Nicolas wrote:
 
 > If you try to mimic the OS native interface, it's only a defensive strategy, 
> by construction something imperfect and always one version late...
> You're wasting development forces to follow the leaders, and don't invent 
> anymore in this domain...

 +1  thank you Nicolas for nailing my sentiments about native widget emulation.
 
 The goal should be good looking, easy-to-use interfaces.  Innovate, don't emulate.
 
 I must admit, I've never understood why some are so concerned with native look and feel anyway.  Why is it such a big deal if the drop-shadow on my buttons appears lower-left instead of lower-right (this is a made up example, is there a better one)?  If Microsoft does it in their new version of Windows, THEN its ok.  It suddenly becomes (gong please) "the new standard" that we all must "conform" to.  Please..  The only way to break this cycle of following is to break it.
 
 Frankly, I also wonder about those who feel "blocked" by Squeaks "weird" look and feel.  It's basically the same as anything else as far as I can tell.  You have lists, buttons, scroll-bars, text editors, etc.  They're styled a bit differently than native windows but operate pretty much the same.  These widget differences are like the differences between driving a Ford vs a Chevy, not much, and most anyone is able to figure it out.
 
 The fact is, going forward, new-and-refined UI's *will* be designed, both in and out of Squeak.  The only thing any user can do is adjust, get used to it, and develop an exploratory nature when working with computers.  Either that or stay with MS Word and MS Excel forever..   :)
 
  - Chris