This is the "other reason" I sometimes go against my better judgment by advocating in favor of native widgets. The first reason is that it would force us to use events and impose related discipline (input focus, etc.) on Pharo's user interface. The applicable reason here is that Pharo would become part of the host OS far more readily than it can (reasonably be expected to) now.
Pinesoft brought us a long way with Polymorph, but emulating happens by reverse engineering and invariably will end at "good enough" (which is pretty good right now) rather than using the same code as the OS. Bill ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Francois Stephany [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, December 02, 2011 6:53 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] A commercial question Hi German, > The average Apple user could accept > the look and feel of a morphic pharo application? (Very different than > the osx l&f). Ouch, I gess they dont. Apple users usually expect a GUI that follows both look and feel of native applications. For some, even Firefox is not 'MacOS' enough. I'm maybe biased on this topic but I would not develop a general purpose software with Pharo (at least a desktop app). If you have niche software, the story is probably different. Sorry to sound so pessimist! Francois (I would love to be proven wrong!) -- http://tulipemoutarde.be BE: +32 (0)65 709 131 CA: +1 778 558 3225
