Well, I have no experience of Qt, but if the configurability is that good, perhaps it could be skinned to give it a more "Amiga" like feeling.
I'm only using Qt as an example because it was mentioned by Thomas, whether it actually gets adopted or not is another matter.
I would guess some simple trials would have to be carried out to see just how it could be incorporated into the system.
Simon
Comments made in any post are personal opinion, and are in no-way representative of any commercial entity unless specifically stated as such. ---- http://codebench.co.uk
To me a great strength of the AmigaOS is the modularity and simplicity. I think it is a shame that this does not extend to the neither the current GUI toolkits nor QT.
This is just my personal opinion, and I understand the motivations behind looking at QT, but I think we shouldn't look in the rear view mirror but forwards when looking at graphical interfaces.
Jolicloud was recently released with what is practically an HTML5 interface. I'm not necessarily saying we should take that route, but looking at emerging technologies gives some good ideas for potential solutions. I'm not sure taking a step sidewards is going to help that much in the long run.
I don't think anyone would consider your decision to look at something else an "insult".
It was a reference to a recent posting of mine that got commented like this on Amigaworld.net.
Quote:
As far as MUI itself goes, I tend to look at it merely from the perspective of those who are more comfortable with it, knowledgable about it...and feel they could bring more to Amiga OS with its use as opposed to learning something new.
The debate about MUI vs, Reaction is as old as MUI and Reaction itself. I used to be a supporter of MUI until such time as I tried to write a program with it and saw how easily you can mess it up with weird settings in the prefs program.
One thing I seriously dislike about all the Amiga toolkits is the way to ... write ....... user ....... interface ....... code .. like .. this.
I hate this macro CF, it's unintuitive and prone to errors. It's born out of the fact that there is no decent interface designer tool on AmigaOS, and user interfaces have to be maintained in program source (the only exception being Feelin). While this is, to a certain extend, still true in Qt it is masked by the fact that user interface designers exist.
@trezzer
Here is an example gui shot of Qt on Windows. The Qt distribution has quite a few examples in it.
Scripting is no solution for a GUI. How would that work? A script is a linear succession of instructions. That does not differ in any way from an executable program, just that it is a few times slower and the source code is compiled every time it is run (sort of).
At the core of it, there is always the same concepts. Windows, widgets/gadgets, and events. Events are generated by user input or programs, and are handled by a programmed succession of instructions, be it a piece of code or a script.
Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Thank you for the link to the gui shot of Qt on Windows.
With the subject of look/feel being mentioned I was just going to ask folks if they could provide some links to what they are discussing. Sadly, the words "port" and "linux" often cause a kneejerk reaction before people even give a fair look. Your example will help us relate.
Well, if you plan to turn OS4 in a random linux distribution (with all the flaws without the advantages) by integrating all kind external components and concepts that will just alter the original amigaos experience, then it's surely the way to go...
Sorry, but that's bollocks. The same could be said about MUI. MUI works within the context of the application. That is why it stops to react to button presses when if the application doesn't regularly invokes a callback. That is not how the "original amigaos experience" worked either, however, I do not see you claim similar things about MUI.
The gust of it is that Amiga user interfaces, and that includes MUI 4, look old-fashioned and severely lack in functionality. If that is what you call the "original amigaos experience", then it's surely the way to go.. I, on the other hand, would prefer to have configurable window layouts, modern looking interface designs based on compositing, and all the goodies that user interfaces on other systems already take for granted.
Seriously, have you ever pressed a button on any other OS? Does that feel in any way different than pressing a button under AmigaOS? Let me help you, no it doesn't. Whether a toolkit is based on BOOPSI, Qt, or LEGO doesn't mean anything. The user doesn't care.
It's what we call "progress". It means that you add functionality, not retain the lack of it for the sake of nostalgia. Your line of argumentation would mean we are never allowed to leave our 640x480 Productivity screens with 16 colors. It would mean we would have had to retain HAM mode for the sake of "Amiga experience", while everyone else is using 10 bit floating point framebuffers.
Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Thank you for the link to the gui shot of Qt on Windows.
With the subject of look/feel being mentioned I was just going to ask folks if they could provide some links to what they are discussing. Sadly, the words "port" and "linux" often cause a kneejerk reaction before people even give a fair look. Your example will help us relate.
#6
You can also look at practically any shot of KDE 4 to get the idea of how it looks. And please note that none of these even tries to look like AmigaOS. With the right visual theme, it could look very much like it, and still retain the superior functionality.
The problem with some Amiga people is that they think everything on Amiga should be different. Unfortunately, they tend to forget that to be different, somebody actually has to undertake the work to make it different. Right now, there is no way that the Amiga community can gather enough people for such an undertaking (creating a modern UI), so going to look on other systems is the only option.
And why not? Amiga has failed to deliver a web browser that works with modern web pages. OWB is a port, but it works. People have to realize that reinventing the wheel is not going to happen.
Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
The modularity and simplicity stems from the way the system is structured. Libraries and datatypes that handle what you throw at them. Text-based scripts (such as startup-sequence) that makes it easier to understand what does what.
The whole structure with devices, storage and so on makes functionality tangible to me. I may not understand the specifics, but it makes it easier to understand what goes on and why, when you eventually run into problems with AmigaOS.
Sadly we've not seen as much progress with libraries and datatypes as I would have liked to see (for instance a Gecko or WebKit library for handling web pages across applications - or system-wide handling of video in the same manner we see images handled through datatypes) and I guess there are good reasons for that somewhere, even if I don't know them (as far as I know datatypes aren't ready for streams, so I guess that's part of it).
Sadly i cannot give you a good GUI example, because I don't think we've had one yet. They've been easy enough to use but either almost non-configurable or incredibly obscure to configure. It did help that both MUI and ReAction added skin (or skin-like) support, but that's not the ease of configurability I'm hoping for.
I would apply the terms to toolkits by way of simplifying again and again till things could get no simpler without breaking. Then allow things to grow as much as necessary and no more. Obviously this is easier said than done, and it's probably not the technical answer you're looking for (others can answer those better than I - and I hope they will), but if you open up the "GUI" prefs, I'm sure you can see what I'm not too keen on as a non-programmer.
On the other hand I could whip up stylesheets and basic layouts, if I were given the option to do so. The same transparency as the "simple" structure of the OS and configuration files.
Edited by trezzer on 2010/7/30 19:51:27 Edited by trezzer on 2010/7/30 19:52:36
Don't try to bring facts in this discussion, it's generally not well received. :)
Don't know where you get that idea. I've certainly been asking for facts/answers. I can hardly help it that you proclaim no knowledge of the people & problems!
I'm also curious why you ignored my last post, which was about why there seems (from my ignorant point of view) a strong argument that MUI4 should have been ported to OS3/OS4 (and why such an argument doesn't really apply to porting Reaction to MOS for example).
@all Regarding lack-of-hardware for porting MUI by someone else than Stefan in 2005. That may very well be true, since we had a hardware drought around then. But that's most certainly no-longer the case!
And even if the guy (who wanted to do the MUI4 port to OS4) in 2005 is no-longer available, I assume that Stefan would still be happy to see a port? In which case someone else should be able to get his permission? I still hope to hear a definitive answer....
Edited by ChrisH on 2010/7/31 10:20:07 Edited by ChrisH on 2010/7/31 10:20:52
Well, if you plan to turn OS4 in a random linux distribution (with all the flaws without the advantages) by integrating all kind external components and concepts that will just alter the original amigaos experience, then it's surely the way to go... I can see some remote interest in QT for some applications, but making it the OS toolkit, seriously? Well, at least you didn't choose GTK... Seriously, where's the "Amiga feeling" in that? Doesn't anyone feel there's something wrong there?
If someone succeded to port QT on AmigaOS (or Morphos) i assure you that you will have a lo of new programs in few months. And for new i not mean only "ported" programs from the linux world that however needs also other works. But also simply programs that can be created ny anyone. And this will not erase the AmigaOS feeling (that IHMO was lost years and years (and versions) ago). We must drive in another direction. That's the point. If you want new users, new developers, new market you cannot stay with MUI and Reaction. Fab, as i said on ikirsector, imagine that one day you (yes you) will won at lottery and decide to leave MOS & co. wo will give all your work? You cannot have an user base of 1000 users and 5 developers.. otherwise you will dead very soon.. but you will happy since you will have the amiga feeling with you..
The modularity and simplicity stems from the way the system is structured. Libraries and datatypes that handle what you throw at them. Text-based scripts (such as startup-sequence) that makes it easier to understand what does what.
That doesn't make the system modular. It isn't. Something is modular if the pieces are optional. In AmigaOS, you cannot simply take away Intuition, or Graphics, and still have a working system.
The library concept is hardly something that is exclusive to AmigaOS.
Quote:
Sadly we've not seen as much progress with libraries and datatypes as I would have liked to see (for instance a Gecko or WebKit library for handling web pages across applications - or system-wide handling of video in the same manner we see images handled through datatypes) and I guess there are good reasons for that somewhere, even if I don't know them (as far as I know datatypes aren't ready for streams, so I guess that's part of it).
The reason for this is mostly that the library system is very limited.
Quote:
I would apply the terms to toolkits by way of simplifying again and again till things could get no simpler without breaking. Then allow things to grow as much as necessary and no more. Obviously this is easier said than done, and it's probably not the technical answer you're looking for (others can answer those better than I - and I hope they will), but if you open up the "GUI" prefs, I'm sure you can see what I'm not too keen on as a non-programmer.
The problem with such simplification is very obvious in a lot of areas in AmigaOS. Try to measure time, in such a way that you get an asynchronous timed event in a program. You must have timer device open for that. For that to happen, you need to
- Allocate Signal - Allocate Message port - Allocate IORequest - Open Device.
While each part is very simple, it is replicated in each and every program. Simplicity is a hindrance here. Where the API more complex, it would offer better support for these recurring tasks.
Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
I'm also curious why you ignored my last post, which was about why there seems (from my ignorant point of view) a strong argument that MUI4 should have been ported to OS3/OS4
Although there is a lot of historical reference concerning MUI in this thread (and accurate, including Stuntzi's bicycle enthusiasm), this thread took more of a turn to discussing the future, Chris. HJF has elaborated on the longer term plans to employ a different system.
Fab may take it upon himself to get you an answer...or he may not. But this is kind of moot until someone from the OS4 team even states they are interested in MUI4 at all for the -short- term. So, I think your question is misdirected.
btw-please understand that even answering the question runs the risk of being misunderstood and adversely affecting a thread, which, to this point, has been informative and civil.
My biggest problem whit GUI that use fixed coordinate is that GUI often becomes where ugly if you try to scale the window, the developers might greater control over the GUI, but put extra effort in making window content being displayed correctly.
Feelin is a nice GUI but has the right idea by using XML files to design the GUI, you do not need to recompile it, if you use a XML editor the file does not get corrupted , and its quicker and easier, then recompiling it, and as HJF points out about wring source code over number of lines its impossible to debug.
When I write GUI's for reaction I have a few simple Macros that makes it easier to write the GUI, then put different part for example tabs in different include files, so I comment out one tab at the time, it also makes it easier to view the source I think.
The Amiga GUI's are not so easy to write but result is often where good.
(NutsAboutAmiga)
Basilisk II for AmigaOS4 AmigaInputAnywhere Excalibur and other tools and apps.
News feed
OS4 Feedback forum
OS4Depot Feedback forum
Amigabounty forum
OpenAmiga forum
AmiCygnix forum
ABC shell forum
AmiKit forum
Cinnamon Writer forum
CodeBench forum
Digital Universe forum
Dopus 5 forum
E-UAE forum
Gnash forum
Ibrowse forum
JAmiga forum
Odyssey forum
OWB forum
Qt forum
SmartFileSystem forum
Timberwolf forum
TouchDevice forum
TuneNet forum
Unsatisfactory Software forum
Donate
