<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Please accept my apologies. I was completely ignoring the 'necessary and/or sufficient' and RTF line of thought. To me 'lost' means 'became extinct', so in that respect, NeXT didn't "lose". As far as the whole 'success of Squeak' thing goes, I don't think I'm nearly as passionate on this topic one way or the other as other people are.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Regarding the whole RTF thing - RTF reading and writing would be nice, but this has been done (http://www.smalltalking.net/Goodies/Dolphin/Files/doRTF.zip, for example). I think a valid area of discussion would be that while Squeak already includes richly formatted text capabilities, it can be quite difficult for new users to find 'the way in'. The various tools have some pretty disparate interfaces and sparse documentation, and even an experienced Squeaker can find it a bit daunting reading through the code to figure out how to use it. Is anybody interested in commenting on this idea?</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> -Dean</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>Bijan Parsia <bparsia@email.unc.edu></b></font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Sent by: squeak-dev-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org</font>
<p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">12/18/03 11:57 AM</font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Please respond to The general-purpose Squeak developers list </font>
<br>
<td><font size=1 face="Arial"> </font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif"> To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list <squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org></font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif"> cc: </font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif"> Subject: Re: [slightly OT]Re: rich text in Squeak</font></table>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 Dean_Swan@Mitel.COM wrote:<br>
<br>
> Bijan Pasia wrote:<br>
> >NEXT had RTF text widget support from the very start, plus a cool<br>
> >Smalltalkesque development enviroment and...well...lost. I don't think<br>
> the<br>
> >RTF support mattered significantly either way.<br>
><br>
> Pardon my digression here, but Mac OS-X would seem to refute the claim<br>
> that NeXT "lost." Probably the only 'significant' change is the<br>
> substitution of Quartz for Display Postscript.<br>
<br>
You're kidding, right?<br>
<br>
The change was being bought by a vastly huger company with an enormous<br>
installed base, and the top down imposed change, a very large rewrite of<br>
big chunks, plus a migration strategy for old code. Plus, a big ole<br>
marketing campaign. I seriously doubt that RTF had a bit to do with it.<br>
<br>
I think MacOSX backward compatibily is a pretty freaking huge change.<br>
<br>
If Squeak is picked up by Microsoft and imposed on everyone as the future<br>
of Windows, then I'm sure we'll win too. In some sense. But not with the<br>
mere addition of RTF!!!<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Bijan Parsia.<br>
<br>
<br>
</font>
<br>
<br>