Gary
Well, Squeak Projects are better tool to organize environment than one
Windows provide, agree, though it requires user to be work entirely in
Squeak.  Thread  "Multiple OS Windows for Squeak" discussing possible
solutions for the problem. It would allow Squeak UI be more transparent to
base OS.
I've played with dotNet bridge. Nice: for Windows it is possible to use
Squeak as dot net applications development environment with workspaces, and,
I believe, browsers etc.
Vaidas


> -----Original Message-----
> From: zeppy at australia.edu [mailto:zeppy at australia.edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 2:53 PM
> To: vaidas at informaciniaiprojektai.lt; The general-purpose Squeak
> developers list
> Subject: Re: User interface (invisible world)
>
>
> Well it took a while for to get used with projects in Squeak. I always
> wanted to break morphs of the environment (probably because I was
> used with
> Java). But I quite like projects now.The things you want to do can be done
> with Squeak running.
> Bye,
> Gary
>
> >Actually this was my old friend's question when I showed how
> easy to build
> >thing in squeak.
> >I think that it is natural to ask that. I use MS Outlook, Word. Windows
> are
> >my primarily environment for me. Say I build some Requirements Management
> >Tool. While working with it I want to see windows desktop to see when
> >letters arrive or something like that happens.
> >Vaidas
> >
> >>I used to think that was a good idea but now I think it is not a good
> one.
> >>What do you want to happen. What morph exactly ?
> >>Bye,
> >>Gary
> >>>Hello,
> >
> >>>Does Squeak desktop applications must live in world?.
> >>Is it possible for morph to move out of the world to my desktop?
> >>>User could see only only that morph if it is the only thing
> needed to do
> >>>the job.
> >>>regards,
> >>>Vaidas
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>