[UI] Squeak UI Annoyances

[Jason Johnson]

On 8/22/07, Brad Fuller <bradallenfuller at yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Tue August 21 2007, Matthew Fulmer wrote:
>
> For the record, I like some of Squeak's look and don't think it necessarily
> goes against "wide-spread UI conventions." Or, I'd like to see that list.
>
> I do not think we should follow what Windows and other UIs have done just for
> the sake of being like them. There are a lot of interface problems with
> Windows (and the Mac and Linux distros). I propose that the best way to start
> is to define general heuristics that Squeak apps/tools/projects/system/etc.
> can follow - starting clean is the best way to approach the issues that we
> find.

+1.  I agree with Bill on this issue:  The look itself isn't the
issue.  I don't think there is anything wrong with Squeak having a
distinct look.  The version we want businesses to use shouldn't
cartoony, like it was made for kids, but it doesn't have to be a
windows clone, or even a Mac.  But it absolutely must have a
consistent, intuitive method of interaction.

> Generally, I think Squeak started out right at the beginning. It's just that
> the UI hasn't been maintained consistently as the world learned of new
> interface issues.

Yes, and I think the abstractions are leaking all over the place.  The
last time I looked through the image I was looking at some
domain/model type class that didn't need GUI interaction, but it had
GUI calls in the code.  In an incredibly programmable system like
Squeak I think it's important that we maintain the MV(C|P)'ness of the
code for flexibility (e.g. with that model class the way it was I
can't automate it, it pops up GUI boxes).