mwm@eris.BERKELEY.EDU (Mike (My watch has windows) Meyer) (10/21/87)
In article <1871@ulowell.cs.ulowell.edu> page@swan.ulowell.edu (Bob Page) writes:
<At AmiExpo I asked RJ Mical (Father of Inhibition) what -=he=- thought
<of HyperCard, since he has had some experience with it. He said he
<thought it was great, but didn't think it would have as large an
<impact as Apple thinks it will. He thought that for all its good
<points, end users (CEOs, secys, dentists, etc) would not want to get
<involved with it and do their own "programming" even though it's
<really easy to do...it's still programming.
Bingo! This has what's been nagging me about HyperCard. Unlike
HyperText, where links point to typed objects (one type of which could
be code), HyperCard has links that can only point to code.
Obviously, the set of structures that can be built with the two are
identical (modulo the types of object available in each system).
However, the act of building them is different.
To wit, HyperText is designed to be used by *anybody* who can use a
word processor, as a hyperthyroid word processor - building links,
adding comments to text, etc.
It looks like hypercard is a tool for building non-linear text and
data bases, and will be used more like dBase. Programmers will build
stacks to do things for users, and the users will then enter cards
into them.
Ok, now for the confession - I've only been exposed to hypercard, I
haven't tried building anything in it. Would some of the stackmakers
care to comment?
<mike
--
But I'll survive, no you won't catch me, Mike Meyer
I'll resist the urge that is tempting me, ucbvax!mwm
I'll avert my eyes, keep you off my knee, mwm@berkeley.edu
But it feels so good when you talk to me. mwm@ucbjade.BITNET