J J wrote:
>> No tut-tut. Remember, we weren't vendors. You have to look at this 
>> (and other decisions) in relation to the big fish we were trying to 
>> fry (which was NOT to build a "free Smalltalk" even though that's what 
>> it unfortunately degenerated to).
> 
> Are you saying that squeak being open source/free is a bad thing?  

No, I'm saying that we failed to achieve what we were aiming for. Squeak 
being open and free is a very good thing but I'd rather have a media 
authoring tool used by a huge number of kids than a "free Smalltalk" 
used by a diminishingly small number of programmers.

Cheers,
   - Andreas