[Edu-sig] Alan Kay - another one of his ideas

[Andreas Raab]

Guido van Rossum wrote:
> In my line of reasoning, the WWW isn't taking anything away because
> 99% of its users didn't have any computer access before the WWW.

That is certainly true for those users. But does that mean we should 
ignore all that has been achieved in the past and start over assuming 
that history has never existed?

> So
> I'm objecting against your "proof" that the WWW took away what you had
> on the C16 based on the C16's superior capacity; that's like blaming
> modern medicine for world hunger.

It would rather be blaming modern medicine for ignoring natural cures 
from the past that have been proven to work. Say, like a hot bath and 
good night's sleep for a common cold.

>> I am not comparing apples and oranges, I am comparing platforms. And
>> that last statement shows precisely where we differ. I don't look at the
>> web as just icing on the cake, to me it's not a supplementary medium. To
>> me it's the whole deal, a platform in and of its own. And when you
>> compare the platforms, the web (maybe with a PC terminal for access) and
>> my C16 you'll find pretty quickly there are lots of things that you
>> can't do on the web. Just go into one of them Internet-Cafes and try
>> installing some software of your own choosing. Or, even worse, try this
>> in a corporate or school setting. You'll notice quickly that you don't
>> have a platform - you have a terminal and the web is the platform.
> 
> The platforms differ. You seem to forget all the things you couldn't
> do with a C16 that are effortless on the WWW (like sharing something
> you wrote with millions of people, or storing thousands of 1000x1600
> color photographs, or email).

Agreed. There are *tons* of things that you can do on the Web that you 
couldn't even dream of on that machine! Coincidentally, I never claimed 
any different ;-)

But then again, does that mean I must close my eyes and pretend that 
nothing ever existed before the web? Does it mean that because the web 
is great (which it is) it can't possibly be criticized?

>>> Why do you keep referring to blogs as limited? They are a 1000x more
>>> versatile and accessible than the word processors of the 80s and 90s.
>>> You seem to be forgetting that.
>> Peace. I said "limited authoring capabilities" and given that even today
>> most blog hosting services offer little more than an input field for
>> writing HTML code I think I can defend that position ;-)
> 
> Did your C16 support hyperlinks, multiple fonts, sizes, colors and
> automatic table lay-out?

Not my C16 (not enough pixels) but my Amiga 500 from the late 80s (or 
was this already early 90s?). And not everything, no. It didn't have 
Hyperlinks and table layouts (though I'm not sure this is a disadvantage 
;-) But I could draw a picture. I could make music.

>>> I'm all for wanting to improve the web. I just don't accept the claim
>>> that it's somehow a regression.
>> That's because you are comparing Apples and Oranges, and I am comparing
>> platforms.
> 
> Let's just agree that it's a different perspective. I still think the
> claim that the WWW is a regression is only possible from a very
> privileged POV.

Well, we certainly have different perspectives and if you choose to 
ignore the past that's of course up to you ;-)

>>> I've had a hard time finding the exact software that was used here. I
>>> found a Squeak installer that was supposed to run in my browser but
>>> didn't install correctly on my PowerBook. Could you publish some
>>> fool-proof URLs for people to experiment with?
>> I'm not sure which "exact software" you are referring to, we've been
>> touching a couple of things in this discussion.
> 
> Well, for a start I'd like to see what Alan Kay used in his keynote.
> I'm guessing that's Logowiki.

Since I didn't see the talk I'm not sure what he used (Alan uses a 
variety of things in his talks). If you remember anything specific from 
the presentation it would help.

>> For Logowiki,
>> http://logowiki.net is the reference and there is no plugin required.
>> For Squeak itself, there is Squeak.org which does not offer a webbrowser
>> plugin installation. Our educational site, Squeakland.org offers such an
>> install, see http://www.squeakland.org/plugin/download.html which is a
>> custom Squeak version intended for use with eToys.
> 
> And eToys itself? The web of different/similar sites is confusing. A
> taxonomy of the Squeak world would be helpful.

It's actually not that hard: Squeak.org provides the "main" Squeak 
version and is heavily geared towards (Smalltalk) programming. That's 
for example why it doesn't provide explicit installers (it simply 
assumes that you can figure out how to deal with the four files you're 
getting ;-)

Squeakland provides a version that is based on Squeak.org and adds some 
additional packages, makes it a little harder to get to some programmer 
facilities and provides an install that includes both a standalone and a 
browser install. It is intended for educational environments.

The eToys are actually included in both versions though typically the 
Squeak.org versions tend to be slightly more broken and out of date 
because our main attention for eToys is with the Squeakland user base.

Cheers,
   - Andreas