On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 18:53:13 -0700, Alan Lovejoy  
<squeak-dev.sourcery at forum-mail.net> wrote:

> A megabyte!? Whoa!
>
> Faster, better, cheaper: choose any two :-)

Since I'm not paying, how about faster, better and smaller?<s>

> The current size of the virgin Squeak image would have shocked me silly  
> back
> in the late '80s.

Seems to me the Squeak is probably lightweight compared to VAST. But  
perhaps the acronym was self-fulfillng.

I'm intrigued by the articles I've read that suggest Squeak could be  
reduced to 1/10th its core size. I'd pay $50 to see that.