Youre quoting is very hard to read. It would be much simplier for me if you
used ">".

>> I'm new to Smalltalk and especially to Squeak and I think this
>> let's me see things more objective.

> Questionable.  Either we're talking at cross-purposes,
> or it hasn't let you see a number of things _at all_.

That's a point. As a beginner, you'll have hard work. Squeak is different,
that's right, but should it be different just to be different? Every time
someone express ones need for an ui building tool, another one says
"let morphic bless you, it's the only way". That's very boring.

>> - Support for Drag and Drop to 'draw' a Application like the VW
>>   UI-Painter has
> Squeak _does_ support Drag and Drop.
> You _can_ "draw" large parts of an application.

It does. But I don't see how to make more than a "Hello world"
or a flashing bullseye. Morpic wizards can paint amazing applications,
I'm sure about this. But to use this helpers, you have to learn how
to do it without, handwired. That's the right(tm) way to program
serious applications, maybe, but doesn't raise my interest to use
squeak as "An Idea Processor For Children Of All Ages!".
VB for Windows does aim this goal more, as it fascinates me more -
and I can see more "return on investment".

> That's what the "Supplies" flap at the bottom of the window is
> for, amongst other things.

It definetily needs a "What happens here" documentation. Heck,
What is a script? All over the place I read about Players, Viewers
and this mystically "Scripting" - but nowhere it's documented like
- What is a script?
- What is a player?
- What is a viewer?
- How to use them for real world things, not for steering animated cars?
Point to the swiki. There, I'll have to follow x links, till I have
an idea, what Morphic is (oh, it's from self. What is self? Oh, it's
anbandoned. Okay, what is the trick? It's cool. Why? It's scriptable).
(p.s. I'm sure that these what-is's are documented, but I can't find where.
I'm sure that'll you tell me how to find them in 30 seconds. The point is: I
did a search and didn't find it. Yes, I'm a "noob").

I'm moving in circles. The only squeak-app, that impresses me is seaside:
- It's well documented.
- It's designed to fulfill requirements, not visions.
- I see ROI

> Squeak _has_ buttons.  Look for class names matching "Button" and
> you'll find more than you know what to do with.  Try
> PluggableButtonMorph.

27 in 3.2gamma. That's very impressing. What Button do I need? Okay,
look for the (ongoing) documentation and see, what of these 27 Buttons
I could use.
There should be a technology sample like "see these buttons". I not very
motivated to make a study about 27 morphs to build a "Press, Action"-Button.
But, on the other hand, I will feel like I didn't use all possibilities.

> They are EXTREMELY easy to add.
> For example, given a button, bring up a halo, choose the debug halo
> item (looks like a spanner, choose "edit balloon help", which is the
> last item in the debug meno for a button.)

Look here, look there. If you want to change behaviour, look here, but
remember to subclass, because sideeffects. The other thing is changed
by a halomenu, ca. in the third-depth.

> Documentation, that's what we need.  When we've got some, we
> could do with some more Documentation.  After that, we could
> do with a bit of beginner-oriented D....

Another time, wizards documenting a system for wizards. That wouldn't fit
the needs.

> Then there are the class comments, or at least, there _should_ be
> the class comments, but in 3.0 the majority of the Morphic classes seem
> to be uncommented.  How, for example, do you use the stuff in the
> Morphic-Outliner category?  None of those classes is commented.

Even it would be nice to have them documented, we'll have to build
quick-tours, like "quick tour to buttons" "quick tour to stacks"
"quick tour to ..."

Kind regards, Markus

P.S.: I like squeak. But some on this list have the "linuxguru syndrome".