Alan Kay's EuroPython Keynote
Locked
123456
123456
 
|
Hi,
Am 07.07.2006 um 09:16 schrieb Andreas Raab: > Right. I *fully* support Alan's efforts to get these communities > involved in the educational efforts - if we compete then the kids > will ultimately win. If that is in Squeak or in Python or in Ruby, > who cares? > +1 We are always at the beginning of teaching knowledge, pedagogics as didactics. No one can assume the Squeak is the last step here, althought it is a very important one :-) Would be interesting to see, how Alan's experience in using Squeak may influence python or even other things ;-) Regards Hans > Cheers, > - Andreas > > Alan Kay wrote: >> ... Children First! >> (It doesn't mean Squeak First, or Python or Ruby First.) >> Cheers, >> Alan >> At 07:24 PM 7/6/2006, Brad Fuller wrote: >>> Markus Gaelli wrote: >>>> >>>> On Jul 7, 2006, at 12:46 AM, Brad Fuller wrote: >>>>> Serge Stinckwich wrote: >>>>>> There is a report of Guido Van Rossum about an Alan Kay talk >>>>>> in his >>>>>> web log here : http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp? >>>>>> thread=167318 >>>>> this is sad to read: >>>>> >>>>> Alan believes that Python has a much larger mindshare than >>>>> Smalltalk or >>>>> Squeak, and that because of this a similar environment in >>>>> Python will >>>>> have a greater chance of succeeding than the current Squeak >>>>> one. Also, >>>>> the $100 laptop already has Python, and Alan is of course >>>>> hoping that a >>>>> Squeak-like environment will be part of it, so this appears >>>>> expedient. >>>>> (At the Shuttleworth summit in April >>>>> < <http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp? >>>>> thread=156162>http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp? >>>>> thread=156162> <http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp? >>>>> thread=156162> I believe >>>>> Alan also suggested that Squeak is suffering from its extremely >>>>> simple >>>>> graphics model; apparently it cannot benefit from graphics >>>>> accelerator >>>>> cards because of its platform-independent architecture. Python >>>>> on the >>>>> other hand already has bindings to OpenGL and DirectX, for >>>>> example.) >>>>> >>>>> --brad >>>>> sonaural >>>>> >>>> >>>> Hi folks, >>>> >>>> let's be proud that Smalltalk was indispensable to come up with >>>> Etoys and let us accept the challenge. >>>> >>>> I googled for python IDEs today and found >>>> http://wiki.python.org/moin/IntegratedDevelopmentEnvironments >>>> and there the most up to date IDE shootout of >>>> http://spyced.blogspot.com/2005/09/review-of-6-python-ides.html >>>> and >>>> http://spyced.blogspot.com/2006/02/pycon-python-ide-review.html >>>> >>>> I have to say that I was not impressed. >>>> >>>> The IDEs were either not free: Wing, Komodo and in the future PyDev >>>> based on Qt (Eric4) >>>> had no liberal license (Gnu! ): SPE >>>> couldn't eat their own dog food as they were based on Java: PyDev >>>> or didn't have convincing screenshots: DrPython >>>> >>>> Alan, which python IDE would you suggest us to widen our >>>> perspectives for ourselves, the job market and for helping to >>>> make the world a better place - if it is not Squeak? >>> I have no idea if Alan actually said that, there are not quotes. >>> And, Alan can speak for himself. However(!), if the essence of >>> the paraphrase is right, I think he's suggesting that Python can >>> benefit from the work that Smalltalk has pioneered. But, I don't >>> know if he's referring to the IDE, eToys, or what when he says >>> "environment" >>> >>> -- >>> brad >>> sonaural >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> --- > > |
Re: Alan Kay's EuroPython Keynote
|
|
In reply to this post by Markus Gälli-3
> It has only a few lines more than the smalltalk (I included a
> smalltalk version), python, ruby,... version but comes with a much Hi Markus, I didn't see any Smalltalk on that page. Just for fun I coded up that reverse game and posted it, we'll see if it shows up. It was 8 lines "beating" Ruby by 2 lines and Python by 1. Here's the code I ended up with: numbers := (1 to: 9) asArray shuffled. steps := 0. [ Transcript cr; show: numbers. numbers isSorted ] whileFalse: [ flipCount := (FillInTheBlank request: 'reverse how many?') asNumber. 1 to: flipCount//2 do: [ :n | numbers swap: n with: flipCount-n+1 ]. steps := steps + 1 ]. Transcript cr; show: 'done, that took you ', steps printString, ' steps.' Strange, I'm not sure why there are ~20 languages (including "REBOL") represented but no mention of Smalltalk anywhere, especially if you had submitted it.. Cheers.. --- Markus Gaelli <[hidden email]> wrote: > > On Jul 7, 2006, at 12:46 AM, Brad Fuller wrote: > > Serge Stinckwich wrote: > >> There is a report of Guido Van Rossum about an Alan Kay talk in > his > >> web log here : http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp? > >> thread=167318 > >> > > this is sad to read: > > > > Alan believes that Python has a much larger mindshare than > > Smalltalk or > > Squeak, and that because of this a similar environment in Python > will > > have a greater chance of succeeding than the current Squeak one. > Also, > > the $100 laptop already has Python, and Alan is of course hoping > > that a > > Squeak-like environment will be part of it, so this appears > expedient. > > (At the Shuttleworth summit in April > > <http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=156162> I > believe > > Alan also suggested that Squeak is suffering from its extremely > simple > > graphics model; apparently it cannot benefit from graphics > accelerator > > cards because of its platform-independent architecture. Python on > the > > other hand already has bindings to OpenGL and DirectX, for > example.) > > > > -- > > brad > > sonaural > > > > > > Hi folks, > > let's be proud that Smalltalk was indispensable to come up with Etoys > and let us accept the challenge. > > I googled for python IDEs today and found > http://wiki.python.org/moin/IntegratedDevelopmentEnvironments > and there the most up to date IDE shootout of > http://spyced.blogspot.com/2005/09/review-of-6-python-ides.html > and > http://spyced.blogspot.com/2006/02/pycon-python-ide-review.html > > I have to say that I was not impressed. > > The IDEs were either not free: Wing, Komodo and in the future PyDev > based on Qt (Eric4) > had no liberal license (Gnu! ): SPE > couldn't eat their own dog food as they were based on Java: PyDev > or didn't have convincing screenshots: DrPython > > Alan, which python IDE would you suggest us to widen our perspectives > for ourselves, the job market and for helping to make the world a > better place - if it is not Squeak? > > Cheers, > > Markus > > p.s. another blog about Alan's talk can be found on > http://vanrees.org/weblog/archive/2006/07/03/europython-keynote-alan- > kay-children-first > > p.p.s. inspired by Paul Bissex - a guy who once wrote a small article > about squeak for Wired - challenge on: > http://e-scribe.com/news/193 > I wrote an Etoys version of this "reverse"-game. > It can be found on > http://www.squeakland.org/project.jsp?http://www.emergent.de/pub/ > smalltalk/squeak/projects/reverse.pr > > (I hope you all have the squeakland plugin installed... ;-) ) > > It has only a few lines more than the smalltalk (I included a > smalltalk version), python, ruby,... version but comes with a much > more sophisticated user interface. > So I do think that Etoys are the way to go... no matter what the > language is underneath - be it smalltalk/python/ruby/etc... > > > |
OT - Squeak and the Broader Software Community
|
|
Please don't read this message if you don't have time or inclination
for a quasi-philosophical ramble down Smalltalk Lane. I'm posting this here to share some experiences I doubt are new or unique but which I haven't seen discussed here in the many months I've been back on the list. I have been involved in Smalltalk on and off for a good many years. It keeps calling me back, like the Sirens, whenever I go in search of a new tool because the one I'm engaged in at that moment falls short or disappoints or just annoys me. As a result of this on-again, off- again love affair with Smalltalk and Squeak, I'm far from as proficient a coder or knowledgeable a designer as I would certainly be by now if I'd stayed put here. But I haven't been able to do that, for a host of reasons that are mostly boring and unique so I won't relate them here. Today I had a conversation with a colleague and friend I had referred to Squeak as a possible solution to a specific set of problems he is working on for a client. He spent a full day exploring Squeak and he came back with an observation that I found difficult to answer. "Why," he asked me in all sincerity, "is Squeak so ugly? Smalltalk has been around 30 years. It's been in the hands of great design firms like Apple and Disney. It's had IBM backing. Doesn't anyone in the Squeak community understand how a polished, modern user interface would help to sell their technology? Other than wxSqueak, which seems basically moribund [I disabused him of this notion in our conversation, but that was his finding on his own], there's nobody out there talking, thinking or working on a professional-looking UI for Squeak's IDE or for deployment of applications! What's going on there?" So I spent a couple of hours looking at the question he raised and what I *think* I learned is that because of the way Smalltalk implements graphics at some deep level beyond my ability to penetrate the image, modifying its basic UI to use a more modern and reactive user experience would be a major, major challenge. After 30+ years, there is no way to do native UI widgets (other than wxSqueak if and when it gets finalized and hopefully incorporated) let alone custom widgets that look polished and professional. I was able to determine that there appears to be a class (PNGReadWriter) that would facilitate the import of PNG images, e.g., to use as controls. With enough time and understanding, I could presumably figure out how to import a graphic (PNG or other) and make it behave like a button, but then getting it into an app layout would require another level of understanding. You get the idea. (And please don't spend time telling me how to do that particular task; I don't have the expertise or interest anyway. It was merely an illustration of what the problem appears to be.) I explained to my friend that Squeak has been used primarily for research and education, not for the creation and deployment of commercial applications where a standardized platform-specific UI was important. For him, that's a reason to avoid Squeak altogether. So with that (probably overly long) background, I can ask my question, on my friend's behalf. Why, after 30 years, does Squeak still appear to be a non-standard, almost toy-like user experience in the IDE? Is it the case that changing that would be far too complex to undertake? Or is it that the community of Squeak users just isn't largely motivated to worry about this subject? Or is the absence of an economic incentive the problem? Or IS there a problem? Thanks for any wisdom you can share. This is one of the two big objections I *always* get when I recommend someone look at Squeak as a possible solution to a problem for which it appears to me to be ideally suited linguistically and architecturally. -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- Dan Shafer Technology Visionary - Technology Assessment - Documentation "Looking at technology from every angle" |
Re: OT - Squeak and the Broader Software Community
|
|
On 7/7/06, Dan Shafer <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Or IS there a problem? > Not really. Well, again - there's a PR problem. But not a usability problem. Modern UI's eat lots and lots of CPU cycles to add almost nothing in added usability. I find Morphic to be careful with the amount of real espace it takes, smart in the use of color (different types of windows get different colors - now why is that not in other ui's?), and I even don't really dislike the old fonts :-). So, probably it's the old thing again - Squeakers don't have a problem, nobody has an itch to scratch, and newbies get turned off so they never get around complaining... |
Re: OT - Squeak and the Broader Software Community
|
|
Exactly my point, Cees! But as a community, we don't find that
troubling? Dan On Jul 7, 2006, at 12:06 PM, Cees De Groot wrote: > newbies get turned off so > they never get around complaining... |
Re: OT - Squeak and the Broader Software Community
|
|
In reply to this post by Dan Shafer-3
Hi all,
On 7/7/06, Dan Shafer <[hidden email]> wrote: <snip /> > Why, after 30 years, does Squeak still appear to be a non-standard, > almost toy-like user experience in the IDE? Is it the case that > changing that would be far too complex to undertake? Or is it that > the community of Squeak users just isn't largely motivated to worry > about this subject? Or is the absence of an economic incentive the > problem? Or IS there a problem? Supposedly there is scientific evidence that visually pleasing things actually work better (see http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/emotion_design.html). It troubles me that Squeak is so odd looking, but I have only had time enough to make minor contributions in this arena. I'm convinced Sueak's look is a primary driver that holds people back. Imagine if it looked as sexy as some Flash sites you see these days on the web. Maybe we need to take Alan Kay up on his idea that Squeak should be terminated and start over so we don't feel like it is such a monumental chore to refactor Morphic into what we want it to be. It might be better if Squeak had no UI -- then people wouldn't judge it so quickly. Regards, John -- The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw |
Re: OT - Squeak and the Broader Software Community
|
|
In reply to this post by Dan Shafer-3
On 7/7/06, Dan Shafer <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Exactly my point, Cees! But as a community, we don't find that > troubling? > Maybe. Maybe not. As a community. The real issue is: does anyone (or a group) find it troubling enough to solve it? |
Re: OT - Squeak and the Broader Software Community
|
|
In reply to this post by John Pierce-2
Yeah, a fork like that might be productive if a big enough group
wanted to undertake it. That would be a huge effort, though, obviously. Dan On Jul 7, 2006, at 12:19 PM, John Pierce wrote: > Maybe we need to take Alan Kay up on his idea that Squeak should be > terminated and start over so we don't feel like it is such a > monumental chore to refactor Morphic into what we want it to be. |
Re: OT - Squeak and the Broader Software Community
|
|
On 7-Jul-06, at 12:26 PM, Dan Shafer wrote: > Yeah, a fork like that might be productive if a big enough group > wanted to undertake it. That would be a huge effort, though, > obviously. > > Dan > > On Jul 7, 2006, at 12:19 PM, John Pierce wrote: > >> Maybe we need to take Alan Kay up on his idea that Squeak should be >> terminated and start over so we don't feel like it is such a >> monumental chore to refactor Morphic into what we want it to be. It's called Spoon and it works already. tim -- tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim Useful random insult:- Calls people to ask them their phone number. |
Re: OT - Squeak and the Broader Software Community
|
|
In reply to this post by Dan Shafer-3
Here's how the creator of Lisp explained -- in 1978 -- why Lisp still
had Lots of Irritating Silly Parenthesis: "Another reason for the initial acceptance of awkwardnesses in the internal form of LISP is that we still expected to switch to writing programs as M-expressions [infix format]. The project of defining M- expressions precisely and compiling them or at least translating them into S-expressions was neither finalized nor explicitly abandoned. It just receded into the indefinite future, and a new generation of programmers appeared who preferred internal notation to any FORTRAN- like or ALGOL-like notation that could be devised." Now, one could look at the acceptance of Smalltalk and the acceptance of Lisp and say, "See, the appearance DOES matter!" On the other hand, there HAVE been plenty of examples where an attempt to make Lisp syntax more "normal" and "acceptable to the enterprise software community" have not made a dent. On the third hand, one might argue that Java.... Well anyway, I think the parallels are interesting. -H |
Re: OT - Squeak and the Broader Software Community
|
|
In reply to this post by John Pierce-2
John,
> Supposedly there is scientific evidence that visually pleasing things > actually work better (see > http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/emotion_design.html). It troubles me that > Squeak is so odd looking, but I have only had time enough to make > minor contributions in this arena. Supposedly, children's mind often work differently. Take a look at an article on SciAm and go to page 5: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID=000ACE3F-007E-12DC-807E83414B7F0000 -- Yoshiki |
Re: OT - Squeak and the Broader Software Community
|
|
In reply to this post by Dan Shafer-3
> Why, after 30 years, does Squeak still appear to be a non-standard,
> almost toy-like user experience in the IDE? Is it the case that > changing that would be far too complex to undertake? Or is it that > the community of Squeak users just isn't largely motivated to worry > about this subject? Or is the absence of an economic incentive the > problem? Or IS there a problem? 1. What does that really mean, looks toy-like? What's it gonna take, please tell us? A manly "gray metal" look like we've seen before or some more rainbow gradients like we've seen before? 2. What is THE "standard"? Microsoft? What, then, when Microsoft changes its look again? Are they then "non-standard" or their followers? 2b. Do you remember this rubbish, "All windows programs look alike therefore once you've learned one you've learned them all.."? 3. Even if it can be "offically" labelled "toy like," what is wrong with that? Too wimpy-looking? What's wrong with wimpy-looking as long as its easy and functional? 4. Speaking of wimpy, someone (not you) once suggested "Squeak" was a wimpy-sounding name, what do you think of "KA-POW!"? > Thanks for any wisdom you can share. This is one of the two big > objections I *always* get when I recommend someone look at Squeak as > a possible solution to a problem for which it appears to me to be > ideally suited linguistically and architecturally. So I guess this group sets its priorities to building something, as you said, "ideally suited linguistically and architecturally". They haven't spent as much time playing endlessly with colors, shadows, gradients, only to please the latest group of popularist superficialites who'll be gone as soon as the next Wired article tells them where they need to go next to be cool. Whew, sorry to say that, at least you have my honesty. IBM VisualAge had (has?) native widgets, that didn't save it.. |
Re: OT - Squeak and the Broader Software Community
|
|
In reply to this post by Dan Shafer-3
On 2006 July 7 14:58, Dan Shafer wrote: <snip> > Why, after 30 years, does Squeak still appear to be a non-standard, > almost toy-like user experience in the IDE? Is it the case that > changing that would be far too complex to undertake? Dan, Personally I believe Tweak can change that. I look at what is in Tweak now, under CProjectBuilder->Widgets, there are buttons (including image button), fields, dropdown, list, area, tree, file open/save dialog, user dialog, even text editor - all that UI stuff is already there probably without that being the major goal of Tweak. (I realize, in general, many want os-native widgets but I think it is slowly shifting to the easy portability of UI with native L&F) In brief, to me, Tweak is an absolute marvel that would go a long way to solve what you discuss. I believe large part of the problem is marketing, exposing Squeak so enough people can at least in some way make a living of it, then stuff like this will happen - example, Eclipse, (although open source) the developement is almost completely funded by IBM, people doing boring bug fixes and major developement are often funded etc. Linux did not move into mainstream until similar things happened. Milan > Or is it that > the community of Squeak users just isn't largely motivated to worry > about this subject? Or is the absence of an economic incentive the > problem? Or IS there a problem? > > Thanks for any wisdom you can share. This is one of the two big > objections I *always* get when I recommend someone look at Squeak as > a possible solution to a problem for which it appears to me to be > ideally suited linguistically and architecturally. > > -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. > -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- > Dan Shafer > Technology Visionary - Technology Assessment - Documentation > "Looking at technology from every angle" |
Re: OT - Squeak and the Broader Software Community
|
|
In reply to this post by Chris Muller
Exactly, Chris! I'm glad that Squeak doesn't follow the latest GUI fad. On the flip side, I do agree that we live in the age of the "sound-byte". Most people are followers and the "look" of the tool conveys the power of the tool. ROFL! That's FUNNY!2b. Do you remember this rubbish, "All windows programs look alike therefore once you've learned one you've learned them all.."? 3. Even if it can be "offically" labelled "toy like," what is wrong with that? Too wimpy-looking? What's wrong with wimpy-looking as long as its easy and functional? 4. Speaking of wimpy, someone (not you) once suggested "Squeak" was a wimpy-sounding name, what do you think of "KA-POW!"? |
Re: OT - Squeak and the Broader Software Community
|
|
In reply to this post by Chris Muller
Once more, this thread is going to focus on the look... As already said many times in many threads, maybe look is good to appeal new comers... But whether windows should be green or orange, or the button have thick borders, oval corner or a shadow is not the more important. What is more important is feel. I do not know how good is Squeak UI on Mac, but windows and linux squeak feel are not at the level we would expect such a wonderfull tool. I will take several simple examples. Why does the mouse wheel does not scroll lists but instead flash? Why does the pageUp and pageDown keys also flash the list instead of selecting one page up or down? Is there multiple selection list working with kind of shift+click or control+click? How can i switch keyboard focus from one pane to another, or change window stack order without using the mouse? Did you really try to copy/paste text from squeak to another application et vice et versa? switching from ALT+C to CTRL+V, or the contrary is really is gymnastic for user hands and brain... That is obviously why a little bit of standardization does not harm. My personnal opinion is that among palo alto inventions, the mouse was not the greatest. Hands are wonderfull tools with a lot of articulations. Compare how many articulations are working when hitting the keyboard and how many when using the mouse... You will understand why many feel the mouse as a handicap. And why many are still using emacs vi and mc. So, when you say "the look does not matter", or Squeak UI is great, please don't forget the feel. Lot of people won't find mouse-centric UI that great. Nicolas |
Re: OT - Squeak and the Broader Software Community
|
|
In reply to this post by Chris Muller
On Jul 7, 2006, at 12:50 PM, Chris Muller wrote: >> Why, after 30 years, does Squeak still appear to be a non-standard, >> almost toy-like user experience in the IDE? Is it the case that >> changing that would be far too complex to undertake? Or is it that >> the community of Squeak users just isn't largely motivated to worry >> about this subject? Or is the absence of an economic incentive the >> problem? Or IS there a problem? > > 1. What does that really mean, looks toy-like? What's it gonna take, > please tell us? A manly "gray metal" look like we've seen before or > some more rainbow gradients like we've seen before? I can see I touched a sore spot here. First, please remember I'm passing on reactions from others, not expressing my own views here. I'm trying to figure out how to make it possible for me to get projects and contracts using Squeak from people with pre-conceived ideas about what an application looks like. Short of true native platform widgets, I think it's safe to say that the vast, vast majority of computer users are accustomed to certain kinds of shapes for certain kinds of objects and that when we vary from those standards, we'd better have a really good reason for asking them to pay attention to our interface rather than to the task they are trying to accomplish. I don't know if that's "manly" gray metal or rainbow gradients or just round-cornered rectangles with default buttons flagged somehow. The point is that it is NOT the UI one finds in Squeak today. > 2. What is THE "standard"? Microsoft? What, then, when Microsoft > changes its look again? Are they then "non-standard" or their > followers? Again, I think it's less an issue of choosing a standard than it is of choosing a UI experience that maps to the user's established expectations. > 2b. Do you remember this rubbish, "All windows programs look alike > therefore once you've learned one you've learned them all.."? Yeah, only I heard it said about Mac programs. Same rubbish, though. > 3. Even if it can be "offically" labelled "toy like," what is wrong > with that? Too wimpy-looking? What's wrong with wimpy-looking as > long > as its easy and functional? Sorry to keep beating the dead horse here, but the issue is that it is toy-like *compared to user expectations* set up by other programs. I find the EToys UI refreshing. My potential clients and colleagues whom I wish to interest in Squeak just don't. > 4. Speaking of wimpy, someone (not you) once suggested "Squeak" was a > wimpy-sounding name, what do you think of "KA-POW!"? > LOL. I think Squeak is a weird name for a programming language. But not weirder than C or Java or Ruby. >> Thanks for any wisdom you can share. This is one of the two big >> objections I *always* get when I recommend someone look at Squeak as >> a possible solution to a problem for which it appears to me to be >> ideally suited linguistically and architecturally. > > So I guess this group sets its priorities to building something, as > you > said, "ideally suited linguistically and architecturally". They > haven't spent as much time playing endlessly with colors, shadows, > gradients, only to please the latest group of popularist > superficialites who'll be gone as soon as the next Wired article tells > them where they need to go next to be cool. Whew, sorry to say that, > at least you have my honesty. > I'm really trying to do is find answers that will satisfy and/or make sense to the great majority of people who've had their user experience expectations shaped by the market. Dan |
Re: OT - Squeak and the Broader Software Community
|
|
In reply to this post by Nicolas Cellier-3
Apart lack of keyboard shortcuts (at least standard ones) that are breaking productivity, one thing that would mostly afraid someone having classical end user applications in mind is the halo handles... What are these handles usefull for end users? Are they just there so the end user can break the UI? I perfectly understand negative reactions. Nicolas |
Re: OT - Squeak and the Broader Software Community
|
|
In reply to this post by Dan Shafer-3
Your original question mentioned IDE's Dan:
> >> almost toy-like user experience in the IDE? Is it the case that therefore I thought the audience you were referring to were developers. For developers I am less-tolerant of their whining about look (but not feel, because Nicolas Cellier's points are excellent). But since you have clarified you apparently are talking about *end-users*, I'd like to clarify, I think, for end-users look is much more important than for developers. But I doubt native/standard/whatever look alone will be enough because, as I mentioned, IBM's VisualAge Smalltalk had native widgets PLUS tons of interfaces to major business systems (even CICS!) that no Smalltalk will probably ever have again. I think Cees nailed it, its so hard to overcome the anti-marketing forces. IBM was selling their VA Java product for half the price of their VA Smalltalk. Its amazing VAST lasted as long as it did. I'm sure they were gratified (again) to sell the small interim-step in technlology (VAJ) as a huge wave of revenue. But I think they made a big mistake, now where are they gonna go? Better looks will never hurt though.. --- Dan Shafer <[hidden email]> wrote: > > On Jul 7, 2006, at 12:50 PM, Chris Muller wrote: > > >> Why, after 30 years, does Squeak still appear to be a > non-standard, > >> almost toy-like user experience in the IDE? Is it the case that > >> changing that would be far too complex to undertake? Or is it that > >> the community of Squeak users just isn't largely motivated to > worry > >> about this subject? Or is the absence of an economic incentive the > >> problem? Or IS there a problem? > > > > 1. What does that really mean, looks toy-like? What's it gonna > take, > > please tell us? A manly "gray metal" look like we've seen before > or > > some more rainbow gradients like we've seen before? > > I can see I touched a sore spot here. First, please remember I'm > passing on reactions from others, not expressing my own views here. > I'm trying to figure out how to make it possible for me to get > projects and contracts using Squeak from people with pre-conceived > ideas about what an application looks like. > > Short of true native platform widgets, I think it's safe to say that > the vast, vast majority of computer users are accustomed to certain > kinds of shapes for certain kinds of objects and that when we vary > from those standards, we'd better have a really good reason for > asking them to pay attention to our interface rather than to the task > they are trying to accomplish. I don't know if that's "manly" gray > metal or rainbow gradients or just round-cornered rectangles with > default buttons flagged somehow. The point is that it is NOT the UI > one finds in Squeak today. > > > 2. What is THE "standard"? Microsoft? What, then, when Microsoft > > changes its look again? Are they then "non-standard" or their > > followers? > > Again, I think it's less an issue of choosing a standard than it is > of choosing a UI experience that maps to the user's established > expectations. > > > 2b. Do you remember this rubbish, "All windows programs look alike > > therefore once you've learned one you've learned them all.."? > > Yeah, only I heard it said about Mac programs. Same rubbish, though. > > > 3. Even if it can be "offically" labelled "toy like," what is > wrong > > with that? Too wimpy-looking? What's wrong with wimpy-looking as > > long > > as its easy and functional? > > Sorry to keep beating the dead horse here, but the issue is that it > is toy-like *compared to user expectations* set up by other programs. > I find the EToys UI refreshing. My potential clients and colleagues > whom I wish to interest in Squeak just don't. > > > 4. Speaking of wimpy, someone (not you) once suggested "Squeak" > was a > > wimpy-sounding name, what do you think of "KA-POW!"? > > > LOL. I think Squeak is a weird name for a programming language. But > not weirder than C or Java or Ruby. > > >> Thanks for any wisdom you can share. This is one of the two big > >> objections I *always* get when I recommend someone look at Squeak > as > >> a possible solution to a problem for which it appears to me to be > >> ideally suited linguistically and architecturally. > > > > So I guess this group sets its priorities to building something, as > > you > > said, "ideally suited linguistically and architecturally". They > > haven't spent as much time playing endlessly with colors, shadows, > > gradients, only to please the latest group of popularist > > superficialites who'll be gone as soon as the next Wired article > tells > > them where they need to go next to be cool. Whew, sorry to say > that, > > at least you have my honesty. > > > I am at least somewhat sympathetic to your thinking here, Chris. All > I'm really trying to do is find answers that will satisfy and/or make > sense to the great majority of people who've had their user > experience expectations shaped by the market. > > Dan > > > |
Re: OT - Squeak and the Broader Software Community
|
|
In reply to this post by Dan Shafer-3
+1
UI widgets are a solved problem. It is part of the operating system. Like writing a file system is done, writing UI widgets is done too. I know in Smalltalk, the turtles go all the way down. But perhaps they don't need to go down quite as far as they currently do. This is me, writing as a professional Smalltalk developer, watching Squeak and waiting for that moment when Squeak becomes a contender and we can (possibly) port our application to it. Daniel Poon Dan Shafer wrote: > Please don't read this message if you don't have time or inclination for > a quasi-philosophical ramble down Smalltalk Lane. I'm posting this here > to share some experiences I doubt are new or unique but which I haven't > seen discussed here in the many months I've been back on the list. > > I have been involved in Smalltalk on and off for a good many years. It > keeps calling me back, like the Sirens, whenever I go in search of a new > tool because the one I'm engaged in at that moment falls short or > disappoints or just annoys me. As a result of this on-again, off-again > love affair with Smalltalk and Squeak, I'm far from as proficient a > coder or knowledgeable a designer as I would certainly be by now if I'd > stayed put here. But I haven't been able to do that, for a host of > reasons that are mostly boring and unique so I won't relate them here. > > Today I had a conversation with a colleague and friend I had referred to > Squeak as a possible solution to a specific set of problems he is > working on for a client. He spent a full day exploring Squeak and he > came back with an observation that I found difficult to answer. "Why," > he asked me in all sincerity, "is Squeak so ugly? Smalltalk has been > around 30 years. It's been in the hands of great design firms like Apple > and Disney. It's had IBM backing. Doesn't anyone in the Squeak community > understand how a polished, modern user interface would help to sell > their technology? Other than wxSqueak, which seems basically moribund [I > disabused him of this notion in our conversation, but that was his > finding on his own], there's nobody out there talking, thinking or > working on a professional-looking UI for Squeak's IDE or for deployment > of applications! What's going on there?" > > So I spent a couple of hours looking at the question he raised and what > I *think* I learned is that because of the way Smalltalk implements > graphics at some deep level beyond my ability to penetrate the image, > modifying its basic UI to use a more modern and reactive user experience > would be a major, major challenge. After 30+ years, there is no way to > do native UI widgets (other than wxSqueak if and when it gets finalized > and hopefully incorporated) let alone custom widgets that look polished > and professional. I was able to determine that there appears to be a > class (PNGReadWriter) that would facilitate the import of PNG images, > e.g., to use as controls. With enough time and understanding, I could > presumably figure out how to import a graphic (PNG or other) and make it > behave like a button, but then getting it into an app layout would > require another level of understanding. > > You get the idea. (And please don't spend time telling me how to do that > particular task; I don't have the expertise or interest anyway. It was > merely an illustration of what the problem appears to be.) > > I explained to my friend that Squeak has been used primarily for > research and education, not for the creation and deployment of > commercial applications where a standardized platform-specific UI was > important. For him, that's a reason to avoid Squeak altogether. > > So with that (probably overly long) background, I can ask my question, > on my friend's behalf. > > Why, after 30 years, does Squeak still appear to be a non-standard, > almost toy-like user experience in the IDE? Is it the case that changing > that would be far too complex to undertake? Or is it that the community > of Squeak users just isn't largely motivated to worry about this > subject? Or is the absence of an economic incentive the problem? Or IS > there a problem? > > Thanks for any wisdom you can share. This is one of the two big > objections I *always* get when I recommend someone look at Squeak as a > possible solution to a problem for which it appears to me to be ideally > suited linguistically and architecturally. > > -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- > > Dan Shafer > Technology Visionary - Technology Assessment - Documentation > "Looking at technology from every angle" > > > > > |
Re: OT - Squeak and the Broader Software Community
|
|
In reply to this post by Nicolas Cellier-3
nicolas cellier wrote:
> > Did you really try to copy/paste text from squeak to another application et > vice et versa? switching from ALT+C to CTRL+V, or the contrary is really is > gymnastic for user hands and brain... That is obviously why a little bit of > standardization does not harm. > that can be changed in perferences. |
«
Return to Squeak - Dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |