Last time I tried that project I got into the object browser and from there got lost, lacking context about what objects I needed and what methods to call on them. The browser will show you everything but you have to know what you want and where to go to find it.

You might be interested in this paper: "Unix, Plan 9 and the Lurking Smalltalk" (https://www.humprog.org/~stephen/research/papers/kell19unix-...)

Cuis Smalltalk and related implementations are rather self-contained systems to the point they seemed walled off from the rest of the system, making it difficult to develop Smalltalk programs using external tools.

However, there's something compelling about the idea of a Smalltalk (or Lisp) OS running on bare hardware, where everything runs in a single address space. I've been thinking about this for a few years, but I haven't had time to pursue these ideas. Some ideas from the 1994 paper "Sharing and Protection in a Single-Address-Space Operating System" (https://homes.cs.washington.edu/~levy/opal.pdf) could be applicable to add some security to a Smalltalk OS.

> but I will never get used to using a graphical VM and UI to develop ordinary programs.

I guess that by "ordinary programs" you mean command-line TUI programs.

Being able to explore and inspect helps whether you are writing GUI or TUI.

When you write Smalltalk code with a Smalltalk IDE, your actions have an implicit context. If you write Smalltalk code with a plain text editor, you must provide that missing context. Something like the fileOut format —

    !BenchmarksGame class methodsFor: 'initialize-release'!

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.

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

My first encounter with ST was at a Macintosh event at college in ‘85.

And there was a fellow there with a Mac Plus, and he had the Apple ST image running on it.

The Apple ST image was a descendant of the original Xerox image. This is the same image that became Squeak. Quite the heritage.

The first the the guy showed me was how easy it was to change the width of the scroll bar. A simple tweak and, voila, the scroll bar changed. This worked particularly well because in the original UI, the scroll bar was a popup (unlike most are today).

It was a dynamic demo to be sure to get that kind of reactivity to development. Made an impression to be sure.

I once crashed Squeak by telling it that true:=false

It had a 7 inch CRT with 640x480 resolution.

It’s definitely very unique and proves that the Macintosh wasn’t the first computer with nice typography ;)

Perhaps Lively Kernel?

https://www.lively-kernel.org/presentations/