Latest posts on Scratch has a marketing problemhttps://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/251639/2022-10-25T00:03:37+00:00About Scratch :: Advanced Topics :: Scratch has a marketing problem
2022-10-25T00:03:37+00:00know0your0true0color6693758<blockquote><p class="bb-quote-author">RAD213 wrote:</p>bruh</blockquote>Stop necroposting<br/>The latest post was 4 years ago<img src="//cdn.scratch.mit.edu/scratchr2/static/__2e65641a7c33fcac9289887768342c25__/djangobb_forum/img/smilies/yikes.png" />
About Scratch :: Advanced Topics :: Scratch has a marketing problem
2022-10-24T22:57:00+00:00RAD2136693670bruh
About Scratch :: Advanced Topics :: Scratch has a marketing problem
2018-09-27T22:58:18+00:00CatIsFluffy3264236It's still suboptimal.
About Scratch :: Advanced Topics :: Scratch has a marketing problem
2018-09-27T22:41:45+00:00Jonathan503264224<blockquote><p class="bb-quote-author">TheAspiringHacker wrote:</p>In certain ways Scratch is as low-level as assembly; variables are global like unlimited registers, one must create a global “call stack” list and deal with offsets from the top to use function-local variables that work in the presence of recursion,</blockquote>You can use custom block parameters. (The only problem is that they can't be assigned to, and then your project gets crowded with lots of helper blocks.)
About Scratch :: Advanced Topics :: Scratch has a marketing problem
2018-09-27T20:10:54+00:00TheAspiringHacker3264071FTR, the article is now at <a href="https://medium.freecodecamp.org/scratch-has-a-marketing-problem-f84626bd18ef">https://medium.freecodecamp.org/scratch-has-a-marketing-problem-f84626bd18ef</a> . (Lol, FreeCodeCamp.)<br/><br/>IMO Scratch doesn't have a marketing problem; it has a design problem. Scratch markets exactly what it is: childish and limiting (even more so with Scratch 3.0). I had a conversation with badatprogrammingibe where they said that Scratch's fun for a programmer comes from the challenges posed by its lack of abstractions. Scratch's lack of abstractions is a design flaw and its difficulty is simply an unintended consequence. The Scratch Team seems to be more focused on multimedia than building a solid programming language for teaching basic computing principles. Maybe people like badatprogrammingibe derive fun from Scratch's design, but I find Scratch absolutely painful. Scratch isn't difficult because its paradigms are difficult or because my problem domain is difficult; Scratch is difficult precisely because it is too low-level. In certain ways Scratch is as low-level as assembly; variables are global like unlimited registers, one must create a global “call stack” list and deal with offsets from the top to use function-local variables that work in the presence of recursion, and one can't dynamically allocate memory like with Lisp's cons without creating a global list to be a “heap” and writing malloc. Oh, are we teaching people low-level programming with a cutesy block-based interface now? Well, to gain the abstractions common in mainstream PLs, one has to derive them in a low-level programming style. Too bad the Scratch Team cares more about adding the next multimedia extension than adding lambda abstractions, first-class lists or pairs, stack-local variables, or even merely functions that can return results. Scratch is fundamentally crippled as an educational PL, Scratch 3.0 is going in the wrong direction, and the Scratch Team needs to pay attention and fix it or else risk better educational PLs such as Racket and Snap! render Scratch obsolete.<br/><br/>See also <a href="https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/292866/">https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/292866/</a> .<br/>
About Scratch :: Advanced Topics :: Scratch has a marketing problem
2018-09-27T05:10:59+00:00herohamp3263538<blockquote><p class="bb-quote-author">badatprogrammingibe wrote:</p><blockquote><p class="bb-quote-author">notlegit wrote:</p>fake news</blockquote>I agree.</blockquote>Please do not necropost <3
About Scratch :: Advanced Topics :: Scratch has a marketing problem
2018-09-27T03:30:18+00:00badatprogrammingibe3263503<blockquote><p class="bb-quote-author">notlegit wrote:</p>fake news</blockquote>I agree.
About Scratch :: Advanced Topics :: Scratch has a marketing problem
2018-02-14T14:51:09+00:00notlegit2992332fake news
About Scratch :: Advanced Topics :: Scratch has a marketing problem
2017-05-05T22:28:15+00:00__init__2596861<blockquote><p class="bb-quote-author">Magnie wrote:</p>Back in Scratch 1.3 I wanted to play around with networking. So I learned about Scratch's Remote Sensor Connections and then built a chat program by creating two servers in Python. The first was to host the actual chat server, the second was a proxy that connected to Scratch and then to my chat server. This allowed normal RSC packets to be passed to an external server. Eventually Scratch 1.4 came out and I had Scratcher enable Mesh so they could connect to my server directly without having to download a program. But I had figured out a way around Scratch's “lack” of networking capabilities.</blockquote>Ooh, I remember Chat.PY!
About Scratch :: Advanced Topics :: Scratch has a marketing problem
2017-05-05T21:39:33+00:00bobbybee2596735<blockquote><p class="bb-quote-author">Magnie wrote:</p>This article just barely appeared in my news feed on SlashDot:<br/><blockquote><span class="bb-bold">This Computer Language Is Feeding Hacker Values into Young Minds</span><br/>At 10, Scratch is a popular tool to teach kids programming. But its real glory is how it imparts lessons in sharing, logic, and hackerism.<br/><a href="https://backchannel.com/the-kids-computer-language-that-became-a-mind-bomb-for-the-hacker-ethic-a0b7e42c229d">https://backchannel.com/the-kids-computer-language-that-became-a-mind-bomb-for-the-hacker-ethic-a0b7e42c229d</a><br/></blockquote><br/>I agree with the article. Back in Scratch 1.3 I wanted to play around with networking. So I learned about Scratch's Remote Sensor Connections and then built a chat program by creating two servers in Python. The first was to host the actual chat server, the second was a proxy that connected to Scratch and then to my chat server. This allowed normal RSC packets to be passed to an external server. Eventually Scratch 1.4 came out and I had Scratcher enable Mesh so they could connect to my server directly without having to download a program. But I had figured out a way around Scratch's “lack” of networking capabilities.</blockquote>Back in the good ol' days :p
About Scratch :: Advanced Topics :: Scratch has a marketing problem
2017-05-05T19:45:12+00:00Magnie2596529This article just barely appeared in my news feed on SlashDot:<br/><blockquote><span class="bb-bold">This Computer Language Is Feeding Hacker Values into Young Minds</span><br/>At 10, Scratch is a popular tool to teach kids programming. But its real glory is how it imparts lessons in sharing, logic, and hackerism.<br/><a href="https://backchannel.com/the-kids-computer-language-that-became-a-mind-bomb-for-the-hacker-ethic-a0b7e42c229d">https://backchannel.com/the-kids-computer-language-that-became-a-mind-bomb-for-the-hacker-ethic-a0b7e42c229d</a><br/></blockquote><br/>I agree with the article. Back in Scratch 1.3 I wanted to play around with networking. So I learned about Scratch's Remote Sensor Connections and then built a chat program by creating two servers in Python. The first was to host the actual chat server, the second was a proxy that connected to Scratch and then to my chat server. This allowed normal RSC packets to be passed to an external server. Eventually Scratch 1.4 came out and I had Scratcher enable Mesh so they could connect to my server directly without having to download a program. But I had figured out a way around Scratch's “lack” of networking capabilities.
About Scratch :: Advanced Topics :: Scratch has a marketing problem
2017-05-05T16:56:40+00:00MegaApuTurkUltra2596125<blockquote><p class="bb-quote-author">card100 wrote:</p>I agree with all this “Power-puff Girls” stuff. <a href="https://www.commonsensemedia.org/tv-reviews/the-powerpuff-girls">This site</a> says 8+. Scratch needs to appeal to 10+ kids. Literally, the only reason my friends are the only ones who don't laugh at me when I open Scratch is because I showed them Griffpatch. That's it. Everyone else snickers. I don't care though.<br/><br/>It does prove a point. Scratch is what set me up to being the computer geek in my school. But when you scare everyone away with cute cartoons from cartoon network or where is the Scratch cat exploring? it gets the wrong point across.<br/><br/>I am really trying to push “Advanced Scratch” on people. Also, the Advanced topics are full of stuff that if you don't know JS or Python you're lost instantly.<br/><br/>That's my rant.<br/><br/>Thanks for sharing the article.</blockquote><br/><br/><br/><br/><br/><br/><br/><br/><span class="bb-small">Snap<span class="bb-italic">!</span></span>
About Scratch :: Advanced Topics :: Scratch has a marketing problem
2017-05-05T16:42:41+00:00card1002596104I agree with all this “Power-puff Girls” stuff. <a href="https://www.commonsensemedia.org/tv-reviews/the-powerpuff-girls">This site</a> says 8+. Scratch needs to appeal to 10+ kids. Literally, the only reason my friends are the only ones who don't laugh at me when I open Scratch is because I showed them Griffpatch. That's it. Everyone else snickers. I don't care though.<br/><br/>It does prove a point. Scratch is what set me up to being the computer geek in my school. But when you scare everyone away with cute cartoons from cartoon network or where is the Scratch cat exploring? it gets the wrong point across.<br/><br/>I am really trying to push “Advanced Scratch” on people. Also, the Advanced topics are full of stuff that if you don't know JS or Python you're lost instantly.<br/><br/>That's my rant.<br/><br/>Thanks for sharing the article.
About Scratch :: Advanced Topics :: Scratch has a marketing problem
2017-05-02T22:45:43+00:00Firedrake9692590575My first impression was that Stencyl's UI seems to have more buttons based on the screenshot on the front page
About Scratch :: Advanced Topics :: Scratch has a marketing problem
2017-05-02T19:54:03+00:00Magnie2590188<blockquote><p class="bb-quote-author">Firedrake969 wrote:</p><blockquote><p class="bb-quote-author">Magnie wrote:</p><blockquote>This is the only issue I have with your post above: Art projects are great because it allows users to share their own talents (creating artwork) in the same great community as the rest of us.<br/></blockquote>Yeah, you are right. I just wish there were more games and creative ideas on Scratch than artwork. I know that Scratch completely supports art based project, but Scratch is meant to teach programming, isn't it? Just a pet-peeve and a little bit why I've stopped using Scratch.</blockquote>Artwork is often creative. The goal of Scratch is to be a way to start learning programming, but that doesn't mean it's <span class="bb-italic">only</span> meant to be used for that… and is that really a reason to stop using Scratch?</blockquote>I said a little bit. It's just my opinion. I actually tell people that Scratch has the best ‘basic’ art editor I've seen (compared to Paint or something). Which is actually an advantage Scratch has. Combine that with the ability to share and you have an amazingly interactive community. Sorry, I didn't mean to make this a debate on art and its relevance to Scratch and programming, but to tie this back to the original post/discussion and to look at it in a different way: Maybe art is a contributing factor to making it look childish and the “marketing problem” that Scratch has? What makes Scratch different from something like Stencyl (<a href="http://www.stencyl.com/">http://www.stencyl.com/</a>) that could be perceived as more “professional” and “less childish”?