Squeak UI and toolkit commentary: (was: Re: Who has no job? (was Re: O'Reilly Squeak book?))

Richard A. O'Keefe ok at cs.otago.ac.nz
Fri Apr 19 06:54:12 UTC 2002

"Jim Benson" <jb at speed.net> wrote:
	You can also say that current WIMPs suck, and that Squeak is "the way". So
	the few hundred of us (who can't really even agree between ourselves) "know"
	better than the 100 million on the outside with their own machines. You
	might find this surprising, but the outsiders aren't buying in.
This is not a serious argument:  the outsiders haven't the slightest idea
Squeak exists, let alone what it looks like.  I don't know what it's
like in your country, but in this country people don't buy a Windows box
because they've made any kind of _choice_ about what kind of interface they
want, but ___because it is the only kind they see advertised in the
newspapers and junk mail___.

Note that this is not a defence of Squeak's interface, although I must say
I have come to love it, except for the fonts.  When I can find a bit of
time I want to try BDF font importing, does that work in 3.0?

By the way, I wrote my data mining code in Squeak, but performance was
abysmal.  I rewrote it in C, and it worked fine.  Partly a matter of
needing giant hash tables, partly a matter of improving the algorithm.

But I'd never have got the C version working without the Squeak version.

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list