Just finished an article http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,50037,00.html about how the Mono project has adopted the X11 licensing terms.
The downside of "custom versions" could be offset by having some kind of branding at the organizational level.
For the record, our attitude as a company is that we do benefit from what Squeak brings us, therefore when it comes to software we create that does not involve our core business but provides a service we need, it's in our best interests to cough it up. Someone else might pick it up and run with it, and we just admitted we'd rather be a consumer than a producer.
However, we do want to protect our virtual reality core, it's our real asset and how we make money. I think the Squeak world can support the uneasy peaceful coexistance of free and commercial solutions in the same space; from our perspective we think Alice is very very nice. But we also think we can make our living on a more sophisticated package for a smaller audience, but for that the license needs to protect us as well as Squeak.
So I put in my vote for the concerns that have been addressed by Mono and wonder if anyone has any comments on the X11 license, since I spent grand total of 5 minutes looking at it and IANAL.
Mark
Mark Mullin mark@vibrant3d.com said:
So I put in my vote for the concerns that have been addressed by Mono and wonder if anyone has any comments on the X11 license, since I spent grand total of 5 minutes looking at it and IANAL.
There's two kind of open source licenses, and the Wired article neatly summarizes them at the end. On the one hand, you've got the 'political agenda' licenses like GPL that mandate that every derived work is open source as well - this viral clause ensures that no-one can "hit-and-run", like Microsoft did when taking the BSD TCP/IP stack for their latest Windoze systems. On the other hand, there's the 'here is some source code, be happy with it' license, that is more relaxed about this possibility. The latter license is distinctly more attractive to commercial firms, because they have the possibility to mix open source and proprietary code and bring that out as a closed-source product.
Then, there's the middle ground. I think it started with the GNU Library/Lesser GPL, that allows the combination of LGPL and non-LGPL code in a restricted way. It works well for shared libraries, for example - linking to an LGPL'ed shared library doesn't create a derived work according to the license, which makes distributing proprietary software possible under Linux. The Squeak License also takes this middle ground. It is 'viral' in that modifications to the virtual machine or the base Smalltalk classes must be shared, but at the same time allows you to do whatever you want with the code you add to that. I think it is a very practical and reasonable middle ground, and meshes well with how you feel about what you will and what you will not contribute.
The Jini Community follows much the same model although it's not open source (you can only share with other licensees, but becoming a licensee is a matter of accepting a click-through license). Richard Gabriel and Ron Goldman developed a pattern language around the idea of a community that shares common code, but at the same time wants to compete with non-common code. I think large parts of it apply to the Squeak Community as well, so everyone should read it. You can find it at:
http://jini.org/JiniCommunityPL.html
(Philosophically, I'm all in favor of the GPL, but that's because I think that intellectual property has outlived its usefulness (if any), and that's an alltogether different discussion).
an interesting action would be also to run the ANSI tests suite (I do not know where it is) and check how we can be as much as possible compliant.
This way we could be sure that Squeak is a superset of these tests and may be we missed some functionality.
Stef
I have found on my hard disk the ANSI tests suite which was on the web site of Richard A. Harmon (not yet available).
I have tried the tests suite with Squeak 2.7 and had the following result: --> 2665 run, 1 failed, 0 error(s)
For those who want to try on Squeak 2.7 here are my notes: - you must have the 4 SUnit changeset version 2.6 for Squeak 2.7 with the following name SUnit26SQ27-*.st - in the file ACSInstl.st, you must set the variables devDir acsDir and sUnitDir with the values corresponding to your installation directory structure.
On Squeak 3.0 and Squeak 3.2 I was not able to load the change sets. Squeak freeze when loading ACSMsgA.cs. It appear that the freeze is when the system compile Symbol>>intern:
I will investigate further in the coming week.
The ANSI tests suite and SUnit26SQ27 are on my home page: http://homepage.mac.com/alain_fischer/
Le Mercredi 30 janvier 2002, à 09:38 , ducasse a écrit :
an interesting action would be also to run the ANSI tests suite (I do not know where it is) and check how we can be as much as possible compliant.
This way we could be sure that Squeak is a superset of these tests and may be we missed some functionality.
Stef
Squeakfoundation mailing list Squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation
Hi
In the context of the next ESUG event http://www.iutc3.unicaen.fr:8000/esug2002/
We are planning to organize a open source day.
The idea would be to use the FSF Europe http://www.fsfeurope.org/ to advertise this day and to show GnuSmalltalk and Squeak.
So I hope we will get one big Squeaker there to talk about squeak.
If you are interested (I hope so) contact Serge Stinckwich Serge.Stinckwich@info.unicaen.fr
Stef
PS: this year ESUG is located between brussels, paris and london (1h30 from paris and Brussels--- and we will have a CampSmalltalk event too like last year. The dates: 26th of August until 30 of August). The local organization has been really improved so we will have a great time.
Hi,
As I am not a programmer, I have for the most part been lurking on this list. I am a digital artist, who is concerned with the history of the GUI, alternative interface design, and virtual communities (especially 3D multi-user virtual worlds).
This may be a bit out of date, but based on the discussions on the Squeak Foundation List re the Squeak license, and also for my own research, I decided to seek opinions on this matter from the horses mouth(s) and emailed Richard Stallman on the matter.
First of all, he was not interested in commenting on whether the Squeak license was "open Source". He distinguished "Open Source Software", from "Free Software", of which he is a supporter, and so the opinion below only pertains to Squeaks conformity with standards of the "Free Software Foundation." This does not mean that Squeak is not "Open source" or that it is free enough for the purposes of the Squeak community. It depends on your politics. Anyway, I thought that I should pass this along to the list.
- Matthew Sloly
PS- Regarding Squeak's default fonts, from an aesthetic point of view, it would not be no great loss to replace these fonts with some that are more standard, and graphically elegant, like Times New Roman, or Arial. I am not sure if these fonts are free or open source, but I am sure that there are free and/or open equivalents.
Generally, Squeak needs a design overhaul, and a consistent interface policy. I would be happy to offer my services to the Squeak community in this regard, if there are some programmers out there who would like to form a team for this purpose . . . but perhaps Squeak is not at the stage where commercial viability is yet an issue, so this may be superfluous.
______________________________________________
M A T T H E W D E N I S R I C H A R D S L O L Y
ART CENTER COLLEGE OF DESIGN, Del Mar Studios 10 East Del Mar Blvd. Pasadena, California, USA 91105 (626)683-0951
sloly@artcenter.edu http://www.interlog.com/~metalogo/ ______________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Stallman" rms@gnu.org To: sloly@artcenter.edu Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 7:38 PM Subject: Re: license for Squeak VM
I know it's not the GNU GPL, but does it meet your standards, as a true Open Source license?Do you mean my standards, or the open source standards? They are not the same, because I am not an open source supporter. I never supported them. I support the free software movement.
I could tell you if the Squeak licese meets free software standards. If you want to know about open source, you'll have to ask the open source movement. They have different standards, less firm than ours. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html for more explanation of the difference between the two movements.
If you'd like me to judge the Squeak license by free software standards, please email me the text of the license.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Matthew Denis Richard Sloly" sloly@artcenter.edu To: rms@gnu.org Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 12:05 AM Subject: Re: license for Squeak VM
Richard,
My apologies for the mix-up in nomenclature, the two terms do imply substantively different values.
I would be particularly interested in your opinion the Squeak license according to "free software" standards: http://www.squeak.org/license.html
- Matthew Sloly
----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Stallman" rms@gnu.org To: sloly@artcenter.edu Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2002 8:41 PM Subject: Re: license for Squeak VM
The fonts are definitely not free, not even close. I think that the license for the software is close to being a free software license but fails because of section 6. There is also a condition in section 2 that I am not sure of. I'd have to think about it for some time. Since I don't have time, it is fortunate that the answer is clear without that.
----- Original Message ----- From: "ducasse" ducasse@iam.unibe.ch To: squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org Cc: "Serge Stinckwich" Serge.Stinckwich@info.unicaen.fr Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 2:51 AM Subject: [Squeakfoundation]Visibility in the open source community
Hi
In the context of the next ESUG event http://www.iutc3.unicaen.fr:8000/esug2002/
We are planning to organize a open source day.
The idea would be to use the FSF Europe http://www.fsfeurope.org/ to advertise this day and to show GnuSmalltalk and Squeak.
So I hope we will get one big Squeaker there to talk about squeak.
If you are interested (I hope so) contact Serge Stinckwich Serge.Stinckwich@info.unicaen.fr
Stef
PS: this year ESUG is located between brussels, paris and london (1h30
from
paris and Brussels--- and we will have a CampSmalltalk event too like last year. The dates: 26th of August until 30 of August). The local
organization
has been really improved so we will have a great time.
Squeakfoundation mailing list Squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation
Matthew Denis Richard Sloly sloly@artcenter.edu said:
This may be a bit out of date, but based on the discussions on the Squeak Foundation List re the Squeak license, and also for my own research, I decided to seek opinions on this matter from the horses mouth(s) and emailed Richard Stallman on the matter.
Thanks for this. His remarks coincide with what I think are the weak spots, which has strengthened my belief in my ability to read licenses somewhat ;-).
I have submitted the SqueakL for review to the Open Source Institute (www.opensource.org), and I propose that people who are really interested in discussing the open source-ness of the SqueakL proceed to their license discussion list, where the SqueakL was posted for discussion this morning. It'll prevent duplication, and some Squeakers showing up on their list will backup the seriousness of our request for review and thus will attract more comments and more time from all the people on that list who will quite likely have an awful lot of experience in this area. A mail to license-discuss-subscribe@opensource.org is all that's needed to get on.
About the fonts: I wonder why they haven't been replaced yet by more, err, generally accepted counterparts like Helvetica or Times. As I've understood it, it is clear that bitmap fonts aren't protectable (at least, Andrew G. seems to state this on the Wiki in terms that a lawyer only uses when he's 1000% sure he's right, IOW usually never ;-)), so am I right to assume that the encoding is the only issue? Not only from a legal PoV, but also from ease of acceptance I think it would be good to let Squeak come up by default with better-known fonts (in a way, I think that'll greatly help usability of the interface). Or are there deeper reasons that New York still rulez the image?
Cees,
Well hey . . . the Squeak license not being quite "Free Software" by Stallman's strict standards does not disqualify it from being "Open Source", and so free enough.
Section 6 states, "Export Law Assurances. You may not use or otherwise export or reexport the Apple Software except as authorized by United States law and the laws of the jurisdiction in which the Apple Software was obtained. In particular, but without limitation, the Apple Software may not be exported or reexported (i) into (or to a national or resident of) any U.S. embargoed country or (ii) to anyone on the U.S. Treasury Department's list of Specially Designated Nationals or the U.S. Department of Commerce's Table of Denial Orders. By using the Apple Software, you represent and warrant that you are not located in, under control of, or a national or resident of any such country or on any such list."
While I do not agree with such restrictions as a matter of political conviction, I recognize that this section was only included to reflect actual US law, which would restrict exportation of Squeak to embargoed countries regardless of it being in the license or not. Windows or LINUX would have the same restrictions on them, but this matters little because information wants to be free and the internet has no borders . . . I guess.
I do not see anything problematic in section 2.
As far as licenses go, Squeak's is very elegant, and understandable. I also don't think it's terms would be revised by Apple, even if there were objections.
Regarding fonts, I am thinking that it would make Squeak more desirable if it could use existing font libraries for the Mac and PC. For instance, would it be possible for Squeak to read TrueType or OpenType fonts? There are many free ones out there. Font design is a very specialized field, but it would not be hard to find someone who would be willing to design a special one, just for Squeak . . . but then again . . . as you put it, "Or are there deeper [technical] reasons that New York still rulez the image?"
I would be happy to help form a team of designers who could act as a resource to the programmers, if there is a demand for such services. Please let me know.
- Matthew
----- Original Message ----- From: "Cees de Groot" cg@home.cdegroot.com Newsgroups: lists.squeakfoundation To: squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 12:32 PM Subject: Re: [Squeakfoundation]Visibility in the open source community
Matthew Denis Richard Sloly sloly@artcenter.edu said:
This may be a bit out of date, but based on the discussions on the Squeak Foundation List re the Squeak license, and also for my own research, I decided to seek opinions on this matter from the horses mouth(s) and
emailed
Richard Stallman on the matter.
Thanks for this. His remarks coincide with what I think are the weak
spots,
which has strengthened my belief in my ability to read licenses somewhat
;-).
I have submitted the SqueakL for review to the Open Source Institute (www.opensource.org), and I propose that people who are really interested
in
discussing the open source-ness of the SqueakL proceed to their license discussion list, where the SqueakL was posted for discussion this morning. It'll prevent duplication, and some Squeakers showing up on their list
will
backup the seriousness of our request for review and thus will attract
more
comments and more time from all the people on that list who will quite
likely
have an awful lot of experience in this area. A mail to license-discuss-subscribe@opensource.org is all that's needed to get on.
About the fonts: I wonder why they haven't been replaced yet by more, err, generally accepted counterparts like Helvetica or Times. As I've
understood
it, it is clear that bitmap fonts aren't protectable (at least, Andrew G. seems to state this on the Wiki in terms that a lawyer only uses when he's 1000% sure he's right, IOW usually never ;-)), so am I right to assume
that
the encoding is the only issue? Not only from a legal PoV, but also from
ease
of acceptance I think it would be good to let Squeak come up by default
with
better-known fonts (in a way, I think that'll greatly help usability of
the
interface). Or are there deeper reasons that New York still rulez the
image?
-- Cees de Groot http://www.cdegroot.com cg@cdegroot.com GnuPG 1024D/E0989E8B 0016 F679 F38D 5946 4ECD 1986 F303 937F E098 9E8B _______________________________________________ Squeakfoundation mailing list Squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation
Matthew Denis Richard Sloly sloly@artcenter.edu said:
Well hey . . . the Squeak license not being quite "Free Software" by Stallman's strict standards does not disqualify it from being "Open Source", and so free enough.
Well, that's what I'm trying to find out - is it "open source", or is Squeak "Open Source Definition Certifiable" (i.e. is SqueakL an OS license according to the OSI OSD), ...
Section 6 states, "Export Law Assurances.[...]
I just checked the GPL, and even the GPL has a proviso for export law compliance. So I think we can check that off as a major hindrance.
I do not see anything problematic in section 2.
The font bit is too restrictive for the taste of the OS community. However, that's easily solvable.
As far as licenses go, Squeak's is very elegant, and understandable. I also don't think it's terms would be revised by Apple, even if there were objections.
I agree that it's simple, elegant, and reasonably understandable (module some interpretations about what counts as modifications that must be given back versus enhancements you can keep to yourself). Foremost, I think the gist of the license (protect the Commons while enabling proprietary extensions) are good for Squeak.
OTOH, given the trouble that Apple seems to have gone through to make their license OSD compliant, I do think that there would be interest at Apple to clean this bit up. I think the APSL has mostly the same provisions as the SqueakL (including the bit about having to share modifications), and having Squeak relicensed under the APSL would in one stroke move all the licensing discussions to other lists :-)
Regarding fonts, I am thinking that it would make Squeak more desirable if it could use existing font libraries for the Mac and PC.
Both. Squeak must come with a platform-independent set of fonts, in order to protect the write-once, run exactly the same everywhere feature. So something must be in the image. At the same time, it'd be nice if Squeak could interface with native font routines but the same goes for a lot of people about interfacing to native widget libaries and thus this is not entirely relevant for the license discussion.
Cees,
OTOH, given the trouble that Apple seems to have gone through to make
their
license OSD compliant, I do think that there would be interest at Apple to clean this bit up. I think the APSL has mostly the same provisions as the SqueakL (including the bit about having to share modifications), and
having
Squeak relicensed under the APSL would in one stroke move all the
licensing
discussions to other lists :-)
I agree that it would be better to addopt a more conventinal liscece, which is both familiar and trusted by the OS community. However, I would suggest consulting with Squeak Central in regard to the possible political pros and cons re Apple . . . I mean . . . what is thier reccord on support and or hostility to OS?
- Matthew
Regarding fonts, I am thinking that it would make Squeak more desirable if it could use existing font libraries for the Mac and PC.
Both. Squeak must come with a platform-independent set of fonts, in order to protect the write-once, run exactly the same everywhere feature. So something must be in the image.
I agree. However, considering all the rants about the copyright issues and considering that it appears to be impossible to protect _bitmap_ renderings of TrueType fonts (as opposed to the possibility that someone - e.g. Apple - might care about some 'original bitmap fonts') it might be worthwhile to replace the fonts in the image with bitmap representations of well-known TTFs (such as Arial, Times New, Verdana, WingDings etc). I've posted code to do exactly this (e.g., interfacing to Windows in order to create bitmaps from TTFs) and it does work rather nicely. So well, in fact, that I'm running various images without any Apple fonts at all and the replacements actually look a lot better, and can - given that you have the native TTF - even be scaled to arbitrary sizes.
Cheers, - Andreas
Andreas Raab wrote:
I agree. However, considering all the rants about the copyright issues and considering that it appears to be impossible to protect _bitmap_ renderings of TrueType fonts (as opposed to the possibility that someone
- e.g. Apple - might care about some 'original bitmap fonts') it might
No. It is impossible to copyright bitmap renderings, even if they were done by hand.
be worthwhile to replace the fonts in the image with bitmap representations of well-known TTFs (such as Arial, Times New, Verdana, WingDings etc).
In fact what you see on the screen is hand-edited bitmaps of these as well, at least those that look good on screen like Arial and Verdana, most likely the others as well. They are embedded in the ttf:s.
Henrik
Matthew Denis Richard Sloly wrote:
Regarding fonts, I am thinking that it would make Squeak more desirable if it could use existing font libraries for the Mac and PC. For instance, would it be possible for Squeak to read TrueType or OpenType fonts? There are many free ones out there.
Probably in the near term, the Apple fonts will be removed and simply replaced with some other bitmap fonts without the Apple licensing problems. (Such as the StableSqueak fonts discussed on the squeak-dev list, which include a NewYork-like font as well as others. Although I don't think a Times-Roman-like font was one of them... a donated Times-Roman-like bitmap font might still be useful.)
But that shouldn't stop us from also adding support for TrueType, antialiased fonts, etc. (although it's not quite as trivial).
Font design is a very specialized field, but it would not be hard to find someone who would be willing to design a special one, just for Squeak . . . but then again . . . as you put it, "Or are there deeper [technical] reasons that New York still rulez the image?"
There aren't any deeper technical reasons that New York still dominates... it's mostly just inertia.
I would be happy to help form a team of designers who could act as a resource to the programmers, if there is a demand for such services. Please let me know.
Thanks for this generous offer... a team of designers could be very helpful. I agree that the Squeak UI is generally somewhat clunky in terms of consistency, but part of this is due to the experimental nature of Squeak... it has a *lot* of UI stuff (windows, widgets, morphs, EToys, etc.) created by a bunch of different people. There's a lot more stuff in there in terms of random widgets than in most UI's (e.g. Java Swing).
However, the UI look (such as the SystemWindows) has improved modestly from 2.8 to 3.0 to 3.2, if you've been following. Squeak 2.8 started up in the ancient MVC interface, which is a direct descendent of the original Xerox PARC overlapping windows UI of the 70's, since you mentioned interest in GUI history.
I think that this UI improvement can continue, especially as more people become interested in Squeak for practical uses.
- Doug Way dway@riskmetrics.com
Doug,
Re: " . . . the UI look (such as the SystemWindows) has improved modestly from 2.8 to 3.0 to 3.2, if you've been following. Squeak 2.8 started up in the ancient MVC interface, which is a direct descendent of the original Xerox PARC overlapping windows UI of the 70's, since you mentioned interest in GUI history."
Sorry to say, I am new to Squeak, so have not been following that long. Do you by any chance have documentation/screenshots of these versions of Squeak?
Also, this is a long shot, but how hard would it be to simulate/emulate the original "Xerox PARC overlapping windows UI of the 70's", as well as applications that would have been typical to it? From a marketing perspective, I think Squeak would benefit greatly from a more explicit relationship to its roots in Xerox PARC.
In regard to the fonts, I figured that inertia was the reason for the longevity of New York, and appreciate that fonts are not the highest priority in terms of development. However, interface policy (though I realize that this may be an overly conservative notion) is an issue if Squeak is going to be marketed beyond the programming community. This is something that its present community (of mostly programmers) needs to consider carefully. Is this what you want, and if so what is the timeframe and/or milestones by which you wish to achieve this goal?
Of course before form must come function, and design decisions must be made in the context of applications. I would suggest the following: a word processor and/or desktop publishing (in this case integrated with all word processing tasks, as a framework for creating a full office application suite, which would include HTML and email editing), Photoshop/gimp type image manipulation and typesetting toolset. I am not sure how you would segment and prioritize the development of these applications but I think that they would be basic to general purpose work environment, and would be a means by which to start doing the design work within Squeak, starting into motion a feedback process between programmers and users of a real-world (testbed) applications. In the interim, to make migration to Squeak easier, it would be good to have a conversion path for graphics, as well as all major file formats (text, audio, and visual), as well as an SDK to encourage such migrations.
Anyway, this is all pie-in-the-sky speculation on my part. As I said before, I am relatively new to Squeak, and I am not a programmer. My perspective on Squeak is more limited to applications, so all of the above must be mitigated by the bigger picture programming paradigm for Squeak, which would be up to you guys.
Is there a way to keep Squeak flexible enough for experimentation while providing a consistent UI policy where needed/desired?
- Matthew
----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Way" dway@riskmetrics.com To: squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 9:46 PM Subject: Re: [Squeakfoundation]Visibility in the open source community
Matthew Denis Richard Sloly wrote:
Regarding fonts, I am thinking that it would make Squeak more desirable
if it could use existing font libraries for the Mac and PC. For instance, would it be possible for Squeak to read TrueType or OpenType fonts? There are many free ones out there.
Probably in the near term, the Apple fonts will be removed and simply
replaced with some other bitmap fonts without the Apple licensing problems. (Such as the StableSqueak fonts discussed on the squeak-dev list, which include a NewYork-like font as well as others. Although I don't think a Times-Roman-like font was one of them... a donated Times-Roman-like bitmap font might still be useful.)
But that shouldn't stop us from also adding support for TrueType,
antialiased fonts, etc. (although it's not quite as trivial).
Font design is a very specialized field, but it would not be hard to
find someone who would be willing to design a special one, just for Squeak . . . but then again . . . as you put it, "Or are there deeper [technical] reasons that New York still rulez the image?"
There aren't any deeper technical reasons that New York still dominates...
it's mostly just inertia.
I would be happy to help form a team of designers who could act as a
resource to the programmers, if there is a demand for such services. Please let me know.
Thanks for this generous offer... a team of designers could be very
helpful. I agree that the Squeak UI is generally somewhat clunky in terms of consistency, but part of this is due to the experimental nature of Squeak... it has a *lot* of UI stuff (windows, widgets, morphs, EToys, etc.) created by a bunch of different people. There's a lot more stuff in there in terms of random widgets than in most UI's (e.g. Java Swing).
However, the UI look (such as the SystemWindows) has improved modestly
from 2.8 to 3.0 to 3.2, if you've been following. Squeak 2.8 started up in the ancient MVC interface, which is a direct descendent of the original Xerox PARC overlapping windows UI of the 70's, since you mentioned interest in GUI history.
I think that this UI improvement can continue, especially as more people
become interested in Squeak for practical uses.
- Doug Way dway@riskmetrics.com
Squeakfoundation mailing list Squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation
Matthew Denis Richard Sloly wrote:
Doug,
Re: " . . . the UI look (such as the SystemWindows) has improved modestly from 2.8 to 3.0 to 3.2, if you've been following. Squeak 2.8 started up in the ancient MVC interface, which is a direct descendent of the original Xerox PARC overlapping windows UI of the 70's, since you mentioned interest in GUI history."
Sorry to say, I am new to Squeak, so have not been following that long. Do you by any chance have documentation/screenshots of these versions of Squeak?
The Screenshots page on the Swiki has some pictures, see http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/683 . (Specifically, the "Morphic" screenshot near the top is a (crowded) screenshot of 3.0, and the "MVC" screenshot is what 2.8 and earlier versions looked like when starting up.)
However, in the current version of Squeak (3.0 or 3.2), the older MVC interface is still available, it's just not the default. (Morphic is the default now.) To try it MVC, select "open..." from the World Menu in Squeak, and then "mvc project" from the submenu. Then click on the newly opened ("Unnamed") project window to enter MVC. Then try opening some windows, etc.
Also, this is a long shot, but how hard would it be to simulate/emulate the original "Xerox PARC overlapping windows UI of the 70's", as well as applications that would have been typical to it? From a marketing perspective, I think Squeak would benefit greatly from a more explicit relationship to its roots in Xerox PARC.
It would be pretty easy to emulate, since the current MVC UI isn't too drastically different than the original Smalltalk-80 UI. They even share some of the same code base. (exactly how much is hard to say) If you look at old screenshots of Smalltalk-80 at Xerox, or in the Smalltalk-80 books, it doesn't look too much different than the current MVC UI. They share the same funky scrollbars, etc. A few things would need to be changed back such as window titlebars, in order to look just like Smalltalk-80.
In regard to the fonts, I figured that inertia was the reason for the longevity of New York, and appreciate that fonts are not the highest priority in terms of development. However, interface policy (though I realize that this may be an overly conservative notion) is an issue if Squeak is going to be marketed beyond the programming community. This is something that its present community (of mostly programmers) needs to consider carefully. Is this what you want, and if so what is the timeframe and/or milestones by which you wish to achieve this goal?
I think this is important to at least part of the Squeak community. I don't think it's been a goal of Squeak Central, but perhaps with the newly forming Squeak Foundation, it will receive some attention. There's no "timeframe and/or milestones" yet, though. :)
Of course before form must come function, and design decisions must be made in the context of applications. I would suggest the following: a word processor and/or desktop publishing (in this case integrated with all word processing tasks, as a framework for creating a full office application suite, which would include HTML and email editing), Photoshop/gimp type image manipulation and typesetting toolset. I am not sure how you would segment and prioritize the development of these applications but I think that they would be basic to general purpose work environment, and would be a means by which to start doing the design work within Squeak, starting into motion a feedback process between programmers and users of a real-world (testbed) applications. In the interim, to make migration to Squeak easier, it would be good to have a conversion path for graphics, as well as all major file formats (text, audio, and visual), as well as an SDK to encourage such migrations.
Some applications may be more appropriate to Squeak than others. For example, I wouldn't be surprised if no one ever creates a full-fledged word processor for Squeak, although it certainly could happen. (Squeak is not necessarily an operating system, so it doesn't have to be a general purpose work environment for everything.) Some of those other apps might make sense, though. (and could be used as a usability testbed)
Anyway, this is all pie-in-the-sky speculation on my part. As I said before, I am relatively new to Squeak, and I am not a programmer. My perspective on Squeak is more limited to applications, so all of the above must be mitigated by the bigger picture programming paradigm for Squeak, which would be up to you guys.
Is there a way to keep Squeak flexible enough for experimentation while providing a consistent UI policy where needed/desired?
I think so. :)
- Doug Way dway@riskmetrics.com
squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
Alain Fischer -
Andreas Raab -
cg＠home.cdegroot.com -
Doug Way -
ducasse -
Henrik Gedenryd -
Mark Mullin -
Matthew Denis Richard Sloly