On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Casey Ransberger
<casey.obrien.r at gmail.com> wrote:
> Inline below.
>
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 9:52 AM, Overcomer Man <overcomer.man at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> I suggest a new fork
[snip]
> :D I like the way you think!
>
>>
>> Recently I found Squeak / Cuis contains many Sound classes.  So I wrote up
>> an email suggesting it to a community college teacher friend who had asked
>> for a sound recorder.  Imagine my embarrassment when I found the files
>> Squeak supports doesn't include .mp3.
>
> Juan, I think it's time to bring out your synth, my friend! So .mp3 isn't
> necessarily a deal breaker. MPEG should be convertible to WAV, but FWIW,
> you're right. Squeak needs a Winamp/XMMS killer. Between this, and a
> standards-complient web browser (read: nightmarish rabbit-hole) I can
> practically ditch my operating system and live in Squeakland all the time.
> Wouldn't that be *radical?*

That is exactly what I want for OSP, the Squeak desktop *IS* the desktop.

>> Squeak has so much unfinished half starts at programs, why not adopt
>> Juan's work to flush the unnecessary, then get started on building a serious
>> applications team to build truly useful free code.
>
> Worth pointing out: applications which use Morphic will take real work to
> make run over Cuis. Morphic in Cuis is a whole new breed of animal; fast,
> lean, beautiful, and completely different from the tangle which many
> applications expect to find down there.

Not sure how to interpret this. Morphic is key to OSP, as it is to
OLPC. Are you saying that Morphic will not run on Cuis without
modification, but should it be ported the underlying system is fast
and lean?


>> Another example, Roxio is a million dollar software company making a video
>> recorder app. which is not as good as an ordinary VCR and not supported
>> (they have a staff but try getting any real help).  Squeak could be
>> capturing a slice of that market and enticing users to learn Smalltalk!  And
>> source code can substitute for most support.
>
> Yes! Redhat sells an open source operating system. We have an operating
> system that's actually pretty! Why not Mousehat or something (obviously I'm
> not from marketing)? I dig the entrepreneurial angle, Overcomer Man. I've
> been thinking about this stuff for years. I dream of a BSD kernel and
> nothing else but drivers and Squeak. Web browser is still an issue, but it's
> no problem money can't solve.

Maybe implementing a window frame class that allows apps to run in a
squeak window is all we need. Rather than build a web browser in
Squeak, open Mozilla it in a Squeak window. Think X tunneling on the
same host.

-- 
Gary Dunn
Open Slate Project
http://openslate.org/
Honolulu