Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!rutgers!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!o.gp.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!jk3t+ From: jk3t+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jonathan King) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hypercard Subject: Re: SuperCard vs HyperCard Message-ID: <4bMdpzy00WB805ivtn@andrew.cmu.edu> Date: 9 Dec 90 20:24:31 GMT References: , <12593@milton.u.washington.edu> Organization: Psychology, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA Lines: 70 In-Reply-To: <12593@milton.u.washington.edu> kraig@biostr.biostr.washington.edu (Kraig Eno) writes: > I use SuperCard for courseware development as well. The three things I > absolutely needed that HC didn't have were: > (1) large windows > (2) PICT graphics > (3) polygon buttons > > I've since found out that I could have done a lot with XCMD's, but I was a > scripting neophyte when I started the whole project. Having the support > built-in made a lot of things possible early on. HC 2.0 now provides for larger (and smaller) card sizes, and allows you to show PICT graphics easily with the built-in Pictures XCMD, but does not allow you to have Mac Draw-like objects appearing on cards. Greg Anderson has written a really neat XCMD/XFCN combo that allows the creation, editing, and use of polygon button. Called "Polybuttons", it is available on Sumex and probably at other archives near you. > The biggest cons I see in SuperCard are (1) it is slow, (2) it is a memory > hog. In my mind, what I am doing should not take more than about 2MB, but > SC insists on requiring at least 4. HC 2.0 would really like at least 2 MB, too, but most HyperTalk commands now run much faster with the new incremental compiler. > The thing I like is that you get the benefits of HyperCard (easily changed > scripts, sort-of-object-oriented development, easy interfaces to videodisc > players, etc.) but you have more control over the user interface. Pop-up > menus, windows, complete control over the menu bar, etc. HC 2.0 now allows you to have multiple stacks open, and you could always "fake" pop-up windows (or use one of several XCMDs. HC 2.0 now also allows you virtually complete control over the menubar. > Therein lies my question for the c.s.m.h crowd: does HyperCard 2.0 let you > make anything that could pass for an application? Stacks now can look much, much, more like "normal" applications, but you still need HyperCard around to run them. > Or does it still look like HyperCard in the end? Don't know that I understand what you're saying here. > Like, can I make my own "About..." menu > option, and take out HyperCard's FILE menu entirely? Yes, you can now do both of these things in HyperTalk. To create your own "About" menu item, all you would would have to do is create a new menu based on the Apple menu, replace the "About" item, delete the normal Hypercard Apple menu, and install your replacement. You can also take out HyperCard's FILE menu entirely. One slight complication is that the command key equivalents for HyperCard's menu items will still work unless you filter them out, as will do menu messages. > You may be able to > tell that I haven't looked into it too much, as SC makes it all very easy. > Perhaps it's just that HyperCard never did come with a good scripting > manual and I'm too cheap to buy things like that after the fact. I certainly think your last comment is on target. Apparently the official Claris upgrade to HC 2.0 will include a complete scripting manual. (I say apparently because I haven't seen one yet, but I am hopeful that it will really cool.) > Kraig Eno, kraig@biostr.washington.edu > "Problems generate new knowledge." -- M. Usui jking