In article <42EA89EC.3050803 / vallner.net>,
David Vallner  <david / vallner.net> wrote:
>Phil Tomson wrote:
>
>>Why is it that people have the idea the ojects are difficult for 
>>programming newbies?  Wasn't Smalltalk intended as a tool for teaching 
>>children to program?
>>  
>>
>Hmm, wasn't that Squeak? I'm pretty much certain Smalltalk was intended 
>as a "normal"
>programming language.


Squeak is a more recent incarnation of Smalltalk with graphics.

Here are some quotes that seem to support the idea that Alan Kay had 
children in mind when he created Smalltalk:

"After writing a thesis about graphical object-orientation and being 
awarded a Ph.D. at the University of Utah he spent two years teaching at 
the Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. While there he began 
thinking about a book-sized computer that the user, especially children, 
could use in place of paper. He dubbed his project "KiddieKomp." It was at 
this time that he also began work on the Smalltalk language.

Smalltalk was designed to mimic Kay's biological model of individual 
entities, or "cells," communicating with each other via messages. 
Eventually his Smalltalk language would father the genre of Objected 
Oriented Programming languages.

In 1972 Kay took a job at Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center (Xerox PARC) 
and began using Smalltalk in an educational context. Young children were 
exposed to computers and their reactions were analyzed. Kay concluded that 
children learned more through images and sounds than through plain text 
and, along with other researchers at PARC, Kay developed a simple computer 
system which made heavy use of graphics and animation. Some of the 
children became very adept at using this system; in fact, some developed 
complicated programs of their own with it! (3) "

from:
http://ei.cs.vt.edu/~history/GASCH.KAY.HTML


Phil