> It is my belief that Squeak's "unique" user interface means a killer
> application will never be built using it.  I cannot believe that
> anybody in their right mind would try to distribute an application
> that would look so "different" compared to the straight and narrow
> of, e.g., the Mac or Windows look and feel.

The Windows "look and feel" was of course intended to match that of the Mac,
which itself was designed to simulate that of the Smalltalk demo Jobs saw at
PARC.  Both are weak copies of that GUI, which was just a small part of the
*language* of which Squeak is the direct descendant.

To say that Squeak cannot succeed unless it becomes practically
indistinguishable from that which it should replace is reminiscent of the
argument that automobiles could not succeed unless they looked like
carriages.

Squeak is not just another medium in which to build Windows or Mac
applications; that's far too limited a viewpoint.  That's why your second
statement, "On the other hand, when you think about it, isn't Squeak itself
the 'killer app'?" is so much closer to the mark (and, coincidentally,
exactly what I was going to say. :-)  The trick, then, is to get the word
out.  IMHO, at this point Squeak needs evangelists more than developers.

SqueakNews is wonderful, but as someone has pointed out it can't catch the
eye of someone browsing the magazine rack at the store or the library.
Print magazines are always on the lookout for material; which one (or ones)
might be ripe for a Squeak article or column?  Is there a
technology-oriented education-related periodical which could be approached?
How about magazines aimed at bright and adventurous kids?  Can we get Squeak
mentioned in any syndicated columns, radio shows, etc?  (Anyone here know
Kim Komando or David Suzuki?)  And how about promotional items like bumper
stickers, T-shirts, etc.?  Trite, perhaps, but a proven means for gaining
mindshare.

Gary