Smalltalk: Requiem or Resurgence? {Dr. Dobb's Journal (05/06/06) Chan, Jeremy}

Hans N Beck hnbeck at
Fri May 12 06:07:49 UTC 2006


Am 12.05.2006 um 01:15 schrieb Mike Hales:

> I think that the VW UI looks quite good under Windows and Mac OS.   
> It has also had many changes to the look and the tools as it has  
> progressed from version to version.  Look at 7.* compared to 5i.4   
> and 3.0.
> Squeak on the other hand looks wierd on all platforms with no sign  
> of change.  I am dedicated Smalltalker and Squeak's UI is a huge  
> barrier for entry for me.  I can't imagine that any non-smalltalker  
> would see it and like it.  It's strengths are far greater than it's  
> weaknesses but it takes a certain level of proficiency to finally  
> realize that.

just as a remark: I've had always trouble to convince marketing  
people with the look of VW, even 7.3 (or 7.4). It was astonishing -  
they always cried "hey, that's not windows" at demos with VW. They  
have a remarkable sense for "native" windows look :-))

 From a developer point of view (VW and .Net C#), VW looks good from  
a absolute point of view, but there is something missing. I have  
great hope for pollock, the new GUI framework. But it comes sooooo  

My experience is that: if it is important to look like "native"  
windows application, it must be perfect and provide the expected GUi  
in all detail and with all bells and wistles provided by .Net Windows  
Forms and special GUI libraries available for that (not to speak of  
the possibilities of Windows vista and Windows presentation  
foundation = avalon). Here we are talking about Outlook Bars,  
draggable Toolbars, MDI look .........

On the other side, if there is no force to be like Windows, all is  
allowed. For this case, even squeak look does not matter.



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list