Urg, some of this off the cuff stuff is a little too much.


Warren Postma <wpostma at ztr.com> wrote:
> So I should build my GUI around Morphic's piano-keyboard morph or a rotating
> smily face I can draw with the paint tool?  Nice demos and educational
> stuff, but Morphic is hardly useful for any real work.


"real" is tough to define, and I think that's the root of the issue
here.  Let's not be so insistent on mimicking boring business software
that already exists.  We have an opportunity to make something better
here.


> 
> And let's look at MVC for a moment. It has two (count em, 2) widgets: 
> 
> Rectangles, and Text.  

This is a gross exaggeration.  I guess you could say "gee, all Squeak
has are bitmaps that happen to look like useful things".  But that's
true of most any system.




> 
> Are there *ANY* commercially useful applications written in Squeak?
> 
> Are there *ANY* applications written in Squeak that are used by
> non-programmers?

As a matter of fact, yes to both.  It's not rampant--it's not Squeak's
driving force to make commercial apps just yet--but people are doing it
anyway.  But for instance, the Swikis have been a big hit.


Lex