In hist post at http://www.braithwaite-lee.com/weblog/2006/01/finding-signal-to-noise-ratio-..., Reg Braithwaite has this to say about why Rails is chosen over Seaside. I am curious to hear others thoughts...
Personally, I would choose Seaside over Rails any day of the week, and twice on Sunday. How do the other users of Seaside feel? To me the decision about choosing Seaside over Rails is not *just* about the framework itself, it's also about the environment in which I am building my application. If Ruby came anywhere near Smalltalk's environment, I might be more willing to lean toward Ruby.
[quote] Speaking of Rails, I'm going to conclude with my take on one reason why Rails is taking off and Seaside is not. Rails allows programmers to express the idioms they already know (relational databases, web-backed MVC, stateless event handling plus a global session store) in fewer bits.
Seaside provides a whole new idiom, continuations, that IMO is more powerful. I think you end up with an even higher signal-to-noise ratio with a Seaside app than with a Rails app. Why? Because continuations afford you a much higher degree of controller reuse.
Now, here's the catch: if you try to imagine your current application running on both Rails and on Seaside, you probably won't see much difference between the two (although they'll both be an order of magnitude better than ASP.NET). They will look the same because you designed your application with idioms that both Rails and Seaside support.
To get a big win, you'd have to rethink your application's flow and logic. You'd have to "think in Seaside." And you're not going to do that. So you pick Rails, like so many others have picked it, because it looks just like your ASP app, only all the noise has gone away. It's all signal, baby. [/quote]
-- Jason Rogers
"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." Galatians 2:20
I think it's less about Seaside vs. Rails and more about Squeak vs. Ruby. The paradigm shift from Python/Perl is greater in Squeak. Verbose message sends vs. dot-notation and function arity, lack of control structures, evaluation order control via blocks instead of special rules. Images and changesets? Where the hell are my files?
The other trouble for me was one of incentive. At first glance Squeak looked like a toy. In fact, it comes with something called "Etoys" and has "teacher packs" and all that educational, childish mumbo-jumbo. Squeak is often mentioned in the same breath as "Logo" and "turtle graphics". Squeak reminds me of a Mazda Miata: killer sports car, huge image problem.
What I had to do was simple:
* Eliminate the useless eyeball widget thing. * Eliminate everything else on the screen, including the trashcan. * Turn the background black instead of some silly shade of purple. * Save the image over the previous one.
There, now I have a barren wasteland. It's "Hackers and Painters": when a painter picks up a canvas, typically it's a blank one. For me, when I'm learning how to use something, I need LESS distractions, not more.
Jeremy
In hist post at http://www.braithwaite-lee.com/weblog/2006/01/finding-signal-to-noise-ratio-..., Reg Braithwaite has this to say about why Rails is chosen over Seaside. I am curious to hear others thoughts...
Personally, I would choose Seaside over Rails any day of the week, and twice on Sunday. How do the other users of Seaside feel? To me the decision about choosing Seaside over Rails is not *just* about the framework itself, it's also about the environment in which I am building my application. If Ruby came anywhere near Smalltalk's environment, I might be more willing to lean toward Ruby.
[quote] Speaking of Rails, I'm going to conclude with my take on one reason why Rails is taking off and Seaside is not. Rails allows programmers to express the idioms they already know (relational databases, web-backed MVC, stateless event handling plus a global session store) in fewer bits.
Seaside provides a whole new idiom, continuations, that IMO is more powerful. I think you end up with an even higher signal-to-noise ratio with a Seaside app than with a Rails app. Why? Because continuations afford you a much higher degree of controller reuse.
Now, here's the catch: if you try to imagine your current application running on both Rails and on Seaside, you probably won't see much difference between the two (although they'll both be an order of magnitude better than ASP.NET). They will look the same because you designed your application with idioms that both Rails and Seaside support.
To get a big win, you'd have to rethink your application's flow and logic. You'd have to "think in Seaside." And you're not going to do that. So you pick Rails, like so many others have picked it, because it looks just like your ASP app, only all the noise has gone away. It's all signal, baby. [/quote]
-- Jason Rogers
"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." Galatians 2:20 _______________________________________________ Seaside mailing list Seaside@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
GPG PUBLIC KEY: 0xA2B36CE5
totally agree this is why this would be good to have a hacker version of Squeak for 3.9 :)
On 6 janv. 06, at 17:25, Jeremy Shute wrote:
I think it's less about Seaside vs. Rails and more about Squeak vs. Ruby. The paradigm shift from Python/Perl is greater in Squeak. Verbose message sends vs. dot-notation and function arity, lack of control structures, evaluation order control via blocks instead of special rules. Images and changesets? Where the hell are my files?
The other trouble for me was one of incentive. At first glance Squeak looked like a toy. In fact, it comes with something called "Etoys" and has "teacher packs" and all that educational, childish mumbo-jumbo. Squeak is often mentioned in the same breath as "Logo" and "turtle graphics". Squeak reminds me of a Mazda Miata: killer sports car, huge image problem.
What I had to do was simple:
- Eliminate the useless eyeball widget thing.
- Eliminate everything else on the screen, including the trashcan.
- Turn the background black instead of some silly shade of purple.
- Save the image over the previous one.
There, now I have a barren wasteland. It's "Hackers and Painters": when a painter picks up a canvas, typically it's a blank one. For me, when I'm learning how to use something, I need LESS distractions, not more.
Jeremy
In hist post at http://www.braithwaite-lee.com/weblog/2006/01/finding-signal-to- noise-ratio-in-never.html, Reg Braithwaite has this to say about why Rails is chosen over Seaside. I am curious to hear others thoughts...
Personally, I would choose Seaside over Rails any day of the week, and twice on Sunday. How do the other users of Seaside feel? To me the decision about choosing Seaside over Rails is not *just* about the framework itself, it's also about the environment in which I am building my application. If Ruby came anywhere near Smalltalk's environment, I might be more willing to lean toward Ruby.
[quote] Speaking of Rails, I'm going to conclude with my take on one reason why Rails is taking off and Seaside is not. Rails allows programmers to express the idioms they already know (relational databases, web-backed MVC, stateless event handling plus a global session store) in fewer bits.
Seaside provides a whole new idiom, continuations, that IMO is more powerful. I think you end up with an even higher signal-to-noise ratio with a Seaside app than with a Rails app. Why? Because continuations afford you a much higher degree of controller reuse.
Now, here's the catch: if you try to imagine your current application running on both Rails and on Seaside, you probably won't see much difference between the two (although they'll both be an order of magnitude better than ASP.NET). They will look the same because you designed your application with idioms that both Rails and Seaside support.
To get a big win, you'd have to rethink your application's flow and logic. You'd have to "think in Seaside." And you're not going to do that. So you pick Rails, like so many others have picked it, because it looks just like your ASP app, only all the noise has gone away. It's all signal, baby. [/quote]
-- Jason Rogers
"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." Galatians 2:20 _______________________________________________ Seaside mailing list Seaside@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
GPG PUBLIC KEY: 0xA2B36CE5
Seaside mailing list Seaside@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
Just to add my two cents to the discussion. I think that the Squeak "look" is only a minor problem, the main problem is stability and usability.
The environment has lot of "small" annoying bugs, and if you have a "image crash" there is not an easy way to recover the last changes like in ENVY.
As a developer, this gives me this feeling: the environment looks "unstable" so I don't trust in it to put in a production web site. On the other side VW is very expensive for small web sites (at least here in Argentina where I live).
So to make Seaside more popular, I think that a lot of work has to be done "clean-up" Squeak (that is full of spaghetti code).
PD: sorry if my post sounds rude, my English is not good.
The environment has lot of "small" annoying bugs, and if you have a "image crash" there is not an easy way to recover the last changes like in ENVY.
That's not really true, sure there are some bugs in the system, but mostly they are easy to fix, you are in Smalltalk after all.
All the changes are stored in a changes-file that can be easily reapplied to the image, in case of a crash. I can honestly say that I never lost a line of code since I started using Squeak 3 years ago.
Moreover there is a very sophisticated source-code versioning and management system called Monticello, that beats StOrE in terms of usability, flexibility, speed, merging, ... really everything.
As a developer, this gives me this feeling: the environment looks "unstable" so I don't trust in it to put in a production web site.
There is a group of people (including myself), that are successfully using Squeak for productive (web-)applications.
So to make Seaside more popular, I think that a lot of work has to be done "clean-up" Squeak (that is full of spaghetti code).
I don't see much difference with VisualWorks.
Lukas
-- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch
Diego Fernandez wrote:
I think that the Squeak "look" is only a minor problem, the main problem is stability and usability.
Stability? In over 5 years, I've only had an image crash, or have had to kill the image at most a dozen times.
Usability? I've gotten used to the way things work. In fact, I often find other Smalltalks lack Squeak's features.
The environment has lot of "small" annoying bugs, and if you have a "image crash" there is not an easy way to recover the last changes like in ENVY.
Recovering from the changes file is pretty easy, if you save your image often enough. Of course, with ENVY, you can just re-load your open edition.
Here's a common situation with ENVY, which can happen if you don't save your image often enough. You create a new application after your last save. After an image crash, you have no indication you need to load that application. (If you had added the application to a configuration map, upon creating it, then you would have a simple re-load.) The bottomline is that you have to save your image often, to make recovery easier - whether you have the changes file or ENVY.
On 1/13/06, Yanni Chiu yanni@rogers.com wrote:
Stability? In over 5 years, I've only had an image crash, or have had to kill the image at most a dozen times.
Sorry, that's not what happened to me :(
I use Squeak in Linux, and I had some inexplicable crashes (usually caused by the UI I think). I cannot reproduce them :( that's why I never filled a bug report about it. (maybe the windows/mac version is more stable). When I talk about "annoying" bugs, I refer mainly that some times (at least to me) the debugger pops-up without an apparent reason, that doesn't prevents me to continue using Squeak (some times I try to look in the stack to see what happened... and some times I just forget it and continue with my work) but I think that from the point of view of a newcomer this is ugly.
I'm pretty ignorant about the internals of the architecture... but when I browse the morphic/ui/kernel classes, I think "mmm this is full of spaghetti code". For example the last week I was trying to fix the "splitter" bug in 3.9... and I give up. Having objects is not enough, you can also make a unmaintainable program with a lot of Boolean flags... using the True/False object :P (just browse references to Preferences to see examples). I think that most of those small bugs are a consequence of "spaghetti" code.
Usability? I've gotten used to the way things work. In fact,
I often find other Smalltalks lack Squeak's features.
Usability is not about features, and yes there is a lot of features. But give Squeak to a newcomer, and to the non-standard UI add small things like: - menus are full of options without an "intention revealing" title/or sequence of actions, i.e: if you copy a morph to the "paste buffer"... where is the "paste" option? (it takes me a lot to figure that is "World->new morph->from paste buffer"). - default keys are not mapped in a standard way (in Linux, the default is to use Alt, instead of Ctrl for saving and cut/paste), yes you can configure it in preferences... but now try to find where is the option - the standard pop-up menus with the "Changes not saved...OK to cancel changes?"..."Yes/No".. why not simple a "Save/Cancel" (like in Mac dialog boxes).
I know that these are small things, but if we are talking about attracting developers to use Squeak and Seaside, we have to look in those small things.
(after writing down this list.. I think.."oh I'm a little stupid, why I just don't fill bugs/wish reports instead of writing this in an email".. yup)
Here's a common situation with ENVY, which can happen if
you don't save your image often enough. You create a new application after your last save. After an image crash, you have no indication you need to load that application. (If you had added the application to a configuration map, upon creating it, then you would have a simple re-load.) The bottomline is that you have to save your image often, to make recovery easier - whether you have the changes file or ENVY.
Yes you are right.
Maybe I was too critic about Squeak. The platform has a lot of work, and is good in many aspects... But I want a better open-source St. been critic is just the starting point :)
I use Squeak in Linux, and I had some inexplicable crashes (usually caused by the UI I think). I cannot reproduce them :( that's why I never filled a bug report about it. (maybe the windows/mac version is more stable). When I talk about "annoying" bugs, I refer mainly that some times (at least to me) the debugger pops-up without an apparent reason, that doesn't prevents me to continue using Squeak (some times I try to look in the stack to see what happened... and some times I just forget it and continue with my work) but I think that from the point of view of a newcomer this is ugly.
Strange on my machine it nearly never crashes. I have a mac.
I'm pretty ignorant about the internals of the architecture... but when I browse the morphic/ui/kernel classes, I think "mmm this is full of spaghetti code".
Sure there are really ugly places. Let us face it but now we are also cleaning squeak :)
For example the last week I was trying to fix the "splitter" bug in 3.9... and I give up. Having objects is not enough, you can also make a unmaintainable program with a lot of Boolean flags... using the True/False object :P (just browse references to Preferences to see examples). I think that most of those small bugs are a consequence of "spaghetti" code.
Yes. I would like to remove as much as possible as preferences. Most of them are useless.
Usability? I've gotten used to the way things work. In fact, I often find other Smalltalks lack Squeak's features.
Usability is not about features, and yes there is a lot of features. But give Squeak to a newcomer, and to the non-standard UI add small things like:
- menus are full of options without an "intention revealing" title/
or sequence of actions, i.e: if you copy a morph to the "paste buffer"... where is the "paste" option? (it takes me a lot to figure that is "World->new morph->from paste buffer").
Yes! Please help. We will try to refactor and clean. But for that we need help and people supporting changes. Because you have a lot of people that prefer not to fix things because they have different agenda.
- default keys are not mapped in a standard way (in Linux, the
default is to use Alt, instead of Ctrl for saving and cut/paste), yes you can configure it in preferences... but now try to find where is the option
- the standard pop-up menus with the "Changes not saved...OK to
cancel changes?"..."Yes/No".. why not simple a "Save/Cancel" (like in Mac dialog boxes).
Send good code and we will integrate it.
I know that these are small things, but if we are talking about attracting developers to use Squeak and Seaside, we have to look in those small things.
Yes
(after writing down this list.. I think.."oh I'm a little stupid, why I just don't fill bugs/wish reports instead of writing this in an email".. yup)
Send fixes :) and help.
Maybe I was too critic about Squeak. The platform has a lot of work, and is good in many aspects... But I want a better open-source St. been critic is just the starting point :)
Sure the next step is .... help :)
Stef
PS: I will have a look at your automatic category organizer. It would be nice to be able to nearly avoid to have to enter category names :).
Squeak's GUI fails on so many fronts and succeeds on so many others. There is such great opportunity (as it's open, and Smalltalk to the core), and yet such a long way to go.
The use of real estate on big text is good. The bigger an object is, the easier it is to click! The rounding of the buttons is BAD -- it's pixel space you can't click on. Tighter-radius rounded rectangles, please!
The font choice is basically horrible. Serif text gives all sorts of "cues" that the human eye can pick up in order to read faster, when on the printed page. The screen, however, is 72 DPI. Do Apple, Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, or Sony use Serif on their home page? No. Case closed. Code should be in monospace because it's easier to communicate repeated patterns that way (yeah, they still occur). These changes should be default.
The shade button is brilliant, as it allows you to store your running programs positionally (the same way you order the things on your desk). You should be able to double-click on the entire title bar in order to shade it, though. Windows should snap to the edges of one another for easy/clean sorting!
Unfortunately, shading is not enough, alone. Some method to switch between running processes quickly would be great (such as a representation of tasks on the screen). In fact, this would be a great use of the middle mouse button! Bury those damned morph controls under a context sensitive menu.
The world menu. Brilliant idea when the desktop is empty, horrible idea when it's full. Why? Because the most common commands take more time as you get busier. And why, WHY would the browser and the transcript be under "open"? Someone should turn on an opt-in usage profiler that feeds back to the Squeak project, and the data should be anonymized and used to rearrange the menus (and for that matter, buttons), so the most common tasks are the quickest.
Flaps are "a good idea" -- allowing you to whip your mouse to the edge of the screen in order to navigate a menu of frequently used things. Except, they don't remain atop the other windows, which is a bad idea, because although you can run your mouse at 90 miles an hour to any edge of the screen, what you're aiming for isn't there any longer. ARGH.
Use the F1..F12 keys intelligently. The keyboard has tactile feedback: why on earth would you not use these keys effectively??? User-programmable behavior should be possible using the world menu. Maybe you want a box, where you can drag command snippets and select an icon?
Speaking of icons, USE ICONS. And for that matter, COLORS (which have already been admirably used to identify different application types, such as the browser).
Key bindings. Please decide on a universal set and then have access modifiers that are application specific. For instance, ESC should always bring up the world menu all the time. CUA keybindings should have 'meta' commands (as is already the case). Emacs keybindings should have 'C-c' pressed as an accessor, followed by the same commands.
And, in case that wasn't enough, can you please make it sexy (OS 9) without being ridiculous (OS X)? Take the time you would spend making it themeable and use it instead to get it right the first time. How many people theme Firefox or OS X?
Jeremy
I use Squeak in Linux, and I had some inexplicable crashes (usually caused by the UI I think). I cannot reproduce them :( that's why I never filled a bug report about it. (maybe the windows/mac version is more stable). When I talk about "annoying" bugs, I refer mainly that some times (at least to me) the debugger pops-up without an apparent reason, that doesn't prevents me to continue using Squeak (some times I try to look in the stack to see what happened... and some times I just forget it and continue with my work) but I think that from the point of view of a newcomer this is ugly.
Strange on my machine it nearly never crashes. I have a mac.
I'm pretty ignorant about the internals of the architecture... but when I browse the morphic/ui/kernel classes, I think "mmm this is full of spaghetti code".
Sure there are really ugly places. Let us face it but now we are also cleaning squeak :)
For example the last week I was trying to fix the "splitter" bug in 3.9... and I give up. Having objects is not enough, you can also make a unmaintainable program with a lot of Boolean flags... using the True/False object :P (just browse references to Preferences to see examples). I think that most of those small bugs are a consequence of "spaghetti" code.
Yes. I would like to remove as much as possible as preferences. Most of them are useless.
Usability? I've gotten used to the way things work. In fact, I often find other Smalltalks lack Squeak's features.
Usability is not about features, and yes there is a lot of features. But give Squeak to a newcomer, and to the non-standard UI add small things like:
- menus are full of options without an "intention revealing" title/
or sequence of actions, i.e: if you copy a morph to the "paste buffer"... where is the "paste" option? (it takes me a lot to figure that is "World->new morph->from paste buffer").
Yes! Please help. We will try to refactor and clean. But for that we need help and people supporting changes. Because you have a lot of people that prefer not to fix things because they have different agenda.
- default keys are not mapped in a standard way (in Linux, the
default is to use Alt, instead of Ctrl for saving and cut/paste), yes you can configure it in preferences... but now try to find where is the option
- the standard pop-up menus with the "Changes not saved...OK to
cancel changes?"..."Yes/No".. why not simple a "Save/Cancel" (like in Mac dialog boxes).
Send good code and we will integrate it.
I know that these are small things, but if we are talking about attracting developers to use Squeak and Seaside, we have to look in those small things.
Yes
(after writing down this list.. I think.."oh I'm a little stupid, why I just don't fill bugs/wish reports instead of writing this in an email".. yup)
Send fixes :) and help.
Maybe I was too critic about Squeak. The platform has a lot of work, and is good in many aspects... But I want a better open-source St. been critic is just the starting point :)
Sure the next step is .... help :)
Stef
PS: I will have a look at your automatic category organizer. It would be nice to be able to nearly avoid to have to enter category names :).
Seaside mailing list Seaside@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
GPG PUBLIC KEY: 0xA2B36CE5
On 1/15/06, Jeremy Shute shutej@crazilocks.com wrote:
There is such great opportunity (as it's open, and Smalltalk to the core), and yet such a long way to go.
[... lots of good critique snipped..]
Thanks Jeremy - great writeup, lots of very valid points. Keep bitching about it (are you on the morphic team/list? I think that team would welcome all the help there is on usability decisions...)
Keybindings [...]
Personally, I think that Squeak's ignoring the keyboard is its single largest usability misfeature. I should be able to do everything without a mouse, with a single-button mouse+keyboard combos, or with a gazillion-buttoned mouse.
I still have to look deeper into it, but from reading about it I liked Archy's way of making the keyboard work (http://rchi.raskincenter.org/index.php?title=Home). The sticker is, probably, that at the moment the VM's don't seem to pass press/release events of modifier keys up (or am I wrong here?).
And, in case that wasn't enough, can you please make it sexy (OS 9) without being ridiculous (OS X)? Take the time you would spend making it themeable and use it instead to get it right the first time.
I think, by the way, that one of the better 'themes' I know at the moment is <don asbestos suit> Windows XP's Silver look, but with a normal title bar font size. It is totally unobtrusive and looks stylish.
Having said that, and very much agreeing with your comments of making it look good out-of-the-box (3.9a is a good step in that direction), I think having a themeable Squeak is a worthwhile goal. It makes it much easier to build games, rich 3d things, etcetera with it where you typically want to have your own look.
I'm a newcomer to Squeak and have been itching to "bitch" about its usability. :-) Here are my 2 cents.
On Jan 14, 2006, at 4:17 PM, Jeremy Shute wrote:
The font choice is basically horrible. Serif text gives all sorts of "cues" that the human eye can pick up in order to read faster, when on the printed page. The screen, however, is 72 DPI. Do Apple, Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, or Sony use Serif on their home page? No. Case closed. Code should be in monospace because it's easier to communicate repeated patterns that way (yeah, they still occur). These changes should be default.
I couldn't agree more with Jeremy on the font issue. The first thing I change is set the font to use the Vera san serif based fonts. However, the anti-aliasing isn't done right. Too blurry on LCD screen. After I switched over to use the anti-aliased fonts, the display speed became awfully slow/sluggish. (at least on my PowerBook.)
Flaps are "a good idea" -- allowing you to whip your mouse to the edge of the screen in order to navigate a menu of frequently used things. Except, they don't remain atop the other windows, which is a bad idea, because although you can run your mouse at 90 miles an hour to any edge of the screen, what you're aiming for isn't there any longer. ARGH.
I agree that Flap is a noble attempt to provide fast access to frequently used stuff. However, it's poorly designed and implemented compared to the Mac OS X dock or even the NeXTSTEP dock that was designed over 10 years ago.
Mac OS X has done it right with the Dashboard and the dock. For power users/developers, some global hot key bindings to bring up browser or what not would be welcomed.
And, in case that wasn't enough, can you please make it sexy (OS 9) without being ridiculous (OS X)? Take the time you would spend making it themeable and use it instead to get it right the first time. How many people theme Firefox or OS X?
Personally, I have grown to like the OS X U.I. more than the OS 9 now. I used to agree with what Jeremy said, but over time, I find the arrangement in OS X feel better, not just eye-candy stuff. Personally I consider themeable U.I. as a relatively less important feature. 1) usually, theme created by the creative individuals are too "colorful" and subjective for the usual users; 2) it has the least to do with usability. Hence, I'd rather focus the effort on improving the speed and usability issue.
All these issues boil down to one common problem for me. When I play/ work in Squeak, I feel cut off from my favorite OS, window manager, editor, fonts, etc, which is my most productive environment. I love the concept of Smalltalk/Squeak/Seaside etc, love the development tools, but can't go back 20 years and look at jagged serif fonts on my screen anymore when I have hundreds of modern anti-alias fonts on my disk.
If Seaside is to be successful, Squeak would need an overhaul.
Another problem is the lack of documentation, some sort of high level docs to help developers new to Smalltalk/Squeak get started to contribute and improve the environment would be essential.
my $0.02. Chris
I use Squeak in Linux, and I had some inexplicable crashes (usually caused by the UI I think). I cannot reproduce them :( that's why I never filled a bug report about it. (maybe the windows/mac version is more stable).
For server images you have to make sure that you close **all** windows and make sure that no morphs remain on the desktop. This helps for that (unpredictable) kind of crashes ;-)
Lukas
-- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
I use Squeak in Linux, and I had some inexplicable crashes (usually caused by the UI I think). I cannot reproduce them :( that's why I never filled a bug report about it. (maybe the windows/mac version is more stable). When I talk about "annoying" bugs, I refer mainly that some times (at least to me) the debugger pops-up without an apparent reason, that doesn't prevents me to continue using Squeak (some times I try to look in the stack to see what happened... and some times I just forget it and continue with my work) but I think that from the point of view of a newcomer this is ugly.
It happens to me too at school (solaris). But I have no problem at home (linux). What is your virtual machine version ? Have you tried to use the memory option ?
At school, I need to use
$ squeak -memory 200m
to make things work. The version is 3.7-7 !
Bye
- -- Damien Cassou
Damien Cassou wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
I use Squeak in Linux, and I had some inexplicable crashes (usually caused by the UI I think). I cannot reproduce them :( that's why I never filled a bug report about it. (maybe the windows/mac version is more stable). When I talk about "annoying" bugs, I refer mainly that some times (at least to me) the debugger pops-up without an apparent reason, that doesn't prevents me to continue using Squeak (some times I try to look in the stack to see what happened... and some times I just forget it and continue with my work) but I think that from the point of view of a newcomer this is ugly.
It happens to me too at school (solaris). But I have no problem at home (linux). What is your virtual machine version ? Have you tried to use the memory option ?
At school, I need to use
$ squeak -memory 200m
to make things work. The version is 3.7-7 !
Bye
Is there a way to access a running image remotely? Something like a remote squeak desktop?
On 3/4/06, Jan Szumiec jps@ftyczka.org wrote:
Is there a way to access a running image remotely? Something like a remote squeak desktop?
There is RemoteFrameBuffer. It is a vnc client/server. This allows you to vnc into the desktop. The latest versions of Seaside have a vnc entry point that allows you to turn rfb on and off via a web interface.
For more info: http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/834 http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/seaside/2006-February/006779.htm...
Wilkes Joiner wrote:
On 3/4/06, Jan Szumiec jps@ftyczka.org wrote:
Is there a way to access a running image remotely? Something like a remote squeak desktop?
There is RemoteFrameBuffer. It is a vnc client/server. This allows you to vnc into the desktop. The latest versions of Seaside have a vnc entry point that allows you to turn rfb on and off via a web interface.
really? where is that?
Jan: I have been using RFB successfully from squeak to squeak. But, I can't seemed to get it to work from vncviewer to the remote squeak/RFB (as I mentioned in a previous message). So, you might try squeak to squeak first: go to squeakmap and install RFB on both remote and local images. And, if you get vncviewer working, tell me how ;-)
brad
Brad Fuller wrote:
Wilkes Joiner wrote:
On 3/4/06, Jan Szumiec jps@ftyczka.org wrote:
Is there a way to access a running image remotely? Something like a remote squeak desktop?
There is RemoteFrameBuffer. It is a vnc client/server. This allows you to vnc into the desktop. The latest versions of Seaside have a vnc entry point that allows you to turn rfb on and off via a web interface.
really? where is that?
Jan: I have been using RFB successfully from squeak to squeak. But, I can't seemed to get it to work from vncviewer to the remote squeak/RFB (as I mentioned in a previous message). So, you might try squeak to squeak first: go to squeakmap and install RFB on both remote and local images. And, if you get vncviewer working, tell me how ;-)
I got VNC working, no problem. First, I installed RFBServer, configured it with a password, and started it through the menu with the display number set to 0. Then, I ran vncviewer, and everything works as expected ;) I wonder how much effort it would take to send events between windows on remote images, instead of sending bitmap updates. I think that's how Windows' remote desktop works, and it is way more responsive than VNC.
Jan Szumiec wrote:
Brad Fuller wrote:
Wilkes Joiner wrote:
On 3/4/06, Jan Szumiec jps@ftyczka.org wrote:
Is there a way to access a running image remotely? Something like a remote squeak desktop?
There is RemoteFrameBuffer. It is a vnc client/server. This allows you to vnc into the desktop. The latest versions of Seaside have a vnc entry point that allows you to turn rfb on and off via a web interface.
really? where is that?
Jan: I have been using RFB successfully from squeak to squeak. But, I can't seemed to get it to work from vncviewer to the remote squeak/RFB (as I mentioned in a previous message). So, you might try squeak to squeak first: go to squeakmap and install RFB on both remote and local images. And, if you get vncviewer working, tell me how ;-)
I got VNC working, no problem. First, I installed RFBServer, configured it with a password, and started it through the menu with the display number set to 0. Then, I ran vncviewer, and everything works as expected ;) I wonder how much effort it would take to send events between windows on remote images, instead of sending bitmap updates. I think that's how Windows' remote desktop works, and it is way more responsive than VNC.
what platform are you running both on? Both of mine are Linux.
Brad Fuller wrote:
I got VNC working, no problem. First, I installed RFBServer, configured it with a password, and started it through the menu with the display number set to 0. Then, I ran vncviewer, and everything works as expected ;) I wonder how much effort it would take to send events between windows on remote images, instead of sending bitmap updates. I think that's how Windows' remote desktop works, and it is way more responsive than VNC.
what platform are you running both on? Both of mine are Linux.
I was running both on Windows. I didn't change any settings for vncviewer, just put in 'hostname:0'.
Jan Szumiec wrote:
Brad Fuller wrote:
I got VNC working, no problem. First, I installed RFBServer, configured it with a password, and started it through the menu with the display number set to 0. Then, I ran vncviewer, and everything works as expected ;) I wonder how much effort it would take to send events between windows on remote images, instead of sending bitmap updates. I think that's how Windows' remote desktop works, and it is way more responsive than VNC.
what platform are you running both on? Both of mine are Linux.
I was running both on Windows. I didn't change any settings for vncviewer, just put in 'hostname:0'.
I just tried vncviewer 4.1.1 on windows and I receive the same error: "Unknown rect encoding"
So, maybe it's a RFB server issue on linux.
Again: it works fine RFB to RFB, but not with vncviewer on linux nor on windows.
I just tried TightVNC viewer and it works ok. Hmm...
Jan Szumiec wrote:
Brad Fuller wrote:
Wilkes Joiner wrote:
On 3/4/06, Jan Szumiec jps@ftyczka.org wrote:
Is there a way to access a running image remotely? Something like a remote squeak desktop?
There is RemoteFrameBuffer. It is a vnc client/server. This allows you to vnc into the desktop. The latest versions of Seaside have a vnc entry point that allows you to turn rfb on and off via a web interface.
really? where is that?
Jan: I have been using RFB successfully from squeak to squeak. But, I can't seemed to get it to work from vncviewer to the remote squeak/RFB (as I mentioned in a previous message). So, you might try squeak to squeak first: go to squeakmap and install RFB on both remote and local images. And, if you get vncviewer working, tell me how ;-)
I got VNC working, no problem. First, I installed RFBServer, configured it with a password, and started it through the menu with the display number set to 0. Then, I ran vncviewer, and everything works as expected ;) I wonder how much effort it would take to send events between windows on remote images, instead of sending bitmap updates. I think that's how Windows' remote desktop works, and it is way more responsive than VNC.
what settings do you use for vncviewer?
seaside@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
Brad Fuller -
Cees De Groot -
Chris Wong -
Damien Cassou -
Diego Fernandez -
Jan Szumiec -
Jason Rogers -
Jeremy Shute -
Lukas Renggli -
stephane ducasse -
Wilkes Joiner -
Yanni Chiu