Classical Applications (was Re: 17 new updates)

Joachim Durchholz joachim.durchholz at
Sat Feb 13 16:00:20 UTC 1999

"Andrew C. Greenberg" wrote:
> If it doesn't do it for you, Stefan, don't use it.

Right... partially. It's OK to ask whether something that's not *that*
far away could be included.
Of course, one can debate whether empowering Squeak for commercial use
is a major effort, a minor one, or whether it is at all impossible. But
these are issues for a debate, not something that can be dismissed in
such an off-hand manner.

> VB is easy and cheap to acquire.

Now you're believing too much in what M$ promises. Visual Basic may be
cheap, but it doesn't scale at all, and it's designed to create a
maintenance nightmare - not something that I'd use in the long term.
(Not that the alternatives are soo much better.)

> I can't get VB to do anything non-trivial without serious effort and
> would never use it as a tool of choice, but that's strictly a matter
> of taste.

NOT. The decision for or against a tool such as VB has very clear-cut
consequences, and so you need not rely on such a vague guideline as
personal taste.

> No, take it from the author of several best-selling commercial games
> -- Squeak is no toy.  The potential is unlimited.  And, compared to
> working in, say, MPW or codewarrior tX-Mozilla-Status: 0009there is
> much to be said for Squeaking in lieu of building anything from
> scratch.

Right. Now where do I get the how-tos, tips, and tricks of the trade how
to do that?

> Agreed that stand-alone applications require some doing, particularly
> if they have to interact in a "traditional" manner.  That will come
> in time -- when there is meaningful and actual demand or need.
> That's the beauty of open source.


Please don't send unsolicited ads.

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list