osmigo@ut-ngp.UUCP (Ron Morgan) (11/29/87)
From ut-ngp!osmigo Sun Nov 29 01:02:09 CST 1987
Article 10218 of comp.sys.mac:
Path: ut-ngp!osmigo
>From: osmigo@ut-ngp.UUCP (Ron Morgan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Re: MacUser Hypercard coverage (now Hypercard user interface)
Message-ID: <6954@ut-ngp.UUCP>
Date: 29 Nov 87 06:58:42 GMT
References: <34647@sun.uucp> <870048@hpcilzb.HP.COM>
Reply-To: osmigo@ngp.UUCP (CP^ZAZPPPYPYXU zQYhBYPYoZO)
Organization: Speech Communication UT Austin
Lines: 54
I have the following comments, mostly negative, to make about Hypercard,
for what it's worth.
1. I agree with the MacUser author that it's being foisted upon the market
without passing the litmus test of retail competition. One can only
speculate how far Hypercard would get if it were quietly slipped onto
retail shelves for $295.00.
2. Its consumption of bytes is horrifying, both in the RAM and on the disk.
A full-blown, heavy-duty Hyperperson (what a concept, eh?) would need at
least 2 megs of RAM and a 20 meg hard disk just to stay alive. I resent
the way this kind of thing is vogue these days, and find it hard to
believe that it's not being done deliberately, to stimulate sales of
higher-capacity systems, as well as to arbitrarily define the market in
ways of questionable benefit to the consumers, e.g., Hypercard making
DA's obsolete within a year or two.
3. Hypertalk is somewhat overrated. True, it's "easier" than C or Pascal, but
in no sense of the word is it a "programming language" in the first place.
MacUser/World often tend to glamorize new software with lots of tinsel-
and-glitter foofooraw. You may recall the front-cover spotlighting of
MacSpin, yet how many people are using it? Just a couple of months ago,
right on the front cover: "Visual Interactive Programming: The Wave of the
Future." Those guys have had more "waves of the future" than Jeanne Dixon.
I'll change my mind when somebody writes a flight simulator in Hypertalk.
Furthermore, I doubt that the "ease" of learning/using Hypertalk (and it's
no mean feat to do so, relying solely on the HELP card or the manual,
neither of which addresses the subject in depth) will be that big an
advantage for the business user. Most professional businessmen I know
are far, far too busy to learn a language and twiddle away their time
writing "button programs." They just want to go click-click and get
their Cash Flow Indexes.
That is, if they COULD learn it. I've known a number of business computer
consultants to laugh with me over lunch, chortling about how they charged
some high-priced executive $25 an hour for teaching him how to drag an icon.
4. In my opinion, Hypercard's most salient innovation is its way of getting
around, but even that's not special. Just click on a box for the next
subject. It's not all that different from the Guidance DA on Pagemaker 2.0.
It's been suggested that Hypercard is really here to pervade the market in
preparation for the introduction of CD's, for which it would be ideally
suited. However, in presenting Hypercard as a magical, omnipotent, do-
everything application that will replace everything but the kitchen sink,
Apple may be setting an otherwise "nice" application up for failure. No
Hypercard application is going to even come close to surpassing its stand-
alone software equivalent, and what with Finder-substitute DA's such as
DiskTools II and DiskTop that let you flick from one application to the
next in seconds, I wonder if Atkinson, having blown 3 precious years on
this monstrosity, is trying to become the Steve Jobs of programming.
Ron Morgan
"Who are you?"
"We're computerists."
"AAAUUGGGHHH!!!"
--
UUCP: {ihnp4,allegra,ut-sally}!ut-ngp!osmigo
osmigo@ut-ngp.UUCP
ARPA: osmigo@ngp.utexas.edu
--
UUCP: {ihnp4,allegra,ut-sally}!ut-ngp!osmigo
osmigo@ut-ngp.UUCP
ARPA: osmigo@ngp.utexas.edufry@huma1.UUCP (11/29/87)
In article <6956@ut-ngp.UUCP> osmigo@ut-ngp.UUCP (Ron Morgan) writes: > >I have the following comments, mostly negative, to make about Hypercard, >for what it's worth. > >1. I agree with the MacUser author that it's being foisted upon the market > without passing the litmus test of retail competition. One can only > speculate how far Hypercard would get if it were quietly slipped onto > retail shelves for $295.00. I think HyperCard would sell quite well for $295. It is totally unlike any other application and it might take awhile for the market to figure out exactly what it's good for, but that's why it's so wonderful of Apple to practically give it away. People can experiment with it and make it into a standard, avoiding a chicken-and-the-egg syndrome while people wait for proof of why they should buy it. >2. Its consumption of bytes is horrifying, both in the RAM and on the disk. > A full-blown, heavy-duty Hyperperson (what a concept, eh?) would need at > least 2 megs of RAM and a 20 meg hard disk just to stay alive. I resent > the way this kind of thing is vogue these days, and find it hard to > believe that it's not being done deliberately, to stimulate sales of > higher-capacity systems, as well as to arbitrarily define the market in > ways of questionable benefit to the consumers, e.g., Hypercard making > DA's obsolete within a year or two. I agree that a 20MB hard drive is very useful for HC, but I think a 20MB hard drive is very useful for just about anything useful on a computer. They are cheap enough now that a lot of people are getting them. But this 2MB of RAM is pretty much nonsense. I use HC in a 750K partition under MultiFinder and I've never encountered a problem. Why do people think HC needs so much memory? HC files certainly are large, but it's basically a case of "you get what you pay for." >3. Hypertalk is somewhat overrated. True, it's "easier" than C or Pascal, but > in no sense of the word is it a "programming language" in the first place. Exactly what sense of the word (sic) "programming language" are thinking about? HyperTalk is descended from a respected, high level language (SmallTalk) that is very easy to program in. If it's not a programming language, what do you think it is? > MacUser/World often tend to glamorize new software with lots of tinsel- > and-glitter foofooraw. You may recall the front-cover spotlighting of > MacSpin, yet how many people are using it? Just a couple of months ago, > right on the front cover: "Visual Interactive Programming: The Wave of the > Future." Those guys have had more "waves of the future" than Jeanne Dixon. > I'll change my mind when somebody writes a flight simulator in Hypertalk. I certainly agree that the magazines will jump on any bandwagon that comes along, but that's their job :-). Back to HyperTalk, you won't see a flight simulator in HyperTalk because it is interpreted and it doesn't allow easy access to the hardware. No one ever said you could write a flight simulator in HyperTalk, nor can you write one in Basic but it's still userful. This morning I made some simple changes to the Address stack that comes with HyperCard and now I have a stack that stores my students names, addresses, phone numbers, and grades for all the assignments. Lastly, clicking on a button draws a simple scatter chart to determine the bell curve for assigning letter grades. This took about 45 minutes to set up. That's why people like HyperCard. > Furthermore, I doubt that the "ease" of learning/using Hypertalk (and it's > no mean feat to do so, relying solely on the HELP card or the manual, > neither of which addresses the subject in depth) will be that big an > advantage for the business user. Most professional businessmen I know > are far, far too busy to learn a language and twiddle away their time > writing "button programs." They just want to go click-click and get > their Cash Flow Indexes. > > That is, if they COULD learn it. I've known a number of business computer > consultants to laugh with me over lunch, chortling about how they charged > some high-priced executive $25 an hour for teaching him how to drag an icon. You can't please all the people all the time. For those who can't drag icons I have no answer. For those that don't want to buy an extra book to help with HyperTalk, I suggest that they part with the bucks; you'll like it. For those who are too busy to write "button programs," I've never met anyone too busy to make their system more efficient. Keep in mind, though, that HyperCard is not meant to replace Excel, which is perfect for Cash Flow Indices. >4. In my opinion, Hypercard's most salient innovation is its way of getting > around, but even that's not special. Just click on a box for the next > subject. It's not all that different from the Guidance DA on Pagemaker 2.0. > It's been suggested that Hypercard is really here to pervade the market in > preparation for the introduction of CD's, for which it would be ideally > suited. However, in presenting Hypercard as a magical, omnipotent, do- > everything application that will replace everything but the kitchen sink, > Apple may be setting an otherwise "nice" application up for failure. No > Hypercard application is going to even come close to surpassing its stand- > alone software equivalent, and what with Finder-substitute DA's such as > DiskTools II and DiskTop that let you flick from one application to the > next in seconds, I wonder if Atkinson, having blown 3 precious years on > this monstrosity, is trying to become the Steve Jobs of programming. HC is not meant to be a Finder-substitute, so what does this have to do with anything? And what do you mean by the remark "Steve Jobs of programming?" I think that would be a wonderful compliment for just about anyone, but programmers of Atkinson's level need no compliments. His monstrosity is not perfect, but it is the first example of what will (hopefully) be a large part of future computing. All people need to do is recognize its limitations. Frankly, your comments make me wonder if you've even used HyperCard. David Fry fry@huma1.harvard.EDU Department of Mathematics fry@harvma1.bitnet Harvard University ...!harvard!huma1!fry Cambridge, MA 02138
forcader@byuvax.bitnet (11/29/87)
Bravo. Someone finally said it. Having read Goodman's book, I still haven't found anything interesting that I couldn't do more easily without Hypercard. However, I suppose if what you want to do is make address lists, grade-rolls and slide-shows, its wonderful.
bc@mit-amt.UUCP (11/29/87)
WHOAH! Chill just a sec. 1. Ignore giant hype. (primary rule of media) 2. Bitmap graphics in HC are COMPRESSED average 15-30x. Atkinson patenting data compression. that good. 3. No "Secret Plans", No "foisting". ok? If you want this kind of environment: ultra graphics, "friendly" (but quite limited) programming, links, etc, it DOES TAKE that much memory. Sorry. Code is quite optimized (I've seen it). 4. Atkinson wrote HC and forced Apple to distribute -- no "secret plans" to make people buy memory, disks. 5. HC not a replace everything environment. You -- you -- can now frotz your data in new ways you never could unless seasoned programmer. It might be very very slow for tricky stuff. That's drawback. But you -- mr user -- can now do newer things, beyond what programmer coded. Ever use Cricket Graph? Only 12 kinds of graphs. yours not there, too bad. now you CAN do it, with hc. ok? Best part is you can buy or get free expansion code -- XCMD, or just stackware -- and add it on no prob to get new features. No one will force you to buy anything new. But if you want the super-premium HC environment, it does require hd and a meg or two. Sorry. No other choice. 6. HC has bugs, limitations, that are being fixed. Some really horrible. But they will be fixed. OK? Now please: no conspiracy. No. Sorry for druggy writing, i broke my hand, taking percodan, typing with one finger.................................................bc
dlw@hpsmtc1.HP.COM (David Williams) (11/30/87)
So you hate HyperCard do you? Well fine, its free so just don't use it. I happen to love it and I use it Every Day. Quite frankly it offers me the fastest tool available to prototype User Interfaces for applications development. As to a real language being one that allows you to write a Flight Simulator?? Boy thats one application everyone needs! I guess you must be another person who invested in OWL's stock eh? Why are you so upset that Bill Atkinson wanted and made Hypercard free? Would you rather he took the approach of ParcPlace systems ($1000+ for SmallTalk 80) and insure that the product got into the hands of Big corporations and universities rather than be accessable to the general public at large? If you want to code in C, fine -- Lightspeed C is an excellent product and you can buy it for $150 or so, and write your Flight simulator which everyone will want to own, and make extensions to ;) Whew, I feel much better now...
eirik@tekcrl.TEK.COM (Eirik Fuller) (11/30/87)
In article <3410@husc6.harvard.edu> fry@huma1.UUCP (David Fry) writes: >In article <6956@ut-ngp.UUCP> osmigo@ut-ngp.UUCP (Ron Morgan) writes: > ... > >>3. Hypertalk is somewhat overrated. True, it's "easier" than C or Pascal, but >> in no sense of the word is it a "programming language" in the first place. > Exactly what sense of the word (sic) "programming >language" are thinking about? HyperTalk is descended from a >respected, high level language (SmallTalk) that is very >easy to program in. If it's not a programming language, what >do you think it is? > NO NO NO NO NO NO ... Oops, excuse me, I got carried away ... Tell me, have you ever seen smalltalk? Have you programmed in smalltalk? I find it far easier to believe that you speak from the depths of your ignorance on this one, than that you have really used smalltalk and still believe this. Smalltalk is several orders of magnitude better as a programming language than hypertalk. I would possibly begin to believe otherwise if hypercard were implemented in hypertalk, the way that the smalltalk environment is implemented in smalltalk. The essential difference between hypercard and smalltalk is simple. Hypercard is a user environment with something like programming thrown in as an (admittedly useful) afterthought, while smalltalk is pure and simple a programming environment, whose user interface is in some sense an afterthought. What is hypertalk if not a programming language? It's a useful hack. > ... > Frankly, your comments make me wonder if you've even used >HyperCard. > > ... Ditto, except substitute HyperCard with smalltalk.
chuq@plaid.Sun.COM (Chuq Von Rospach) (11/30/87)
>I have the following comments, mostly negative, to make about Hypercard, >for what it's worth. and, of course, the rebuttal. >1. I agree with the MacUser author that it's being foisted upon the market > without passing the litmus test of retail competition. One can only > speculate how far Hypercard would get if it were quietly slipped onto > retail shelves for $295.00. Except that HyperCard wasn't designed as a high-price, high-end product. It was designed to be a give-away base for other applications (see my other, recent posting on Hypercard as a latter day Applesoft -- I'll spare you and not repeat it). And I still think it'd sell well at the high price, at that. But it's TRUE worth is letting everyone have at it, and see what happens in the stackware market. So far, the stackware market has been amazing. Imagine what'll happen in a year when folks really get a handle on the thing. (and as a side comment, and product that is 'quietly slipped' on the market deserves to die.) >2. Its consumption of bytes is horrifying, both in the RAM and on the disk. > A full-blown, heavy-duty Hyperperson (what a concept, eh?) would need at > least 2 megs of RAM and a 20 meg hard disk just to stay alive. It's no worse than any other product of its type. You start shoving the same data in any database and you'll see similar or worse performance. High end products require hardware support. As another example, Ready, Set, Go! 4.0 takes up lots of disk. a LOT more than the same files in word 3.0 format (which is larger than word 1.05 format, by the way). But if you look at the output of RSG vs. Word, you see that there are lots of things being done by RSG that Word can't even sneeze at. You can't ask for a program to sing and dance and then complain when it requires ballet shoes instead of lead weights. If you only want to allow a program macWrite resources, you can't expect it to outperform a cray. >I resent > the way this kind of thing is vogue these days, and find it hard to > believe that it's not being done deliberately, to stimulate sales of > higher-capacity systems, as well as to arbitrarily define the market in > ways of questionable benefit to the consumers, e.g., Hypercard making > DA's obsolete within a year or two. You can resent it all you want, but it's called progress. You can complain that HyperCard won't fit on an old ROM 128K mac, but you couldn't write something like Hypercard on that machine. you also can't write it on a commodore 64, and TRS-80, an IBM-PC or my dear departed IMSAI (state of the art -- tarbell cassette, 16K of Ram, and a whole 8K of ROM!). Anything that pushes the state of the art pushes beyond the capabilities of older hardware. It's a fact of life, not just limited to the Mac. I remember when the sun2 was the state of the art. I remember when macwrite was the best thing since sliced bread. Hell, I remember when the 780 was the Unix box of choice, for that matter. As you force more and more functionality into your software, you force more and more requirements on the underlying hardware. You need more hardware, more speed, more oomph. This is evolution. As our software gets better and better, the hardware underneath must follow. Any attempt to claim otherwise goes against the entire history of the computer industry. (and if you don't believe it, go live with Wordstar on an Imsai. I'll wave at you from the window...) >3. Hypertalk is somewhat overrated. True, it's "easier" than C or Pascal, but > in no sense of the word is it a "programming language" in the first place. Bull. You haven't worked with it much, or you wouldn't say that. It is a different sort of programming language, but it is complete and quite powerful. Somewhat specialized, but it is in a specialized environment. > I'll change my mind when somebody writes a flight simulator in Hypertalk. Would you settle for adventure? Hypertalk doesn't claim to be a real time environment, so asking for a flight simulator in Hypertalk is like claiming that Cobol isn't a real language because nobody has writen a flight simulator in that. I do know that I can write adventure in Hypertalk. I believe I can even implement Rogue. But asking for real-time from a system that wasn't designed for real time operation is stupid. > Furthermore, I doubt that the "ease" of learning/using Hypertalk (and it's > no mean feat to do so, relying solely on the HELP card or the manual, > neither of which addresses the subject in depth) will be that big an > advantage for the business user. Wrong. Again, see my other comments on Hypercard, Applesoft, and puttering. >4. In my opinion, Hypercard's most salient innovation is its way of getting > around, but even that's not special. Just click on a box for the next > subject. It's not all that different from the Guidance DA on Pagemaker 2.0. Except, of course, that it took a professional programmer to write the Guidance DA on Pagemaker. Anyone can implement the same in Hypercard with a little time and puttering. There's the big difference, and why Hypercard is a big deal. It brings the power of the programmer to the puttering hobbyist. chuq --- Chuq "Fixed in 4.0" Von Rospach chuq@sun.COM Delphi: CHUQ
howard@cpocd2.UUCP (Howard A. Landman) (12/02/87)
In article <6956@ut-ngp.UUCP> osmigo@ut-ngp.UUCP (Ron Morgan) writes:
[A bunch of negative stuff saying why HyperCard isn't as good as X, Y, and Z.]
I've read all the reviews of HyperCard now. They range from "Overly hyped
trash" to "The biggest revolution since the PC". Neither of these extremes
is correct. In fact, only one person said anything even halfway intelligent
about HyperCard (other than Atkinson himself on Computer Chronicles), and
that was Douglas Adams (author of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, etc.) in
his MacUser article. Perhaps this will answer Ron's complaints:
"So why all the fuss about a program that is a less powerful visual database
than Business Filevision? A less powerful painting tool than SuperPaint or
GraphicWorks? A less powerful hypertext editor than Guide? A less powerful
object-oriented programming language than Smalltalk? A less powerful file
manager than the Finder?"
[I would add: a less powerful language-directed editor than Emacs.]
"Well, I think it occupies the same niche in the evolution of software as human
beings do in the evolution of life. A human can't run as fast as a horse,
can't climb trees as well as a monkey, can't swim as well as a fish, hear as
well as a dog or see as well as a cat. But we can swim better than a monkey
and run faster than a fish. If we need to go as fast as a horse, we can ride
one. If we need to go faster still we can build a car or an aeroplane or use
one that someone else has built. ...
"In other words, HyperCard is a program that functions in the same way that
human beings do. It can turn its hand to any kind of task at any moment and
do it as well as most tasks actualy need. And if the task is beyond it,
HyperCard can use the phone, it can go for a ride on Excel, and it knows where
Illustrator is kept.
I should probably add that I've been using HyperCard for a week, and I'm in
love, even though the person who let me copy it forgot to give me the Phone
and Address stacks and several other major pieces. It didn't matter. I
recreated them myself in a couple of hours. Now that I have the "official"
Address stack, I'm just going to throw it out, because the one I wrote is
better (for *MY* purposes); for example, it's smarter about area codes and
dialing 1. I've ripped out the rather cheesy Periodic Table that came with,
and spliced in not 1 but 2 different stacks of the elements. Tonight I'll
link them together with background buttons, so I can jump between them; I
expect that this will take about 15 minutes. Though the process is just begun,
I can see that HyperCard will let me customize an information environment
to my liking, and that I can grow with it for years to come.
One bad thing: I found Goodman's "Complete" HyperCard Manual to be anything
but. It spends several hundred pages spelling out in excruciating detail
things that any HyperCard user will figure out in the first half hour of
playing with the program, and totally ignores questions like "How do I write
an XFCN resource for a HyperCard stack and install it?" I admit this isn't
exactly a beginner's question, but now I'm going to have to buy *ANOTHER*
book for that. If and when one becomes available. Thanks, Danny. :-(
--
Howard A. Landman
{oliveb,hplabs}!intelca!mipos3!cpocd2!howard
howard%cpocd2.intel.com@RELAY.CS.NET
"I'm sorry, Dave, but I can't do that."howard@cpocd2.UUCP (Howard A. Landman) (12/02/87)
>>In article <6956@ut-ngp.UUCP> osmigo@ut-ngp.UUCP (Ron Morgan) writes: >>>3. Hypertalk is somewhat overrated. True, it's "easier" than C or Pascal, but >>> in no sense of the word is it a "programming language" in the first place. >In article <3410@husc6.harvard.edu> fry@huma1.UUCP (David Fry) writes: >> Exactly what sense of the word (sic) "programming >>language" are thinking about? HyperTalk is descended from a >>respected, high level language (SmallTalk) that is very >>easy to program in. If it's not a programming language, what >>do you think it is? In article <2116@tekcrl.TEK.COM> eirik@crl.TEK.COM (Eirik Fuller) writes: >Tell me, have you ever seen smalltalk? Have you programmed in >smalltalk? I find it far easier to believe that you speak from the >depths of your ignorance on this one, than that you have really used >smalltalk and still believe this. >Smalltalk is several orders of magnitude better as a programming >language than hypertalk. I would possibly begin to believe otherwise >if hypercard were implemented in hypertalk, the way that the smalltalk >environment is implemented in smalltalk. I'll answer for David. Yes I've programmed in Smalltalk, in fact I had a *job* programming in Smalltalk at Xerox PARC. (Of course, it was Smalltalk 76 (and a little 72), not Smalltalk 80, but that's a minor cavil.) I even got briefly to work with Diana Merry, who first implemented overlapping windows (in Smalltalk). It's a wonderful language, so wonderful that a lot of newer languages have borrowed from it, including HyperTalk. Hypertalk is a simpler language than Smalltalk. It doesn't have a class structure, for example. But it's still quite powerful, and in a few ways even superior to Smalltalk (fast find, bitmap compression, closeness to English). I can whip up a Smalltalk application in a few hours to a few days. I can whip up a HyperCard application in a few minutes to a few hours. That's worth something. If I want it to run fast, I'll reprogram it in C! (At least until ParcPlace lowers their prices. Ouch!) -- Howard A. Landman {oliveb,hplabs}!intelca!mipos3!cpocd2!howard howard%cpocd2.intel.com@RELAY.CS.NET "I'm sorry, Dave, but I can't do that."
scaletti@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu (12/02/87)
PLEASE, ITS Smalltalk NOT SmallTalk!!!!! I think any resemblance between HyperTalk and Smalltalk is purely coincidental (and for 'celebrity status ruboff'). Kurt J. Hebel
schmidt@lsrhs.UUCP (12/03/87)
In article <1002@cpocd2.UUCP> howard@cpocd2.UUCP (Howard A. Landman) writes: >>>In article <6956@ut-ngp.UUCP> osmigo@ut-ngp.UUCP (Ron Morgan) writes: >>>>3. Hypertalk is somewhat overrated. True, it's "easier" than C or Pascal, but >>>> in no sense of the word is it a "programming language" in the first place. blah, blah, blah etc. Why does this happen? Here's a new piece of software which represents new thinking in computer use, marketing and existing customer-base support. Why has it garnered all these attacks? As with any piece of software, I would expect that those people who don't like it, won't use it. Why is it that so many folks are getting steamed over the enthusiasm that hypercard has generated? And the argument that says: "We can't let the world go crazy over something so flawed" just doesn't wash. Isn't clear by now that the new ideas embodied in hypercard will prove, eventually, helpful and that it's flaws will not corrupt, for evermore, the thinking and expectations of its users. This forum would be more useful if we didn't have to read all this stuff. There, my first and last contribution to this sort of discussion . . . -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Chris Schmidt/Lincoln-Sudbury High School/390 Lincoln Rd/Sudbury/Ma/01776 (617) 926-3242 -----> mit-caf!lsrhs!schmidt@eddie.mit.edu
glosser@ut-ngp.UUCP (12/04/87)
disagree with those who only think Hypercard is good for date books etc. A good use is for presenting complicated ideas. As an example picture what would be a complicated formula for an undergraduate in an introductory statistics class, for example, the formula for a binomial distribution. By clicking over any part of the formula (using a transparent button) the student is presented with a discussion explaining what that part of the formula means (for example the combinations notation). In addition the student then has the opportunity to go back to the original formula or to see where else the subtopic he/she is looking at also has applicability. In otherwords I see hypercard as a tool to enhance conceptualization of difficult material. This ability is because of the nonlinear nature -- CHAOS (buzzword :-) ) Hypercard permits. Sorry for the terseness, I'm paying a long distance fee to write this, and its been ages since I've used the vi editor. But I couldn't help but put my 2 cents in. Stuart M. Glosser Univ. of Wisc at Whitewater Dept. of Econ.
howard@cpocd2.UUCP (12/04/87)
In article <174400080@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu> scaletti@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu writes: > > > >PLEASE, ITS Smalltalk NOT SmallTalk!!!!! > >I think any resemblance between HyperTalk and Smalltalk is >purely coincidental (and for 'celebrity status ruboff'). > > Kurt J. Hebel Here is a resemblance: You can send messages to objects in both HyperTalk and Smalltalk. You cannot do this in C (unless C++ or Objective C), Pascal, Lisp (unless e.g. Flavors), PL/I, Algol, Prolog, Fortran, BASIC, Jovial, or most other languages. This resemblance is not coincidental. Bill Atkinson said in an interview I saw that Smalltalk was the second biggest language influence on HyperTalk. The first? Why, English, of course. -- Howard A. Landman {oliveb,hplabs}!intelca!mipos3!cpocd2!howard howard%cpocd2.intel.com@RELAY.CS.NET "I'm sorry, Dave, but I can't do that."