[sugar] Why Embedded Sugar?

[Bill Gatliff]

David Farning wrote:
> It has been a bit of a plug but it looks like we have reach critical
> mass for a self sustaining embedded Sugar community.

I love the idea of getting a critical mass around something, but I don't yet
"get it" regarding Sugar for embedded work.  The problem is most likely that I'm
not thinking out-of-the-box, but if you present Sugar at ESC then you're going
to have to really know--- and show--- the embedded itches that Sugar can scratch
to a room full of people like me.  A demo of a pretty UI on non-PC hardware
isn't enough.

I'm not discarding Sugar's contribution to the computing community as a whole,
and I'm certainly not suggesting that Sugar lacks anything to offer for embedded
applications.  I just want to make sure that while your new team is busy getting
Sugar to work on beagleboard, they're also thinking about how to package its
"sell" to the larger embedded audience.  Do that right, and you'll never have to
struggle for critical mass again.  Do that poorly, however, and all the effort
goes nowhere.

Case in point.  I happen to think Forth is cool for embedded work, but it hasn't
caught on.  The problem isn't that Forth lacks advocacy, it's that Forth lacks
advocacy by those who can credibly "sell" it as a solution that embedded
developers need.  So we remain stuck with uBoot.  :)


So, sell Sugar to me!


b.g.
-- 
Bill Gatliff
bgat at billgatliff.com