It is better to think of FBP as a language / methodology for software architecture. FBP ideas are indeed old, yet tend to be ignored. FBP keeps resurfacing and keeps being rediscovered ("steam engine time"). This is due to the fact that these ideas do solve real problems encountered in software design. Software practioners who care about software design are the ones who rediscover FBP, or immediately "get it" when they find out about it. An excerpt from my slides (intro.ppt) here http://www.meetup.com/Toronto-GTA-Flow-Based-Programming-Meetup/files/ ... FBP is Often Compared to... - Erlang, CSP, Actors. FBP is hierarchical and sibling components are invisible to one another. - UML. FBP is meant for compiling designs, not modelling them. - LabView. FBP presevers component separation at runtime. - Scratch, et al. FBP is primarily meant to simplify software engineering / architecture. FBP is not targeted at non-programmers, per se. [If you're in the GTA, feel free to come out to the next meetup, Oct. 23. Join the meetup.com group, the google group, the Bento Miso mailing list https://www.bentomiso.com/ , or email me paul.tarvydas@gmail.com]