[Golist] Go: Scary-complicated?

Tue Mar 4 12:59:57 PST 2008

Moses,

I think the perception of Go being complicated also comes from  
people's familiarity with Fuse. Fuse was easy to use, but went pretty  
deep by comparison, which could be throwing people. The idea of  
building Fuse with Go sounds daunting, and there could be a sense that  
you are required to roll all that functionality yourself, even though  
it might not be required for the code you're writing. People hate  
losing options, even when it costs them.

Also, it's possible that people are confused by the methodology  
change. Instead of controlling everything through the Fuse class, you  
create individual tween objects, which seems more complex.

Tim

On 4-Mar-08, at 1:00 PM, golist-request at goasap.org wrote:

> Send GoList mailing list submissions to
> 	golist at goasap.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://goasap.org/mailman/listinfo/golist_goasap.org
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	golist-request at goasap.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	golist-owner at goasap.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of GoList digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Go: Scary-complicated? (Moses Gunesch)
>   2. Re: Go: Scary-complicated? (Angela Ferraiolo)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 11:56:48 -0500
> From: Moses Gunesch <moses at goasap.org>
> Subject: [Golist] Go: Scary-complicated?
> To: Mailing list for the Go ActionScript Animation Platform
> 	<golist at goasap.org>
> Message-ID: <48147780-4E36-4B8F-913B-C1BC8613C070 at goasap.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed;
> 	delsp=yes
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> So now that the new site is live, let's assess how I did for making Go
> approachable.
> Go is actually very simple once you understand it, but before that it
> intimidates people and seems really complicated.
>
> So:
> Are the goals of Go still confusing?
> Is the presentation of Go confusing?
> Is it intimidating, say if you had first seen it at the new site http://www.goasap.org/
>  ?
> Is it clear yet that very little is required for the compatibility
> layer ? just GoEngine, GoEvent, and PlayableBase/IPlayable ? and that
> everything else is entirely optional?
> Is it obvious yet that it's very easy to build a tween over LinearGo
> in 3 easy steps or does that still feel like everest?
>
>
> Here's one idea I had ? a swf slideshow with a "next" nav button, that
> would walk you through step by step how Go is structured. Because each
> bit of it is extremely logical and is there for a reason... for
> example, GoItem is there as an abstract base class for any animation
> type, not just tweens, and PlayableBase sits at the very core because
> some things that you can play, are not animations at all, like a
> Sequence. I want that structure to be really clearly presented but I'm
> worried that the Architecture page does not show this simply  
> enough....
>
> thanks,
> Moses
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 12:22:47 -0500
> From: "Angela Ferraiolo" <aferraiolo at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Golist] Go: Scary-complicated?
> To: "Mailing list for the Go ActionScript Animation Platform"
> 	<golist at goasap.org>
> Message-ID:
> 	<4499c75b0803040922o66462498ibf315fd2178f614f at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252
>
> Hello Moses & the list,
>
> Thanks for Go! A .swf walkthough would be awesome!
>
> It is not that your site is confusing so much as there is
> a lot of new stuff to learn right now on all sides. Anything
> you can do to help speed the process would be greatly
> wonderful and go-tatstic.
>
> Right now Go is still in my "to do" list! But I am a fan.
>
> Thank you again,
>
> -- Angela
>
>
> On 3/4/08, Moses Gunesch <moses at goasap.org> wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> So now that the new site is live, let's assess how I did for making  
>> Go
>> approachable.
>> Go is actually very simple once you understand it, but before that it
>> intimidates people and seems really complicated.
>>
>> So:
>> Are the goals of Go still confusing?
>> Is the presentation of Go confusing?
>> Is it intimidating, say if you had first seen it at the new site http://www.goasap.org/
>>  ?
>> Is it clear yet that very little is required for the compatibility
>> layer ? just GoEngine, GoEvent, and PlayableBase/IPlayable ? and that
>> everything else is entirely optional?
>> Is it obvious yet that it's very easy to build a tween over LinearGo
>> in 3 easy steps or does that still feel like everest?
>>
>>
>> Here's one idea I had ? a swf slideshow with a "next" nav button,  
>> that
>> would walk you through step by step how Go is structured. Because  
>> each
>> bit of it is extremely logical and is there for a reason... for
>> example, GoItem is there as an abstract base class for any animation
>> type, not just tweens, and PlayableBase sits at the very core because
>> some things that you can play, are not animations at all, like a
>> Sequence. I want that structure to be really clearly presented but  
>> I'm
>> worried that the Architecture page does not show this simply  
>> enough....
>>
>> thanks,
>> Moses
>> _______________________________________________
>> GoList mailing list
>> GoList at goasap.org
>> http://goasap.org/mailman/listinfo/golist_goasap.org
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> GoList mailing list
> GoList at goasap.org
> http://goasap.org/mailman/listinfo/golist_goasap.org
>
>
> End of GoList Digest, Vol 4, Issue 1
> ************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://goasap.org/pipermail/golist_goasap.org/attachments/20080304/b5ba7b10/attachment.html 