Hi! Connecting Pharo to SUN Lively Morphic GUI: http://research.sun.com/projects/lively/ has lots of advantages: * decoupling of GUI and steering engine in hardware, like X-Server from X.org * independance of hardware and OS. * speed - drawing canvas in SVG is implemented in C, steeting in JAVA-Script. Google Chrome engine V8 is a ActionScript Jitter (http://llvm.org/) and even offers OpenGL as C-lib (Khronos) -> No more plugin's into VM necessary for graphics, same with vector-font libraries. * comfort - You can develop your smalltalk software from everywhere, e.g. pharo vm installed at a webhoster ... or local over loopback interface. * Lively and Squeak Morphic mental models fit perfectly, adaption should be really easy. Dan Ingall being one of the designers of Lively... * Pharo's killer applications seaside and pier also are remote applications, also using ActionScript and browser -> why not for graphics, morphic and etoys? * Chrome/FireFox tends to become the standard universal visualisation and I/O toolkit for all OS, so why not being lightyears ahead by consequently implementing the GUI in Chrome/FF? few disadvantages: * sound, videostreaming, printing problematic, but easily solvable, because FF/Chrome already have that features built in ;-) I'm a bit disappointed by the fact, that the squeak / pharo jitter still has not the expected performance impact. Elliot does a good work, but Frank Lesser with its DNG engine is showing actually, what is technically possible ...C-Speed for Smalltalk and ! Apple is behind LLVM and JAVA 6 is showing also, that C-Speed can be reached in full OO-Languages, see the "language shootout". By the way: ActionScript is a full OO-language, like Smalltalk. I really wondered, why not LLVM has become the standard jitter in Pharo. Power/ARM/Sparc/Intel ... processors are already supported! I think, any proprietary Jitter is a design fault ... just my 2 ct. Have fun, Guido Stepken