Computerchannel.de: Squeak 3.0 tested

G.J.Tielemans at dinkel.utwente.nl G.J.Tielemans at dinkel.utwente.nl
Thu Sep 27 22:00:38 UTC 2001


> --On Thursday, September 27, 2001 8:21 PM +0200 
> G.J.Tielemans at dinkel.utwente.nl wrote:
> 
> > No, you have to separate all those good intentions and 
> efforts of you and
> > all the other builders AND the way all this work shows to 
> the world: This
> > article suggest that...
> 
> Herm?
> 
> I, personally, haven't lifted a finger to make Squeak into a 
> Children's Programming Tool :)

Back to your roots Bijan, ask Alan where the name Smalltalk stands for,
ask him in which way Papert did inspire the name Smalltalk and the mission
behind it....

Many people miss the point when Alan talks about children of all ages...
 
> Of course, one can *always* say, "Oh well, the failure of the 
> writer was the failure of us to "market" to the writer..." 
> Baloney. Given that Squeak has *not* been rolled out as a 
> kid's thing yet (i.e., there *is* no end-user release), the 
> author 1) should have discerned that (not hard), 2) taken 
> that into account when evaluating it.

On the moment you say Squeak is a modern Smalltalk you inherit its
history...
...Including the myths and the historical misconceptions:

Myth I: It should be children's play.. 

But if you dare to start with Squeak they offer you a full toolbox..
and on the moment you try to open it it turns out to be a Box of Pandora:
And then youy say: everything is already there....yes yes, I know it but I
cannot find it,
what is the logic in the toolbox-organization? How are methods grouped in
concept-groups?
Where should a newby start.. 

You have to kind of tutrials: the guide tours - like the racecar on
Squeakland (example needs still to be repaired) - that make you hungry: The
magazine would give these a quick look and then write the article

And the second type - when you are hungry are the "sit on my shoulder when I
am on work" (The master-assistent approach) 
(I prefer tutorials where authors try to show you how they make
design-mistakes in the first round and then in a second round 'discover' the
mistake and explain the use of a better method. (I thought it was in the
Rolodex?)



> Not that that would require *softening* the evaluation of the 
> system as is. 
> It's not ready for mom and dad to download it for junior. We 
> all know that. 
> But one would have thought that the point of such an article 
> is to investigate the various bits of the system.
> 
> Take this:
> 
> " For children, the target group, Squeak is hardly suitable to enhance
>   creativity with the PC. Thus we still have to wait for a novice
>   programming language suitable for children à la Logo."
> 
> This is sheer, unadulterated baloney. *Smalltalk* can work 
> well for children.
> 
> Can you sit them in front of a raw squeak system and walk 
> away? No. But show me a logo system for which that is true?
> 
Got you, now you make the comparison with Logo yourself...

> Or this:
> 
> "Real tests with the target group (children) as well as with 
> experienced
>  programmers, however, show a less satisfying picture.  
> Squeak admittedly
>  presents itself with a simple and, after a second or third 
> try, intuitive
>  interface, although this mainly applies to functions like painting or
>  music. But as soon as it gets to programming itself, not only the
>  environment appears to be complex and comparatively 
> outdated, but also the
>  work with Squeak itself confirms this impression."
> 
That hurts and is not fair, I agree with you.

> I would love to know a bit more about the testing 
> methodology. Is this the system browser, the package browser, 
> tiles, omniuser, and active essay, etc. etc. etc.
> 
> I write articles about stuff that itsn't always well 
> documented. Lack of documentation or presentation is, of 
> course, an issue. But making judgements about various bits of 
> the system based on what seems to be a lack of understanding 
> is a flaw in the author, IMHO.
> 
My children discover always new functions in my remote-controls that are not
mentioned
in the manual:
So, every time you cannot find any statement about translation in another
language in the manual, and you assume it is not possible, you are wrong...?

OK you are right on main points: a good journalist would ask the creators of
a product
for a comment before publishing: Who is the speaksman for Squeak? Mark,
Alan, Ted, Dan, Bijan, Jochen, Bob, Andreas, Stephen?

<snip>

> So, did we learn anything new from this article about Squeak 
> inherently or about it's public presense? I'd argue not.
>
Well the Swedish people learned that there is a possibilty to do a
translation and did start a group...
> 
> 
> On a productive type note, what *would* be cool is to try to 
> get experienced Squeaker/writers to start publishing 
> articles, or for Squeak.org/Squeakland to have pointers to, 
> say, the nuBlue book chapeter on learning with Squeak or to 
> folks who'd be willing to be "press contacts".
> 
can you please explain this a little more?

> (Also, remember that SqueakLand isn't quite up to full 
> snuff...the Squeak Central folks are still reeling from the 
> big move. One thing that would be cool is something analogous 
> to SqueakNews only targeted to kids. Maybe even 
> something like Cricket magazine! SqueakCricket would be very 
> very cool.)
>
A children's corner in Squeak magazine for a start?
> 
> Cheers,
> Bijan Parsia.
> 
> 




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list