Scratch

"the experimental viewer looks like garbage". I think we've targeted the problem - some people like it, but some don't. If you ask me, it has a very modern, "Web 2.0" look to it. But to others, it doesn't appeal. You can always give suggestions to how you can improve it on the thread here.

"50x slower". It really varies from project to project. The Scratch Team is probably still working on optimizing the system; so hopefully it will improve.

'incredibly glitchy". Can you be a bit more specific? It seems to work very well if you ask me. Just like other things technologies, there's always bugs; so there's most definitely things to improve on.

"very hard to use". Well if we were always thinking that, than humans wouldn't get anywhere. You can't just say that something is bad because you don't like change. It really isn't that difficult to use. Perhaps they may be changing the system to make it easier for New Scratchers to use.

"nobody else seems to (honestly) like it very much either". That's very biased. Many people enjoy it. If you look at the thread on it, you can see many positive comments, many constructive comments, as well as some negative comments. It varies; so just because one person doesn't like it, doesn't mean everybody doesn't like it. Remember; whenever you make something, not *everybody* is going to be happy with it. Just like Scratch, there are many haters, as well as lovers of it. So it's varying.

The switch is necessary, because as time goes on, more and more applications are going "on the cloud", or being web-based, rather than for downloading. So we can't stay behind in the Scratch community - we have to move on.

Perhaps they may change the technology to Javascript and HTML5 and such; but for now, it's 100% positive that Scratch 2.0 will be web-based.

I hope this clears things up. 

I also find the online player, especially the graphics, somewhat lacking. I very much hope that there will be an offline version to Scratch 2.0 as well as an online component.

Hopefully the Flash viewer will be okay when it's done... 

illusionist wrote:

Lucario621 wrote:

"the experimental viewer looks like garbage". I think we've targeted the problem - some people like it, but some don't. If you ask me, it has a very modern, "Web 2.0" look to it. But to others, it doesn't appeal. You can always give suggestions to how you can improve it on the thread here.

If you ask me, less buttons and smoothed edges can make anything look good. 

Practically everything on it is smooth. The script area, the block pallete, the screen, everything. And there aren't *that* many buttons. I mean you can't eliminate all of them

"50x slower". It really varies from project to project. The Scratch Team is probably still working on optimizing the system; so hopefully it will improve.

The last update was months ago, so I am hoping something big-ish will happen next.

'incredibly glitchy". Can you be a bit more specific? It seems to work very well if you ask me. Just like other things technologies, there's always bugs; so there's most definitely things to improve on.

Again, no updates have shown up since mid-August. The bugs are not necessarily in the viewer itself, but the way it reads projects. Wildly fluxuating frame rate, misposition, the sound blocks?    I just want to know if these will be resolved. D:

Well, yes. There aren't many problems with the *interface* of the viewer. It's probably not going to even be that in Scratch 2.0. They're just using that, so if a user finds a problem, he/she can use the viewer to help track down the problem more easily. Remember. It's an experimental viewer; so the main purpose is to be able to view the projects in flash, to see if they function correctly. Frame rate changing? That happens in Scratch too. Misposition? What do you mean by that? Any project examples for that glitch? And for sounds/midi stuff... well that's a bigger issue than just a "bug" or "glitch". It's a major issue that they're probably deciding what they will due about that.

"very hard to use". Well if we were always thinking that, than humans wouldn't get anywhere. You can't just say that something is bad because you don't like change. It really isn't that difficult to use. Perhaps they may be changing the system to make it easier for New Scratchers to use.

The way it is currently organized seems illogical, half of our old features are completely gone, dragging blocks in even a moderately-sized project is hard to control... once again, and update should make change and addition, not change and subtraction. 

Again, this probably isn't going to be very similar to what Scratch 2.0 is going to be like. The whole script area of the experimental viewer is most likely to help the Scratch Team narrow down the problem. Ex.; if there were scrolling issues like there were in the early testing, you could change variables or something, and you could figure out what the issue was. "Other features" such as painting for sprites and backgrounds and stuff are likely to come back; just it wasn't a needed feature for the purpose of testing. Don't get mesmerized that this is a "very-early beta of Scratch 2.0". Many things are subject to change.[/red]

"nobody else seems to (honestly) like it very much either". That's very biased. Many people enjoy it. If you look at the thread on it, you can see many positive comments, many constructive comments, as well as some negative comments. It varies; so just because one person doesn't like it, doesn't mean everybody doesn't like it. Remember; whenever you make something, not *everybody* is going to be happy with it. Just like Scratch, there are many haters, as well as lovers of it. So it's varying.

[color=blue]Many people get excited because it is new, and ignore the obvious issues it currently presents. To me, that is much more bias.

So, many people that see Scratch for the first time are excited because of the idea of making games being so fun and easy, but they ignore issues such as procedures, and what not.  But you're not arguing about those people, are you? 

The switch is necessary, because as time goes on, more and more applications are going "on the cloud", or being web-based, rather than for downloading. So we can't stay behind in the Scratch community - we have to move on.

Umm.... why?

Umm... why don't people use Netscape anymore? Umm... why don't people write letters (often) anymore? For those same reasons. It's being updated, and you can't just hope people will keep using old technology. And especially when it comes to the MIT Media Lab, the people who use all of the latest technologies, you can't stay old.

Perhaps they may change the technology to Javascript and HTML5 and such; but for now, it's 100% positive that Scratch 2.0 will be web-based.

You have me praying. 

I hope this clears things up. 
Thanks!


...and don't minimod. 

  That wasn't my goal. I was just helping you understand some of the reasoning the Scratch Team has of the creation of Scratch 2.0. They've mentioned it before, so I just tried to sum it up. I apologize for being too formal.

Why not make a it downloadable, and base it in a browser for those who want to use it that way. 

and unfortunately, I prefer the conventional scratch look and not the experimental viewer 

Interesting discussion - I'll throw a few points in the mix.

The experimental viewers is "experimental" - so there's a fair bit of optimization to be done. You can all help by reporting bugs. One reason we released it first was so there'd be time for Scratchers to report differences / glitches, so we can get this new code based in sync with the current Scratch.

Here are a few important reasons to make Scratch 2.0 web-based.

A lot of schools and large organizations have security policies that make it difficult to install and configure new software. A flash based Scratch can be used by anyone with a browser and an internet connection - this makes it much simpler for many people to use it.  You will also be able to download the software and edit projects offline.

Uploading and downloading Scratch projects is one potential trouble spot, as anyone who has ever received the "Failed: Unknown reason" error can tell you.  Having all the projects on the same server eliminates this, and opens up new possibilities for collaboration and remixing as well.  One reason mesh was tricky because there were firewalls, and changing IPs, and all sorts of network factors to take into account. Those aren't really an issue when all the projects are running on the same server.

Finally - having two different code bases for Scratch - one in Squeak, and one in Java (the web player) makes things very difficult to maintain. As everyone knows, they perform differently, even after we've spent a long time trying to get them in sync. A web based Scratch allows us to have a single code-base for the player and the editor:  so what you see in the editor is what you, and everyone else, will see on the site when viewing a project.

There's a lot more info here:
http://info.scratch.mit.edu/Scratch2FAQ

I think that Flash is the right direction to move in. The experimental viewer looks pretty polished to me, although I really hope that the interface from 2.0 stays pretty close to what we're used to. It could use some optimization (please lose the GlowFilters on running scripts, it looks terrible!) but overall it's very impressive!

andresmh wrote:

I do think we will lose some things with Scratch 2.0 (e.g. full MIDI) but we will gain others. The key is to gain important features and lose some less used ones.

Aren't there some open-source audio synth libraries for as3 This site does some really cool stuff with sound in Flash.
Also, will 2.0 mean the end of the binary .sb format?

Last edited by fullmoon (2010-10-31 14:39:23)