ignore .NET - We at LSW are already developing .NET apps with
> Smalltalk.
>         Create tools which generate VB, JavaScript, etc. from Smalltalk
>         Create tools to import/export Perl, Ruby, Phyton
>         Improve Flash-stuff - make tools for generic-Flash generation.
> 
>         The idea of having all in one is quite resonable. 99% of Windows-apps are
> not single-     exe. This is a mess - for the user which is forced to update,
> update and update.
>         You can expect - after some time they will stop to work - because
>         DLL-hell, even MS start to take out API's in Windows-XP which were present
> in NT.
> 
>         A good reason to have all in one. A Squeak application will run in 5 years.
>         This can be not expected from Java, Non single-exe's or even .NET apps.
> 
>         And it is easy to achieve - write a tool which allows to put an Image as a
> resource in     the exe - if there is no Image - Squeak can read this
> resource-image.

I think a clear distinction between Squeak and the other world
is desirable. In a system that always have authoring on it's 
not good to look and behave like something that's very unauthorable.
I would like to push Squeak in the other direction were more 
instance modification of the interface is simpler so new tools 
can be made on the fly. 

I think we are back to the killer app discussion e.g. when Squeak gets
good enough it won't matter that it is different.

Karl