> I don't believe it rejected either thing. [files/command line] I understood that you believe that. My point is that you are wrong. The point of files and th

> I don't believe it rejected either thing. [files/command line] I understood that you believe that. My point is that you are wrong. The point of files and the command line is not to have some sort of analogous mechanisms somewhere, no matter how far you had to stretch the analogies, and you had to stretch them pretty much to or slightly beyond the breaking point. The point is to be integrated into the Unix filesystem and the Unix command line (or the Windows one, doesn't matter). Because they are integration mechanisms. > It blows my mind that people still think Unixisms are somehow some kind of universal apex of computing Well, that should blow your mind, because they are not the "apex", they are the lowest common denominator, the minimum that you need to play. But if you don't adhere to this minimum, you can't play. And so Smalltalk got left behind. > [..] Smalltalk is exactly that it takes the identity between programming language runtime and operating system seriously The point is that this, while an attractive idea, and a locally productive one, it is not actually a good one, because it creates isolated worlds. And it turns out that not being isolated is more important than being locally optimal. Just like the image is a great hack, because it provides so many things "for free" that other environments have to work really hard at. But, paradoxically, it turns out the price is still too high. Which doesn't mean that other systems couldn't and shouldn't learn from the image. Just not duplicate it. What Objective-S is trying to do is combine the two, because I don't think you have to isolate yourself and try to be the OS to achieve the good parts of Smalltalk. And no, GNU-Smalltalk wasn't it, otherwise I would have just used that.