On 2013-06-02 07:26, [email protected] wrote:
> Bahman Movaqar wrote:
>> On 2013-06-01 10:40, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>   
>>> Hi guys
>>>
>>> I think that we are doing a poor job selling ourselves. I think that the 
>>> quality of our community is in 
>>> general excellent but we do not sell it. I think that we are not using well 
>>> the association. 
>>> I think that this is REALLY important for a larger adoption of Pharo that 
>>> the world 
>>> knows that we have excellent guys around that can consult. 
>>>
>>> So what do you think?
>>> I would use the association in a much clearer way.
>>>     
>>
>> I'd like to mention a few facts:
>> 1.  I used to think Smalltalk is dead.
>> 2.  I used to think Smalltalk, even if not dead, is only being used in
>> universities.
>> 3.  I used to think Smalltalk world is far behind the modern web
>> aspects/framework/technologies.
>>
>> It's been less than a week that I started to give Smalltalk (Pharo) a
>> try -and to be honest I chose to do so just to see what is Seaside.  And
>> to my utmost surprise all of the above assumptions turned out to be
>> moronic per-assumptions (though hugely popular).
>>
>> I come from the Java world which I'd say is the richest and most
>> evolving ecosystem for web development.  But I was shocked by design,
>> quality, simplicity, cleanness and feature-set of Seaside.  And if you
>> ask me nothing matches it even in the wide range of Java web frameworks.
>>
>> I believe, Seaside is a sample of what Smalltalk world has to offer
>> (correct me if I'm wrong) and it's a real pitty that frustrated
>> developers/companies using Java or .NET don't know about such a thing.
>>
>> PS:  I have some general suggestions but, honestly, I thought I'd hold
>> them as I'm not a pro Smalltalk'er :-)
>>
>>   
> Thanks for your comments Bahman.  The opinions and suggestions of
> newcomers are hugely important, since that is the market we need to sell
> into.  While your ideas might not align completely with the direction
> Pharo wants to take, by the time your are a Pro-Smalltalk'er you might
> forget your perspective today.  So it is good to share, and this is the
> forum for it.

Thanks Ben.

DISCLAIMER:  ALL OF THE FOLLOWINGS ARE JUST MY PERSONAL OPINIONS.

**  Smalltalkhub is a very good idea and it should be further developed
and promoted.  It's a place (with a slick *modern* looks) where people
like me can see that there are lots of people using Smalltalk for
serious business.

**  A very good way to promote a mature and well thought-out language
like Smalltalk/Pharo is to something serious with it and let people know
about it.  Honestly, I'd write a business application, open source it
and try to promote it on the net.
Many companies are coding in Java because the main software they
implement is written in Java.  As an example, I have to do business in
Java because the ERP for which I offer services is written in Java.  And
I know quite a lot of people/companies sticking to Java/.NET for the
same reason.

**  The name "Smalltalk" was a marketing mistake IMHO, just like Squeak
(sorry Squeak folks!)  I remember I downloaded Squeak 4-5 years back
being just curious about Smalltalk.  I ran it and the first thing I saw
was a mouse as the background of the environment.  It may sound stupid
but, honestly, that seriously hurt my curiosity.  Pharo is much better
in terms of looks (I don't know about the internals).  These things,
though very unimportant or even fun for the existing Smalltalk
community, have great effect on newcomers.


> What was it that first caught your attention about Seaside?

1.  Simplicity
==============
I almost knew no Smalltalk, let alone Seaside.  Following only the first
6 chapters of Seaside Tutorial[1] and taking a very quick glance at the
next 3 chapters I was already coding!  This is *not* something one may
get in Java world: assuming that one already knows Java *well*, she has
to read twice as much as tutorials and still without the help of an IDE
to automate all the boilerplate she's completely helpless.

2.  Design
==========
AFAIK component-oriented design is the hottest trend in the web
framework design and Seaside has got very well.  In Java world, despite
numerous -I mean it- web frameworks, there are only 2-3 ones that have
been designed this way, namely GWT, ZK and Wicket.

3.  Quality
===========
The quality of the design is outstanding.  The idea of components
calling each other, i.e. `call:', and the notion of tasks makes web
development a lot easier.  Not that it's not possible to do so in other
web frameworks but it's not as easy and straight-forward.
And data binding as easy as using `on:of:' is just a breeze from heavens!

4.  Cleanness
=============
To me Seaside looks like a no nonsense web framework.  No
XML/boilerplate configuration and just enough of client/server side
control over the code makes it one of the *few* good ones.
Again, I being able to code after a few chapters of *tutorial* clearly
speaks about cleanness.

5.  Feature set
===============
Component-based architecture, encapsulation of the Script from Hell
(Javascript), no setup, halos, that /creepy/ code modification from
within the browser, ... Heck, I'm already drooling :-)

6.  Light-weight
================
In Java world, unless you're one of those few tough know-it-all gurus,
you *cannot* easily develop a web application on a machine with less
than 2GB of RAM.  Heck my Pharo image running Seaside in development
mode and all the windows open inside Pharo has cost me just ~80MB RAM!
Unbelievable!


[1] http://www.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/hirschfeld/seaside


-- 
Bahman Movaqar  (http://BahmanM.com)
ERP Evaluation, Implementation, Deployment Consultant

Reply via email to