On Thu, Sep 03, 1998 at 12:18:51PM +0200, Joerg Brunsmann wrote:
> Boris G. Chr. Shingarov wrote:
> > 
> Thanks, Boris. A Win32 port is a step behind a Linux/MoreOrLesstif port,
> or better, as someone else suggested, Linux/gtk port. 
Yes. I vote for GTK, too. (see http://www.labs.redhat.com/themes.shtml)

> Anyway, from the first day I saw Squeak it was always my strong belief
> that Squeak wouldn't get that acceptance as it deserved without native
> wigdets. I don't want to get too pathetic but perhaps this is the last
> chance for Smalltalk to gain more developers and acceptance. That's very
> unfortunate since Squeak is small, fast, free, open, portable, simply
> great.

Hmm, yes. I think you are right. Many people simply dont know Smalltalk.

There is a lot of work going on in the Linux-community to build consistent, 
easy to use GUI-Environments (see http://www.gnome.org). 
It would be really good if one could use a free Smalltalk to develop for 
such a free desktop. (free as in "free speech", not "free beer", so vwnc 
is no option). 

I know that it is all pink-plane development (doing old things with
squeak), but such an Linux Desktop will be (IMHO) the best (hmm, better:
not-bad-as-everything-else) we will have for the next years, until
we reach the holy grail of the DynaBook.

BTW, i found the following text that describes (some of) the goals of
Squeak very good (does he actually talk about squeak? I think its
from 1995, so it would be possible):

>Xerox, Apple and Progress by: Bruce Horn
>http://www.insanely-great.com/Interface/ui_horn1.html
>
>In many ways, the computing world has made remarkably
>small advances since 1976, and we continually reinvent the
>wheel. Smalltalk had a nice bytecoded multi-platform virtual
>machine long before Java. Object oriented programming is the
>hot thing now, and it's almost 30 years old (see the
>Simula-67 language). Environments have not progressed much
>either: I feel the Smalltalk environments from the late
>1970's are the most pleasant, cleanest, fastest, and
>smoothest programming environments I have ever used.
>Although CodeWarrior is reasonably good for C++ development,
>I haven't seen anything that compares favorably to the
>Smalltalk systems I used almost 20 years ago. The Smalltalk
>systems of today aren't as clean, easy to use, or well-
>designed as the originals, in my opinion.
>
>We are not even _close_ to the ultimate computing-information- 
>communication device. We have much
>more work to do on system architectures and user interfaces.
>In particular, user interface design must be driven by deep
>architectural issues and not just new graphical appearances;
>interfaces are structure, not image. Neither Copland nor
>Windows 95 (nor NT, for that matter) represent the last word
>on operating systems. Unfortunately, market forces are
>slowing the development of the next revolution. Still, I
>think you can count on Apple being the company bringing
>these improvements to next generation systems.
>
  Marcus

-- 
Marcus Denker marcus at ira.uka.de fon at home:(0721)614235 @work:(0721)608-2749  
  With a PC, I always felt limited by the software available.
  On Unix, I am limited only by my knowledge. --Peter J. Schoenster