Multimedia (was re: HeatedDiscussion)
Russell Allen
russell.allen at firebirdmedia.com
Thu Mar 16 04:30:25 UTC 2000
>"Andrew C. Greenberg" <werdna at gate.net> wrote:
>>"Russell Allen" wrote:
>>Out of all of the content forms, Squeak seems closest (at this time) to
>>being able to be an authoring system for multimedia (such as Director) and
>>being a development system for business applications (such as VB). This is
>>not to say that Squeak should be limited to these areas! However the
>>amount of work needed to bring Squeak into an area such as , eg, music
>>composition and notation (like, to take a piece of software I use,
>>Sibelius) is much greater.
>
>I find it peculiar to be comparing Squeak, a program development
>system, with Sibelius, a special-purpose application.
I would respectfully disagree with the description of Squeak as a "program
development system". In my opinion, this is as limiting to Squeak as
saying that Squeak is a "multimedia authoring system".
Squeak is fast on its way to being a "content development system" as well
as a "program development system".
As it does so, it subsumes the functionality of more specialised programs.
Within Squeak is a compiler, an IDE, a web server, a flash player, a midi
player and sampler, a web browser and email reader etc.
Why not a common music notation program?
And why shouldn't the functionality of that common music notation program
be compared with the best special-purpose examples currently available?
>Sibelius is very nice, indeed. It does many cute things and is very
>WYSIWYG. Try to get it to do something it was not programmed to do,
>however. Try extending it. What you see is sometimes all you get.
>
>Squeak is certainly not Sibelius, but given that you have Sibelius,
>why would you want to make another Sibelius from Squeak?
For precisely the reasons you have stated above - Sibelius is limited in
what it can do because it is a specialised, closed-source program.
>Did you think that a solid product like Sibelius was easy to code in
>C, or that it was easier to code Sibelius in C than it would have
>been to code it in Squeak?
No! Not at all. I am very much aware of the complexity of Sibelius. If I
thought it was easy to write I would not have bought it!
Eventually, I hope that Squeak will be able to handle common music
notation. This will not make Squeak a Sibelius clone, any more than Squeak
is now an Apache clone because of Commanche.
>But the other hand, have you seriously looked at what others have
>already done in Squeak? For example, consider Stephen Travis Pope's
>Siren package and his earlier MODE, both described in much greater
>detail at:
>
> http://rain.create.ucsb.edu/Siren/
Yes, this is a good start. But I am a greedy person - I want the
flexibility of Squeak and the ease and power of Sibelius too. And lots of
other stuff!
:)
Russell
----------------------------------------
Russell Allen
russell.allen at firebirdmedia.com
----------------------------------------
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|