mike clemow wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I'm going chime in with my $0.02 here, for what it's worth.  I'm
> positive that Brad is on the right track here.  But it seems to me,
> being that Smalltalk and hence Squeak is such a radical approach to
> computing, that the ideas behind the applications we're considering
> here change completely within the context of this platform.  I know
> that no one's suggesting this, but I would hate to have the team put
> their blood, sweat, and tears into replicating the same use-paradigm
> within which these applications normally manifest themselves on their
> current technology stacks.  That is to say, what Squeak/Smalltalk is
> to computing, it's applications should be to their problem domain.
> I'm sure those are high standards, but that is just what will make
> this work so well.  We should not be afraid to make paradigmatic
> improvements to the idea of an email application, say, or a
> word-processor, or a calendaring application.  IMHO, it would would
> only be in keeping with the spirit of the Dynabook and Squeak itself.

Exactly.

Maybe it shouldn't be called email or a web browser, because these evoke
images of current functionality, and that's not what I'm after. Maybe
think of the email app as a "time-shifted correspondence object engine".
And do more than text, but embed squeak objects. Sure, it could read
standard ASCII text (and html, since scamper would be improved.) The
transportation of morphic objects within a squeak "email", for example,
would be easy since a lot of this is already set up in squeak. You could
still correspond with others in standard email, but if both were using
the new improved Celeste, all kinds of things are possible. I really
haven't thought about it, this is just off the tip of my fingers.

The only thing I cringe about a squeak web browser is that web browsing
is so backwards - it's just a slightly better static paper magazine
page. Alternatively, it would be great to have a seaside browser within
squeak. A browser that could browse typical web pages with no problem
but when it came across a seaside site, would have additional squeak
features that wouldn't be available in your standard browser such as
Firefox. These features could increase the popularity of both seaside
and squeak.

And if these two engines were partitioned well within squeak, you could
utilize them together.


> 
> That being said, it's a wonderful idea we're discussing.  I'm
> certainly not saying that I have any genius ideas, but this group as a
> whole, I think, could make some great improvements.
> 
> Cheers,
> Michael
> 
> 
> On 1/31/07, Brad Fuller <brad at bradfuller.com> wrote:
>> Ralph Johnson wrote:
>> > Celeste is an e-mail reader.  Scamper is a web browser.  Both need
>> > improvement before they are killer apps, though I think some people
>> > ues Celeste every day.  See http://map.squeak.org
>> >
>> > Croquet is in some ways a radical rethinking of what the web could be
>> > like.  Sophie is very definitely a radical rethinking of what a book
>> > could be like.  You should take a look at those projects.
>> >
>> > Squeak is more likely to attract people by doing something unique like
>> > Croquet or Sophie than by trying to compete with the rest of the world
>> > with e-mail and web browsing.  But, if you can get people to make
>> > Celeste or Scamper good enough that a lot of people use them every
>> > day, more power to you!
>>
>> Thanks all for your comments.
>>
>> I completely agree that competition with today's email and browser apps
>> would be tough considering the competition and the ingrained usage and
>> preferences of users. I was only thinking of the best way to motivate
>> new users to squeak with something they already understand but with much
>> cooler features.
>>
>> Another way is to create a squeak app that satisfies an unfulfilled user
>> need but make it extremely easy to use (so they don't give up because
>> it's "too radical".) I like this approach better, but that requires more
>> brain power on the frontend of the squeak community.
>>
>> So, it came down to a decision of what could be successful.
>>
>> There's nothing wrong, though, in doing both, like Yann's idea of the
>> multipurpose bag that eliminates the usage of a filesystem or Derek's
>> multimedia management system or social networking tools coupled with
>> Scamper and Celeste completion.
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> brad fuller
>> www.bradfuller.com
>>
>>
> 
> 


-- 
brad fuller
www.bradfuller.com