Killer Application (was: Squeak Foundation)

Karl Goiser kgoiser at bigpond.net.au
Sun Jun 9 20:54:00 UTC 2002


Hi Gary,

No problems here - I especially liked the 'cargo cult' argument!

But I think that my point about Squeak being 'difficult' for new 
users still stands.


>Hi, Karl!
>
>I'm not an Aussie (I'm a Michigander, actually) but I certainly understand
>your point about having "to think about some of the most mundane things in
>order to get on with what I wanted to do . . . "  I face that daily, whether
>I'm dealing with door handles, drinking fountains or ball-point pens,
>automobiles, checkbooks or thousands of other everyday items designed to
>conform with a particular paradigm I happen not to share.
>
>Like many others in my situation, I consider it generally a wonderful thing
>(when I happen to consider it at all) exactly *because* it leads me to think
>about those things others overlook.
>
>That doesn't translate precisely to the Squeak GUI concerns you expressed,
>but I believe there is at least a superficial correspondence in that (1) the
>Squeak GUI helps reinforce the paradigm shift that Squeak itself
>represents -- the user isn't lulled into "thinking in [name another language
>here]" and simply translating to Squeak and (2) the Squeak GUI challenges
>the assumption that the evolution of the GUI itself from ST76 to Mac '84 to
>Win 1-2-3-9x (with various evolutionary sideroads) truly resulted in the
>ultimate user interface.
>
>There is a story from your general part of the world which describes
>indigent populations on small islands receiving assistance packages dropped
>by parachute in the closing months of the Second World War.  As outsiders
>were later able to visit these people in person, they occasionally found
>crude representations of airplanes on the beaches, being worshipped (or at
>least highly honored) as the source of the life-saving food and other items
>that had fallen from the sky.  Called "cargo cults," these people had
>mistakenly confused the interface -- the airplane -- with the benefit it had
>conveyed.
>
>Squeak remains true to the fundamental principles which underlie the Mac/Win
>GUI (see Larry Tesler's "The Smalltalk Environment" in the August '81 BYTE)
>but happens to extend them in a few directions others may have overlooked.
>This does not *limit* the user, but extends his or her grasp in ways no less
>intuitive than the commercial GUIs.  The "learning curve" is an issue only
>for those of us who have to be pushed back down it; kids seem to pick up the
>Squeak view without difficulty.
>
>And that brings us around again to the beginning -- what's "different" about
>Squeak's GUI is not in that it strays from what epistomologically *should*
>be, but from what pragmatically *happens* to be.  That is not necessarily a
>bad thing, though it does tend to spook us old horses from time to time.
><G>
>
>Gary
>
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Karl Goiser" <kgoiser at bigpond.net.au>
>To: <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
>Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2002 10:41 PM
>Subject: Re: Killer Application (was: Squeak Foundation)
>
>
>>  Hi Gary,
>>
>>  I don't have any argument with you about the relative quality of
>>  various GUI's.  My problem with Squeak is that its is _different_ and
>>  there are some very well established user interface principles about
>>  similarity, predictability and learning that means that switching
>>  between <insert your os here> and Squeak just won't do.
>>
>>  (I was recently in the USA for Apple's WWDC.  I am an Aussie, so I
>>  had to think about some of the most mundane things in order to get on
>>  with what I wanted to do because so many things were the opposite to
>>  what I was used to: light switches were 'upside down', sink taps
>>  turned the 'wrong way' - and I had to be so careful when crossing
>>  streets because cars drove on the 'wrong side of road'.)
>>
>>  I don't have an argument with the Squeak user interface - I think it
>>  is really good to have something like this where research can be done
>>  - I just wish there were something just like Squeak that used <insert
>  > your os here> as well.
>>
>>  Look at it from a newcomer's point of view: Squeak has a wonderful
>>  language, a great library (viewable in source too) and an unsurpassed
>>  development environment, but how are they going to find out about
>>  those things if they can't get past the idiosyncratically unique user
>>  interface?
>>
>>  In my opinion, you get more users to Squeak by showing them a better
>>  way to achieve their goals, not another planet to live on.  (Ok, some
>>  users will want to live on another planet, and that is fine too).
>>
>  > Karl




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list