"Yes, get your history and citation right to avoid being flamed."
That's the wrong motivation for understanding the history of computing as it relates to what you are working on. There are things to learn from history. It's not the ability to correctly cite Smalltalk etc. to quiet some older programmers , it's the ability to compare, contrast and learn from what came before. The really debilitating thing about not understanding the history is that you are doomed to repeat the same mistakes; it's better if you can make new mistakes.
For example, you say "But there really is something special in Light Table". Great. What is it?
I've mentioned in a peer post that his design is very well done; they are focusing on awareness and code topology issues that I think is long overdue. Now, do I know exactly what the differences are between smalltalk yet? No, not at all. But I've never seen smalltalk demos like this (the closest would be etoys, which was a not-very-comparable end-user programming experience).
Again, its a blog post and a talk, I don't think we should expect rigor on previous/related work coverage at this point, that will come with time.
That's the wrong motivation for understanding the history of computing as it relates to what you are working on. There are things to learn from history. It's not the ability to correctly cite Smalltalk etc. to quiet some older programmers , it's the ability to compare, contrast and learn from what came before. The really debilitating thing about not understanding the history is that you are doomed to repeat the same mistakes; it's better if you can make new mistakes.
For example, you say "But there really is something special in Light Table". Great. What is it?