[IAEP] [Sugar-devel] Sugar future

[Daniel Narvaez]

On 13 April 2013 03:21, <forster at ozonline.com.au> wrote:

> I would like to see all these questions discussed further. I would like
> the technical implementation discussions to be more contextualised in terms
> of user experience.
>

Hi Tony,

let me try contextualize, for what I know so far.

I think these are the possible technical approaches to Sugar on Android
(I'm going to simplify a lot, so this is not going to be exactly accurate).

1 Android kernel + Ported linux libraries + Sugar
2 Android kernel + Datastore/Collaboration replacement + Sugar rewritten in
HTML
3 Full Android + Datastore/Collaboration replacement + Sugar activities
rewritten in HTML
4 Full Android + Datastore/Collaboration replacement + Sugar activities
rewritten with native Android API

In terms of UX, 1 has only one major consequence. It will not possible to
run Android and Sugar apps side by side. The rest would stay all the same.

That would be the main consequence for 2 as well. Other small modifications
might be required, for example the single instance stuff that started this
thread. The change of toolkit will certainly have some consequences on the
activities people will write, hard to predict  but I'm hoping in a positive
direction. I'd say html is much richer than gtk.

So I'd say with 1 and 2 the goal is to keep pretty much the same user
experience (although I think we should consider improvements while we are
rewriting things). That's why the discussion so far has not been including
UX considerations.

Where UX would be interesting is with 3 and 4, as your questions shows. As
far as I know these have not been researched much, or at least not
discussed in detail on the mailing lists. I'm personally not very
interested in them because I feel they would produce a bit of a UX monster
and we would risk to lose what makes Sugar a compelling proposition (as
described by Bert). Doing 2 would make it much easier to run Sugar
activities on full Android, even if maybe with reduced functionality, and I
would contempt with that. Anyway, I do think 3 and 4 are worth
investigating, I'm just not going to do it myself.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20130413/ae29f8f9/attachment-0001.html>