>I'm not sure if it's mostly a question of
>"You're-most-comfortable-with-what-you-learn-first", but I found that for
>most of my SuperCard projects, I preferred using an environment that "keeps
>out of my way", graphically speaking.
>
>For example, I was alot more comfortable using SC 2.x's "Runtime
>Editor"(RTE) than v3.x's "Project Editor"(PE). I like the fact that the few
>palettes (in the RTE) are mostly vertical, long and narrow, and can be
>easily kept at the side of the screen. I prefer the dialogs used to set
>individual object preferences to a whole mess-o'-buttons on a toolbar or
>palette. I also like the availability of just about everything from the
>menus, if desired (menus stay out of the way when you don't need them).
Kurt,
I have to agree I feel similar in many regards. Until recently, I was
still using an age-old Photoshop 1.0.7, and when I switched to the new
release, I was often annoyed by thousands of palettes. Though I really like
that you can compose your own palettes with the appropriate tabs. But
honestly spoken, in many cases I prefer palettes for things like editing a
field's contents or turning on/off their properties. This is what makes
devising a good UI so hard. You have to identify the parts that don't work
well in modal dialogs and put them into palettes, but you can't put
everything into palettes, because then people drown in hundreds of windows.
It would be great if people could come up with a list of where to put
different features.
>I also prefer having the RTE (this is also true for the HC editor) kept
>running constantly, i.e., not like the PE, which has a "run" and "edit"
>mode. For editing with scripts "off", a utility like SuperEdit is more
>predictable and flexible in its function. (Incidentally, I rarely used SE
>-except to "set up" a project at the start- when I was using the RTE, but
>more recently I find that I use SE alot more, as a more predictable "edit"
>mode than is offered by the PE.)
I would also prefer the HC/MC/Serf way of simply switching a tool. A "run"
mode like SC 3 has would annoy me, especially if switching between modes
takes long. What do the others on this list think?
>But what about the project browser feature of the PE?
>For a time I was using OMO, and someone (I don't have the name handy at the
>moment) produced an object browser (a library stack) which worked well in
>OMO's RTE-like editing/running environment.
I'd also love such a window (which I call a "stack hierarchy window" or
similar, but it's merely the same thing in green).
>(I'm well aware that others do not share my views, and I do not mean to
>belittle the amazing effort that produced a tool such as the PE; I certainly
>could not have done it myself!)
The PE is a great thing, and it's a lot better than e.g. MC's. If I had to
choose one of the existing editors, I'd probably take SC's Project Editor
for feature-richness and convenience, but I'd want it much faster.
>So, that's my 2 or 3 cents...
Thanks for sharing your views with us, and don't hesitate to comment more
when you feel like it!
Cheers,
-- M. Uli Kusterer
------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.weblayout.com/witness
'The Witnesses of TeachText are everywhere...'
--- HELP SAVE HYPERCARD: ---
Details at: http://www.hyperactivesw.com/SaveHC.html
Sign: http://www.giguere.uqam.ca/petition/hcpetition.html
