4 ms·

I was always amazed that the smalltalk environment looks like a complete computer control - a paradise for a programmer and a hacker, and a creator. It's surpri

I was always amazed that the smalltalk environment looks like a complete computer control - a paradise for a programmer and a hacker, and a creator. It's surprising that it didn't take off. Probably too much openness reflects the internal openness of the smalltalk creator to the world, but the outside world, unfortunately, did not reciprocate. Especially if we pay attention to Apple's success with completely closed devices, suitable only for content consumption.

badc0ffee 1y ago
Suitable only for content consumption - only if you define content narrowly as software/apps.
- criddell 1y ago
  And when you use that narrow definition you have to remember that all those apps were made on Apple devices. A broader definition of content would include things you read, listen to, or watch and lots of writers, musicians, and film makers do a lot of their work on Apple hardware. The suitable only for content consumption claim just doesn’t hold up.
pjmlp 1y ago
Smalltalk as platform did take off, that is why the famous GoF book uses Smalltalk and C++, even though many think Java is somehow on a book that predates it for about three years. All the IBM's Visual Age line of IDEs were written in Smalltalk, and in a way it was the ".NET" of OS/2. SOM (OS/2 COM) supported it natively, and one biggest difference to COM is that it supports meta-classes and proper inheritance, language agnostic. What made Smalltalk lose industry mindshare was exactly Java. When it came out, some major vendors, like IBM, pivoted all the way into Java, leaving Smalltalk behind. It is no accident that Eclipse was designed by some of the GoF authors, and it is initially a rewrite of Visual Age underlying platform from Smalltalk to Java. Eclipse even to this day has a Smalltalk like code browser. It wasn't only the IDEs, some famous Java libraries, like JUnit, started their life as Smalltalk libraries. Now as full OS, yes that never really took off. Note not all Smalltalk vendors switched to Java, that is why Dolphin and Cincom Smalltalk are still around.
- igouy 1y ago
  > not all Smalltalk vendors switched to Java Cincom only acquired the VisualWorks Smalltalk software after ParcPlace had unsuccessfully rebranded as ObjectShare in response to the emergence of free as in beer Java.
  - speedbird 1y ago
    Lots of things went wrong. ParcPlace acquired competitor Digitalk and tried to create a Frankenstein hybrid - jigsaw? - that royally screwed things up. Around the time, the industry was very exercised about a number of features that alledgedly made PP Smalltalk bad: - non-native widgets (emulated) for windows - who cares now; - principal deployment as a single process, not natively multi-threaded, using internal virtual threads - which actually scales better; - must be able to run in the browser like java applets - :-) - can't get my head round "image" model, must have individual files This was all FUD. Developing in VisualWorks with Envy (Gemstone) centralised version control was a blissful experience I haven't seen bettered. But yes, Smalltalk and C++ faced off in industry for a number of years for the crown and then along came Java on the OSS tidal wave that effectively destroyed the business model for VisualWorks that relied on expensive licences.
    - pjmlp 1y ago
      Ironically the whole way modern IDEs work with virtual filesystems, or the LSP approach, aren't much different than putting an image like layer on top of traditional filesystems. And still don't have quite a C++ IDE experience that somehow comes close to Visual Age for C++ v4 (from Smalltalk side), or Energize C++ (from Lisp side).
    - igouy 1y ago
      > Lots of things went wrong. https://wirfs-brock.com/allen/posts/914 https://wirfs-brock.com/allen/posts/914 > non-native widgets Digitalk’s Visual Smalltalk and IBM’s VisualAge provided native widgets.
  - pjmlp 1y ago
    Thanks for the overview. Yeah, still it is quite surprising, in a positive way, that a few vendors manage to stay in business, despite all the reasons not to.

badc0ffee 1y ago

Suitable only for content consumption - only if you define content narrowly as software/apps.

criddell 1y ago
And when you use that narrow definition you have to remember that all those apps were made on Apple devices. A broader definition of content would include things you read, listen to, or watch and lots of writers, musicians, and film makers do a lot of their work on Apple hardware. The suitable only for content consumption claim just doesn’t hold up.

pjmlp 1y ago

Smalltalk as platform did take off, that is why the famous GoF book uses Smalltalk and C++, even though many think Java is somehow on a book that predates it for about three years. All the IBM's Visual Age line of IDEs were written in Smalltalk, and in a way it was the ".NET" of OS/2. SOM (OS/2 COM) supported it natively, and one biggest difference to COM is that it supports meta-classes and proper inheritance, language agnostic. What made Smalltalk lose industry mindshare was exactly Java. When it came out, some major vendors, like IBM, pivoted all the way into Java, leaving Smalltalk behind. It is no accident that Eclipse was designed by some of the GoF authors, and it is initially a rewrite of Visual Age underlying platform from Smalltalk to Java. Eclipse even to this day has a Smalltalk like code browser. It wasn't only the IDEs, some famous Java libraries, like JUnit, started their life as Smalltalk libraries. Now as full OS, yes that never really took off. Note not all Smalltalk vendors switched to Java, that is why Dolphin and Cincom Smalltalk are still around.

igouy 1y ago
> not all Smalltalk vendors switched to Java Cincom only acquired the VisualWorks Smalltalk software after ParcPlace had unsuccessfully rebranded as ObjectShare in response to the emergence of free as in beer Java.
- speedbird 1y ago
  Lots of things went wrong. ParcPlace acquired competitor Digitalk and tried to create a Frankenstein hybrid - jigsaw? - that royally screwed things up. Around the time, the industry was very exercised about a number of features that alledgedly made PP Smalltalk bad: - non-native widgets (emulated) for windows - who cares now; - principal deployment as a single process, not natively multi-threaded, using internal virtual threads - which actually scales better; - must be able to run in the browser like java applets - :-) - can't get my head round "image" model, must have individual files This was all FUD. Developing in VisualWorks with Envy (Gemstone) centralised version control was a blissful experience I haven't seen bettered. But yes, Smalltalk and C++ faced off in industry for a number of years for the crown and then along came Java on the OSS tidal wave that effectively destroyed the business model for VisualWorks that relied on expensive licences.
  - pjmlp 1y ago
    Ironically the whole way modern IDEs work with virtual filesystems, or the LSP approach, aren't much different than putting an image like layer on top of traditional filesystems. And still don't have quite a C++ IDE experience that somehow comes close to Visual Age for C++ v4 (from Smalltalk side), or Energize C++ (from Lisp side).
  - igouy 1y ago
    > Lots of things went wrong. https://wirfs-brock.com/allen/posts/914 https://wirfs-brock.com/allen/posts/914 > non-native widgets Digitalk’s Visual Smalltalk and IBM’s VisualAge provided native widgets.
- pjmlp 1y ago
  Thanks for the overview. Yeah, still it is quite surprising, in a positive way, that a few vendors manage to stay in business, despite all the reasons not to.