Jose San Leandro wrote > If an opinion from a newcomer is useful, I'm not so obsessed about how > popular Smalltalk is.
Very useful, and not just a newbie opinion. On the Amber list, Richard Eng, who is working to make Smalltalk mainstream, was disappointed by his blog post stats. I responded in agreement with you [2]: > Unix, which Alan Kay describes as "a budget of bad ideas" (and I > agree), took almost 50 years to take over the world [1]. Maybe you're 10 > years too early to make Smalltalk popular ;) But seriously, I think you're > using the wrong metrics. The great majority of people are instrumental > thinkers i.e. they judge every new thing by how useful it is to their > current goals. This is the definition of the Pink Plane. Given that the > real value of Smalltalk is that it's prototype Dynabook software, which is > way into the blue plane of computing, convincing the masses of its value > is extremely unlikely - and not required! If say 10% of programmers are > interested in the inherent value of ideas, and we capture this 10%, that > will be more than enough critical mass. And given your report of relative > popularity of your blog posts, 570/7000 = 8% doesn't sound too far off ;) > > BTW I'm not saying don't try to reach as many people as possible, only to > reframe what failure looks like. > > [1] > http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/05/07/is-unix-now-the-most-successful-operating-system-of-all-time/ [2] http://forum.world.st/A-Gentle-Introduction-to-Amber-tp4831244p4833048.html ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Bill-Gross-The-single-biggest-reason-why-startups-succeed-tp4838376p4838548.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
