<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PersonName"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>My comment on Visual Works was referring to
7.4. The UI looks like Windows 2000 gunmetal gray. I have not
looked at it under OS/X yet. I agree that the Squeak UI takes some
getting used to. In particular the set of targets on the window are not
obviously available. But, then all the Smalltalk UIs rely on mouse
buttons to trigger menus or other UI to issue commands. It does look like
Dolphin can look the slickest, but I have explored it the least.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>As a developer I do not like the VW or
Dolphin browsers nearly as well as the traditional system browser. Tree
controls are nasty things that require a very accurate mouse click to access,
and produce very long lists of items. Then again in Eclipse I basically
never use a browser but always do the equivalent of “find class” to
locate classes. The use of namespaces in VW seems a bit kludgy, and has
only limited value over a set of prefix letters. Using namespaces in Java
where the same class name is shared is a royal pain. It is far better to
have unique names.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Michael<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font size=2
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
squeak-dev-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org
[mailto:squeak-dev-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org] <b><span
style='font-weight:bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>Mike Hales<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Thursday, May 11, 2006 4:15
PM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> <st1:PersonName w:st="on">The
general-purpose Squeak developers list</st1:PersonName><br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re: Smalltalk: Requiem or
Resurgence? {Dr. Dobb's Journal (05/06/06) Chan, Jeremy}</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>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.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>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. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>I think dolphin has the look that makes it easier for people to want to
look deeper.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>We shouldn't judge books by their cover, but everyone does.
That's totally normal. Even if it has a 350 under the hood, who wants to
drive a rusted out chevy nova? Or who wants a ferrari painted with a
bunch of wierd random pastels? <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Getting a little sex appeal, together with the amazingly cool Smalltalk
features would make a huge difference in drawing new users. Look at Apple
for example. Why buy an ipod or a mac when they cost more for the same
functions. Because you like using them. It is a pleasure to see the
great design. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>We always say how if you don't like how squeak looks you can change
it. But why not make it handsome from the get go and let the guys who
want it ugly change it?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Mike<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span class=gmailquote><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>On 5/11/06, <b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Michael
Latta</span></b> <<a href="mailto:lattam@mac.com">lattam@mac.com</a>>
wrote:</span></font></span> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>I really do not have an
issue with the Squeak UI. It is different from the<br>
platform UI but seems reasonably well implemented and such. The size
of <br>
scroll bars and borders is a bit small for my taste and eyes these days.<br>
But, since this is Smalltalk I can always change them!<br>
<br>
Mostly I was referring to the perception of Smalltalk as a language/system<br>
that had its day and was on the decline. That is generally the
response I <br>
get when mentioning it to those that have not actually used it on a project,<br>
or who have been converted to the mainstream of Java or .Net.<br>
<br>
The VisualWorks UI is a bit dated and still has the annoying 10 year old bug <br>
of not always repainting windows properly. That bug alone makes it look<br>
dated.<br>
<br>
Michael<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: <a href="mailto:squeak-dev-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org">squeak-dev-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org
</a><br>
[mailto:<a href="mailto:squeak-dev-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org">squeak-dev-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org</a>]
On Behalf Of Bob Erb<br>
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 3:03 PM<br>
To: <st1:PersonName w:st="on">The general-purpose Squeak developers list</st1:PersonName>
<br>
Subject: Re: Smalltalk: Requiem or Resurgence? {Dr. Dobb's Journal<br>
(05/06/06) Chan, Jeremy}<br>
<br>
On 5/10/06, Michael Latta <<a href="mailto:lattam@mac.com">lattam@mac.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
> While Squeak can do far more than Ruby or Python, they <br>
> get much more press. In part this is because Smalltalk is seen
as old.<br>
<br>
The out-of-the-box UI is very old-fashioned; quaint, with the mousey<br>
eyes, and the little window with the balloon, and the quirky colors. Maybe <br>
a slick update -- for programmers, rather than kids -- would help dispell<br>
the "old" image. Maybe LCARS . . . :-)<br>
<br>
- Bob<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><br>
<br clear=all>
<br>
-- <br>
Mike Hales<br>
Engineering Manager <br>
KnowledgeScape<br>
<a href="http://www.kscape.com">www.kscape.com</a> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>