Thanks Ron!
Well, there are no barriers besides some work and a few more features to make
up the differences in either direction. So that is probably what should be done.
Cheers,
Alan
>________________________________
>From: Ron Teitelbaum <hor...@earthlink.net>
>To: 'Alan Kay' <alan.n...@yahoo.com>; 'Steve Thomas' <sthom...@gosargon.com>;
>'iaep' <iaep@lists.sugarlabs.org>; naturalm...@googlegroups.com; 'squeakland'
><squeakl...@squeakland.org>; scratc...@scratch.mit.edu; John Maloney
><jmalo...@media.mit.edu>
>Sent: Friday, September 2, 2011 10:47 PM
>Subject: RE: [squeakland] [IAEP] Why is Scratch more popular than Etoys?
>
>
>Hi All,
>
>Terrific answer Alan. The user experience issue is something we deal with in
>a number of different places. Our systems are very difficult to explain to
>people but once you get people in to try it they get it. The learning curve
>on OpenQwaq is very small for beginners and we have depth for advanced users
>(arguably to much depth in places, making the system more complex than it
>needs to be). The problem seems to be getting people in and keeping them
>there long enough to get it.
>
>I showed Etoys and Scratch to my daughter. She was 15 at the time I believe.
>She needed some prodding to understand Etoys but picked up Scratch right
>away. The initial concept explanation was very simple with Scratch: This is a
>thing, this is an action, this is logic. See how they are all puzzle pieces
>that fit together? The initial concept explanation for Etoys took longer.
>In both cases she was drawn to drawing and making things look interesting much
>more than the movement or logic.
>
>I love both pieces of software. Scratch is fun and easy to explain plus it
>drives people to try and understand programming by giving hints about what
>things can work together. I spent much more time enjoying Etoys. Not
>surprising considering what I do for a living, but still I was playing and
>creating much more interesting things in Etoys. The concepts are a bit harder
>to pick up because it demands more understanding from students and takes more
>mentoring from teachers but I agree with Alan: it has more depth, which is
>much more satisfying for someone with real interest.
>
>I’ve been considering a 3d version of Scratch or Etoys for OpenQwaq. I’ve
>been drawn more to Scratch then Etoys probably because I place a higher value
>on the amount of time it takes to explain and see initial results. From a
>teacher perspective this has tremendous value since it makes my job easier,
>and it allows more people to take advantage of the features if they find
>them. It would keep their interest long enough to find value and then come
>back later to try some real things for themselves. I suppose I worry that
>Etoys would be very useful but if people don’t use it long enough to see it
>work they will give up and never use it.
>
>So from my perspective as a software provider Scratch wins, but if I were
>providing the software for ME to use I would rather see Etoys. I guess I’ve
>convinced myself that there is no good answer. What matters more is not the
>software but the student and the teacher. Given a talented and motivated
>student I’d probably spend the time and energy showing them Etoys because they
>will hit the wall on Scratch much sooner. A student that shows little
>interest and really only wants the basics will do better on Scratch.
>
>Interesting discussion.
>
>All the best,
>
>Ron Teitelbaum
>Immersive Collaboration Expert
>3d Immersive Collaboration Consulting
>r...@3dicc.com
>
>From:squeakland-boun...@squeakland.org
>[mailto:squeakland-boun...@squeakland.org] On Behalf Of Alan Kay
>Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 11:34 PM
>To: Steve Thomas; iaep; naturalm...@googlegroups.com; squeakland;
>scratc...@scratch.mit.edu
>Subject: Re: [squeakland] [IAEP] Why is Scratch more popular than Etoys?
>
>Both Etoys and Scratch were done by some of the same people (especially John
>Maloney), and both are on top of Squeak Smalltalk. The original Etoys
>interface was more like Scratch's (small area for action results, most of the
>screen area used for showing tools, tiles, etc.). The first Etoys was aimed at
>the web (at Disney), and making the start up more obvious and using more
>screen for it is a good idea I think. The projects for the first Etoys were
>also like Scratch projects: effects, jokes, postcards, simple animations, etc.
>
>The next version of Etoys was for classrooms that would have much more help
>and do more ambitious projects. So we went to a full screen with flaps for the
>tools. This worked well in this setting.
>
>The OLPC XO presented a problem in that it had lots of pixels but a very small
>visual angle. We decided to stay with the classroom version, and I think this
>was a good idea on the one hand, but it went against the general lack of help
>that might be available in many of the XO's destinations.
>
>Then we handed Etoys over to the Squeak Foundation, and the version they put
>out online retains the classroom UI with flaps.
>
>Personally, I think the Scratch UI is better for many things than the Etoys
>UI, especially first encounters, which are so important for so many beginners
>these days. And I think the Scratch people have done a fantastic job on their
>web presence, including their gallery, the emulator for Scratch projects so
>you can see what they do, their online materials, etc.
>
>On the other hand, Scratch lacks a real media system, a massively parallel
>particle system, and many other features that are really needed and useful for
>learning things beyond simple programming. Etoys is much more complete in many
>more ways.
>
>Both systems have strong and weak points as to their language choices. Both
>lack nice extensions into more sophisticated programming. Both need to be
>greatly improved.
>
>And so forth.
>
>But I think in the world we live in, it is initial experiences that count in a
>non-classical culture (and this is most cultures around the world including
>the US). So we have to praise Scratch here, and wish that it had more depth.
>Etoys could easily be set up with a more useful exposed UI, and this would
>help tremendously in initial impressions.
>
>As to how many features to include, this is a tricky one. Scratch has quite a
>few features -- such as the thought balloon one -- because it was primarily
>initially designed for the "Computer Clubhouses", afternoon drop in
>experiences for junior high and high school kids.
>
>Etoys has fewer built in features because part of the "real deal" is to learn
>how to make your own features. It could have clip art, but we left it out
>because it is cognitively a good thing for children to learn how to draw. This
>is good for a "learning tool", but is not good for a "productivity tool".
>
>There is no question that both systems could be improved along the lines of
>their current styles.
>
>One could also imagine taking the lessons learned from both systems and
>inventing a new environment that is quite a bit better than either. I like
>this option the best.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Alan
>
>>
>>________________________________
>>
>>From:Steve Thomas <sthom...@gosargon.com>
>>To: iaep <iaep@lists.sugarlabs.org>; naturalm...@googlegroups.com; squeakland
>><squeakl...@squeakland.org>; scratc...@scratch.mit.edu
>>Sent: Friday, September 2, 2011 7:04 PM
>>Subject: [IAEP] Why is Scratch more popular than Etoys?
>>I have taught both Scratch and Etoys to kids and hands down most kids prefer
>>Scratch. I also prefer Scratch for certain things, but prefer Etoys for most
>>learning and teaching.
>>
>>What can we learn from Scratch (and TurtleArt et al) to improve Etoys? And
>>vice versa what can be done to improve Scratch?
>>.
>>I have ideas, which I will share later, but I am curious to hear the thoughts
>>of others (as mine add nothing to my current understanding and repeating them
>>will simply further ingrain incomplete and incorrect assumptions and
>>prejudices ;)
>>
>>Stephen
>>P.S. I fully believe kids should learn multiple languages and am not looking
>>for the "one ring to rule them all." Each language/environment has its
>>advantages and we need multiple.
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
>>IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
>>http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>
>
_______________________________________________
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
