send a cs.

Stef

On 18 juin 05, at 13:42, Rudi Bichler wrote:

Yep. I totally agree. Simply coloring oll the text and list panes in the tools to white is already an incredible improvement and - I think - very easy to realize.

Chris Schreiner chris.schreiner@online.no wrote: This LookEnhancement; what a pleasant changeset :-)

Stéphane Ducasse skrev:

...

Hi all

I was at Lugano and I did yet another squeak demo to young programmers, they were impressed but after they show me what they were doing in Java and ....I was impressed by the quality of the look of their applications and I thought that if we do not do anything about look we should not say that we want to have more squeakers but keep playing between us. So does anybody wants that Squeak can talk with young programmer of 2000?

I would really like that Squeak out of the box look improves. Here is what I suggest, we have different possibilities

• (1) either load a skin package and use a nice skin
• (2) load the LookEnhancement available at

MCHttpRepository location: 'http://squeak.saltypickle.com/LookEnhancements' user: '' password: '' This package is doing a lot of overrides so we cannot load it simply in 3.9 and it would be better to have it inside the image.

• (3) speed the changes of diego

• (4) Do a competition of the better look for squeak

-- here the criteria should be that the system should be cool -- responsive -- as less intrusive as possible

Stef

---

Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

Whats up with the border?? Its thin again...

Rudi Bichler skrev:

Hi, here's my cs as an attachment (for 3.7). I simply changed most of the panes of the tools from transparent to white. This creates ugly colors for the big button rows so I changed theses colors as well (in the browser and in the debugger).

It's not a huge change but IMHO it improves the look (a bit:-)

Rudi

*/stéphane ducasse ducasse@iam.unibe.ch/* wrote:

send a cs.

Stef

On 18 juin 05, at 13:42, Rudi Bichler wrote:

>
> Yep. I totally agree. Simply coloring oll the text and list panes
> in the tools to white is already an incredible improvement and - I
> think - very easy to realize.
>
>
>
>
> Chris Schreiner wrote: This
> LookEnhancement; what a pleasant changeset :-)
>
> Stéphane Ducasse skrev:
>
> > Hi all
> >
> > I was at Lugano and I did yet another squeak demo to young
> > programmers, they were impressed
> > but after they show me what they were doing in Java and ....I was
> > impressed by the quality of the look
> > of their applications and I thought that if we do not do anything
> > about look we should not say that we want to have more
squeakers but
> > keep playing between us. So does anybody wants that Squeak can
talk
> > with young programmer of 2000?
> >
> > I would really like that Squeak out of the box look improves.
> > Here is what I suggest, we have different possibilities
> >
> > - (1) either load a skin package and use a nice skin
> > - (2) load the LookEnhancement available at
> > MCHttpRepository
> > location: 'http://squeak.saltypickle.com/LookEnhancements'
> > user: ''
> > password: ''
> > This package is doing a lot of overrides so we cannot load it
> > simply in 3.9
> > and it would be better to have it inside the image.
> > - (3) speed the changes of diego
> >
> > - (4) Do a competition of the better look for squeak
> > -- here the criteria should be that the system should be cool
> > -- responsive
> > -- as less intrusive as possible
> >
> >
> > Stef
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>

---

Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

---

'From Squeak3.7 of ''4 September 2004'' [latest update: #5989] on 18 June 2005 at 6:53:39 pm'!

!CodeHolder methodsFor: 'controls' stamp: 'RB 6/18/2005 18:10'! addOptionalButtonsTo: window at: fractions plus: verticalOffset "If the receiver wishes it, add a button pane to the window, and answer the verticalOffset plus the height added"

| delta buttons divider | self wantsOptionalButtons ifFalse: [^verticalOffset]. delta _ self defaultButtonPaneHeight. buttons _ self optionalButtonRow color: (Display depth <= 8 ifTrue: [Color transparent] ifFalse: [Color gray alpha: 0.2]); borderWidth: 0. Preferences alternativeWindowLook ifTrue:[ buttons color: (Color r: 0.73 g: 0.88 b: 0.582). buttons submorphsDo:[:m| m borderWidth: 2; borderColor: #raised]. ]. divider _ BorderedSubpaneDividerMorph forBottomEdge. Preferences alternativeWindowLook ifTrue:[ divider extent: 4@4; color: Color transparent; borderColor: #raised; borderWidth: 2. ]. window addMorph: buttons fullFrame: (LayoutFrame fractions: fractions offsets: (0@verticalOffset corner: 0@(verticalOffset + delta - 1))). window addMorph: divider fullFrame: (LayoutFrame fractions: fractions offsets: (0@(verticalOffset + delta - 1) corner: 0@(verticalOffset + delta))). ^ verticalOffset + delta! !

!Debugger methodsFor: 'controls' stamp: 'RB 6/18/2005 18:52'! addOptionalButtonsTo: window at: fractions plus: verticalOffset "Add button panes to the window. A row of custom debugger-specific buttons (Proceed, Restart, etc.) is always added, and if optionalButtons is in force, then the standard code-tool buttons are also added. Answer the verticalOffset plus the height added."

| delta buttons divider anOffset | anOffset _ (Preferences optionalButtons and: [Preferences extraDebuggerButtons]) ifTrue: [super addOptionalButtonsTo: window at: fractions plus: verticalOffset] ifFalse: [verticalOffset].

delta _ self defaultButtonPaneHeight. buttons _ self customButtonRow. buttons color: (Display depth <= 8 ifTrue: [Color transparent] ifFalse: [Color gray alpha: 0.2]); borderWidth: 0. Preferences alternativeWindowLook ifTrue: [buttons color: (Color r: 0.73 g: 0.88 b: 0.582). buttons submorphsDo:[:m | m borderWidth: 2; borderColor: #raised]]. divider _ BorderedSubpaneDividerMorph forBottomEdge. Preferences alternativeWindowLook ifTrue: [divider extent: 4@4; color: Color transparent; borderColor: #raised; borderWidth: 2]. window addMorph: buttons fullFrame: (LayoutFrame fractions: fractions offsets: (0@anOffset corner: 0@(anOffset + delta - 1))). window addMorph: divider fullFrame: (LayoutFrame fractions: fractions offsets: (0@(anOffset + delta - 1) corner: 0@(anOffset + delta))). ^ anOffset + delta! !

!PluggableListMorph methodsFor: 'initialization' stamp: 'RB 6/18/2005 18:06'! on: anObject list: getListSel selected: getSelectionSel changeSelected: setSelectionSel menu: getMenuSel keystroke: keyActionSel self model: anObject. getListSelector _ getListSel. getIndexSelector _ getSelectionSel. setIndexSelector _ setSelectionSel. getMenuSelector _ getMenuSel. keystrokeActionSelector _ keyActionSel. autoDeselect _ true. self borderWidth: 1. self color: Color white. self updateList. self selectionIndex: self getCurrentSelectionIndex. self initForKeystrokes! !

!PluggableMessageCategoryListMorph methodsFor: 'as yet unclassified' stamp: 'RB 6/18/2005 18:09'! on: anObject list: getListSel selected: getSelectionSel changeSelected: setSelectionSel menu: getMenuSel keystroke: keyActionSel getRawListSelector: getRawSel. self model: anObject. getListSelector _ getListSel. getIndexSelector _ getSelectionSel. setIndexSelector _ setSelectionSel. getMenuSelector _ getMenuSel. keystrokeActionSelector _ keyActionSel. autoDeselect _ true. self borderWidth: 1. self color: Color white. getRawListSelector _ getRawSel. self updateList. self selectionIndex: self getCurrentSelectionIndex. self initForKeystrokes! !

!PluggableTextMorph methodsFor: 'initialization' stamp: 'RB 6/18/2005 18:08'! on: anObject text: getTextSel accept: setTextSel readSelection: getSelectionSel menu: getMenuSel

self model: anObject. getTextSelector _ getTextSel. setTextSelector _ setTextSel. getSelectionSelector _ getSelectionSel. getMenuSelector _ getMenuSel. self borderWidth: 1. self color: Color white. self setText: self getText. self setSelection: self getSelection.! !

!SystemWindow methodsFor: 'panes' stamp: 'RB 6/18/2005 18:30'! addMorph: aMorph fullFrame: aLayoutFrame

super addMorph: aMorph fullFrame: aLayoutFrame.

paneMorphs _ paneMorphs copyReplaceFrom: 1 to: 0 with: (Array with: aMorph). Preferences alternativeWindowLook ifFalse: [aMorph borderWidth: 1. aMorph color: Color white] ifTrue: [aMorph adoptPaneColor: self paneColor. aMorph borderWidth: 2; borderColor: #inset]. Preferences scrollBarsOnRight "reorder panes so flop-out right-side scrollbar is visible" ifTrue: [self addMorphBack: aMorph]! !

---

On Jun 18, 2005, at 4:21 AM, Chris Schreiner wrote:

This LookEnhancement; what a pleasant changeset :-)

I agree; it looks great. Can anyone with a slow computer (Tim? :-) ) comment on how fast it is compared to the regular look?

Josh

Stéphane Ducasse skrev:

...

Hi all

I was at Lugano and I did yet another squeak demo to young programmers, they were impressed but after they show me what they were doing in Java and ....I was impressed by the quality of the look of their applications and I thought that if we do not do anything about look we should not say that we want to have more squeakers but keep playing between us. So does anybody wants that Squeak can talk with young programmer of 2000?

I would really like that Squeak out of the box look improves. Here is what I suggest, we have different possibilities

- (1) either load a skin package and use a nice skin
- (2) load the LookEnhancement available at
MCHttpRepository
location: 'http://squeak.saltypickle.com/LookEnhancements'
user: ''
password: ''
This package is doing a lot of overrides so we cannot load it   

simply in 3.9 and it would be better to have it inside the image. - (3) speed the changes of diego

- (4) Do a competition of the better look for squeak
    -- here the criteria should be that the system should be cool
    -- responsive
    -- as less intrusive as possible

Stef

On Jun 18, 2005, at 4:05 PM, Raymond Asselin wrote:

Le 2005/06/18, Josh Gargus schwa@fastmail.us écrivait :

...

On Jun 18, 2005, at 4:21 AM, Chris Schreiner wrote:

...

This LookEnhancement; what a pleasant changeset :-)

I agree; it looks great. Can anyone with a slow computer (Tim? :-) )

Josh, I don't know why :) but I found this one...a good one !

I'm not sure I understand. The reason that I used :-) is that Tim is always (justifiably) complaining about how Squeak/Morphic keep getting slower on his Acorn. Are you also saying that you have a slow computer, and it works well for you?

Josh

Raymond

On Jun 19, 2005, at 10:40 AM, Raymond Asselin wrote:

Le 2005/06/18, Josh Gargus schwa@fastmail.us écrivait :

...

Are you also saying that you have a slow computer, and it works well for you?

No but I like the Tim's humoristic remarks and I read your post as a "clin d'oeil" to this.

Ah, I see. It was indeed.

(Yay! I learned a new French phrase)

Josh

Ciao

Now, as for look and feel stuff for Squeak, the suggested LookEnhancments-jrp. 12 is quite reasonable as a small but definite improvement. I certainly prefer the black text on white background. A lot of the following commentary is not specifically the 'fault' of the suggested improvements, so please don't think I'm blaming Ben & John.

Keep in mind that we worked up these look enhancements to meet the following critieria:

1. Stay within the current SystemWindow framework and, as such, we did not focus on addressing problems with all the UI widgets and we did not focus on makiing a complete overhaul to the visual style. 2. Make a few high impact changes to give a new look and feel while modifyng the least amount of code since we were modifying SystemWindow and other Morphic objects.

The window frame is ok in general.

I'm not convinced by the very flat appearance of the frame buttons, particularly not by the ugly grey circle that appears when you press them. I'd also point out that the 'collapse circle' is really ugly; a decently anti- aliased one ought to be easy to cache. In general something supposed to be a button ought to have some visual separation from its background. It should have a clearly different but related appearance while it is pushed.

This is already built into squeak. We only turned "alternativeWindowBoxesLook" off in preferences.

The inner frames are too thick in my opinion and rather intrusive. I'd say

make them thinner and mark the divider-mover part with a dark line rather than making the whole thing thick enough to fit a dot inside. There is an old and very annoying problem with the divider stuff in that the cursor changes and seems to jam up the UI - an artifact of uncompleted event driven changes I suspect. I suggest the divider should have movability only in a marked place (the centre, normally) and not along its entire length. I'll note in passing that morphic produces divider behaviour at the top of the 'instance|?|class' buttons as well even though no visual divider exists. Nasty.

I think these are mostly issues with SystemWindow. The divider behavior is actually quite intertwined in SystemWindow and hard to modify. We did make the dividers 6 pixels wide. If that is too wide, I suspect we could ultimately make them 3 pixels with a 1 pixel divider handle in the middle. I would have to explore the implications of usability.

Window resizing handles - nicer than assumed ones all over the place. More clear difference to the divider handles would be good. The performance when resizing is appalling on my machine, suggesting some optimisation would be beneficial. One UI facility I find useful on RISC OS when risiezing is that if you drag the resize handles to/past the edge of the screen, the topleft moves up & left so the window can grow.

Again, these are mostly comments about SystemWindow in general. I agree in general. The divider handles which dub as our resizing handles I've kind of grown attached to, but there are a lot of different styles one could imaging if we just had a more versitle theme engine built into Squeak.

Window moving. Morphic seems to assume that if you grab something in a place that does nothing else you obviously want to move it. I really hate that for windows. Especially since there seem to be small but too-easily touchable places in every window.

Agreed.

Roundedcorners. Yuck. So utterly passe and kindergarten-winXP.

This one is quite interesting. Seems that everyone wants to implement round corners on web sites these days (even gmail has em). So I am not quite so sure they are utterly passe. Isn't everyone tired of the same ole' boring square windows that come out of the box on windoze? I am. Square windows are utterly passe!

<snip />

I'm sure I can extend the critique if anybody is interested - and as I said

above, this is mostly not aimed at Ben & John but at the general state of the Squeak UI.

Agreed. We need to overhaul the Squeak UI. I still believe this is primarily what holds us (Squeakers) back from getting serious attention by the development community. Ben and I (mostly Ben) built the Look Enhancements on the cheap to make Squeak more pleasant to work in. We didn't want to solve all the problems with the Squeak UI -- just make it a place that I want to work in. That it has done for me and Ben. I would be happy to join others on revamping the Squeak UI widget set to be more modern if we could get a group of us working on it.

Regards,

John

Hi john

I liked your simple approach. What I would like to see if if we can fix simple glitches of your style or others and use it to improve the squeak default look. May be tweak will save the rest but I'm not sure. So I would really like to get something now instead of dreaming about tomorrow (that may not happen). So what do you think about that?

Stef

Now, as for look and feel stuff for Squeak, the suggested LookEnhancments-jrp. 12 is quite reasonable as a small but definite improvement. I certainly prefer the black text on white background. A lot of the following commentary is not specifically the 'fault' of the suggested improvements, so please don't think I'm blaming Ben & John.

Keep in mind that we worked up these look enhancements to meet the following critieria:

1. Stay within the current SystemWindow framework and, as such, we

did not focus on addressing problems with all the UI widgets and we did not focus on makiing a complete overhaul to the visual style. 2. Make a few high impact changes to give a new look and feel while modifyng the least amount of code since we were modifying SystemWindow and other Morphic objects.

The window frame is ok in general.

I'm not convinced by the very flat appearance of the frame buttons, particularly not by the ugly grey circle that appears when you press them. I'd also point out that the 'collapse circle' is really ugly; a decently anti- aliased one ought to be easy to cache. In general something supposed to be a button ought to have some visual separation from its background. It should have a clearly different but related appearance while it is pushed.

This is already built into squeak. We only turned "alternativeWindowBoxesLook" off in preferences.

The inner frames are too thick in my opinion and rather intrusive. I'd say make them thinner and mark the divider-mover part with a dark line rather than making the whole thing thick enough to fit a dot inside. There is an old and very annoying problem with the divider stuff in that the cursor changes and seems to jam up the UI - an artifact of uncompleted event driven changes I suspect. I suggest the divider should have movability only in a marked place (the centre, normally) and not along its entire length. I'll note in passing that morphic produces divider behaviour at the top of the 'instance|?|class' buttons as well even though no visual divider exists. Nasty.

I think these are mostly issues with SystemWindow. The divider behavior is actually quite intertwined in SystemWindow and hard to modify. We did make the dividers 6 pixels wide. If that is too wide, I suspect we could ultimately make them 3 pixels with a 1 pixel divider handle in the middle. I would have to explore the implications of usability.

Window resizing handles - nicer than assumed ones all over the place. More clear difference to the divider handles would be good. The performance when resizing is appalling on my machine, suggesting some optimisation would be beneficial. One UI facility I find useful on RISC OS when risiezing is that if you drag the resize handles to/past the edge of the screen, the topleft moves up & left so the window can grow.

Again, these are mostly comments about SystemWindow in general. I agree in general. The divider handles which dub as our resizing handles I've kind of grown attached to, but there are a lot of different styles one could imaging if we just had a more versitle theme engine built into Squeak.

Window moving. Morphic seems to assume that if you grab something in a place that does nothing else you obviously want to move it. I really hate that for windows. Especially since there seem to be small but too-easily touchable places in every window.

Agreed.

Roundedcorners. Yuck. So utterly passe and kindergarten-winXP.

This one is quite interesting. Seems that everyone wants to implement round corners on web sites these days (even gmail has em). So I am not quite so sure they are utterly passe. Isn't everyone tired of the same ole' boring square windows that come out of the box on windoze? I am. Square windows are utterly passe!

<snip />

I'm sure I can extend the critique if anybody is interested - and as I said above, this is mostly not aimed at Ben & John but at the general state of the Squeak UI.

Agreed. We need to overhaul the Squeak UI. I still believe this is primarily what holds us (Squeakers) back from getting serious attention by the development community. Ben and I (mostly Ben) built the Look Enhancements on the cheap to make Squeak more pleasant to work in. We didn't want to solve all the problems with the Squeak UI -- just make it a place that I want to work in. That it has done for me and Ben. I would be happy to join others on revamping the Squeak UI widget set to be more modern if we could get a group of us working on it.

Regards,

John

-- It's easy to have a complicated idea. It's very very hard to have a simple idea. -- Carver Mead

On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 05:21:42PM -0700, Tim Rowledge wrote:

The inner frames are too thick in my opinion and rather intrusive. I'd say make them thinner and mark the divider-mover part with a dark line rather than making the whole thing thick enough to fit a dot inside. There is an old and very annoying problem with the divider stuff in that the cursor changes and seems to jam up the UI - an artifact of uncompleted event driven changes I suspect.

I'm not sure if what you're describing is the same thing I'm thinking of, but it sounds like an issue related to switching from the hardware cursor to a software cursor. When the hand is showing a temporary cursor, the hardware cursor is made invisible, and we rely on Morphic to draw the cursor for us. Since we have to wait for the Morphic redraw, there is a very annoying glitch on slow machines where the cursor seems to get stuck or move discontinuously when switching the cursor back and forth like this. At one time in the distant past, I wrote a patch for this which maintained a hardware cursor when possible, as well as fixing a problem with software hands (Morphic replay and Nebraska) and the fast window resizing preference. I found it to be a great improvement, but apparently nobody else noticed, and that was that.

With respect to window design, I would like to have a thinner graphical border for the handle region than in the proposed look enhancement, but to have the actual active region be slightly wider than the border.

-Jesse

Attaching a .mcz of the washed out effect. I'll take this opportunity to say also that this was so easy to do because of the amazing usability of Monticello!!! It was so easy to find where to make the change because of Monticello's interface -- just browse changes, look for the most likely candidate, browse senders, change code. I love it!!

I checked-in a different effect but kept the gradient color on inactive windows. Check it out, I think it is more obvious than washing out. I really like the "active" window to be the brightest as the eye is naturally drawn to the brightest object on the screen.

Regards,

John

The button colors are a bit too pale because sometimes we do not see their border and the size of the fonts for windows is a bit too big. Beside that I like the look.

Stef

Stéphane Ducasse wrote:

...

• (2) load the LookEnhancement available at

MCHttpRepository location: 'http://squeak.saltypickle.com/LookEnhancements' user: '' password: ''

I really like this. Who is maintaining this? I have one suggestion. The inactive window's color looks really blocky when it loses its gradient look. Why not keep the gradient look and just wash the window out some? Or the active window could have a darker or bolder border.

-- Jason Rogers

"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." Galatians 2:20

sure john I did that already. My point was more what is reasonable as a default look for the image.

On 6/18/05, stéphane ducasse ducasse@iam.unibe.ch wrote: The button colors are a bit too pale because sometimes we do not see their border

I'm not sure that is caused by the LookEnhancements.

I will try my other settings.

and the size of the fonts for windows is a bit too big. Beside that I like the look.

Just edit your system preferences and down the Window Title font size from 15 to 12 points. Looks better I think.

Stef

John

Thumbs up overall... the contrast with the white pane background is really nice.

The old style of having everything in the window a different shade of one color (e.g. green) was getting pretty monotonous, that's just bad graphic design. Of course, I guess that look evolved over time. It might even be nice to change the scrollbars to be a separate, contrasting color.

FYI, I think the solid color on the background windows is fine. Although the transparent buttons do look odd, those could use some sort of change.

If we incorporated it, I predict some would complain that you can't resize the windows along the side or the bottom anymore, but I'm okay with that.

Also, I can't tell by looking at the .mcz file whether this change is for Squeak 3.7, or 3.8, or ..., which is frustrating. Somehow the window titles got changed back to bold... I tend to think the BitStreamVeraSans bold font is just a bit too fat.

- Doug

On Jun 18, 2005, at 12:54 PM, John Pierce wrote:

Ben Schroeder and myself (John Pierce) maintain this look. While we are kind of picky about the look and want a clean presentation, we will look at suggestions and incorporate as appropriate.

Regards,

John

On 6/18/05, Jason Rogers jacaetevha@fast-mail.org wrote: Stéphane Ducasse wrote:

...

• (2) load the LookEnhancement available at

MCHttpRepository location: 'http://squeak.saltypickle.com/LookEnhancements ' user: '' password: ''

I really like this. Who is maintaining this? I have one suggestion. The inactive window's color looks really blocky when it loses its gradient look. Why not keep the gradient look and just wash the window out some? Or the active window could have a darker or bolder border.

-- Jason Rogers

"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me."     Galatians 2:20

-- It's easy to have a complicated idea. It's very very hard to have a simple idea. -- Carver Mead

Hi john

This is a cool look. I like the changes of jason :). I think that if we want to change the out of the box look of squeak your changes should be push in the image since there are a lot of overrides and this is important that there is not too much difference between basic and full images. We discussed with marcus about that because I wanted to have it in 3.8 final....but for the reasons above we did not make it.

Stef

Ben Schroeder and myself (John Pierce) maintain this look. While we are kind of picky about the look and want a clean presentation, we will look at suggestions and incorporate as appropriate.

Regards,

John

On 6/18/05, Jason Rogers jacaetevha@fast-mail.org wrote: Stéphane Ducasse wrote:

...

• (2) load the LookEnhancement available at

MCHttpRepository location: 'http://squeak.saltypickle.com/LookEnhancements ' user: '' password: ''

I really like this. Who is maintaining this? I have one suggestion. The inactive window's color looks really blocky when it loses its gradient look. Why not keep the gradient look and just wash the window out some? Or the active window could have a darker or bolder border.

-- Jason Rogers

"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." Galatians 2:20

-- It's easy to have a complicated idea. It's very very hard to have a simple idea. -- Carver Mead