> Not for blind kids. That is a very good point, and yet another reason why it would be good for something else other than Scratch to take off (particularly in

> Not for blind kids. That is a very good point, and yet another reason why it would be good for something else other than Scratch to take off (particularly in schools). I honestly am not 100% sure what makes Scratch click with people, my best bet is it's the community features, which are one of the few parts of Scratch I think are reasonably good. But it could be other stuff too. Quorum looks interesting, but I don't know if the problem is that mainstream languages like Lisp/JS/C are too complicated or if it's something else. I feel like both of my nieces would be capable of writing JS without too much trouble if they actually wanted to (but they don't and I'm not going to force them). I also vaguely feel like Scratch is straight-up harder to work with than JS for some problems. So I'm torn with whether the compromises it makes are helping it be popular, or if it's popular in spite of them. Scratch (on top of being a drag-and-drop block language) is also very visually oriented in the types of programs it encourages people to write. And that might be a contributing factor for its popularity with sighted kids, but obviously is not going to translate very well for blind/vision-impaired kids even if the interface itself was made more accessible. I strongly suspect Flash would have had the same problem back in the day (assuming that was accessible, which... I haven't checked but I also suspect it probably wasn't). I wonder if there could be some cool things that would be possible to do nowadays with pre-packaging a bunch of decent-quality sound effects in an engine or setting up some of the AI-driven voice tools that have been popping up online and letting kids start programming with them.