On 9/5/10 1:56 AM, Randall Lee Reetz rand...@randallreetz.com wrote:
That runrev could export C source would in no way interfere with the ongoing
activity of runrev users (should they choose not to export their stacks into C
source).
The capacity to output C SOURCE WOULD OPEN THE REACH OF
Ruslan Zasukhin wrote:
RevMobile before it seems was going generate c# sources?
Strange choice as for me.
Main engine should go to C,
Some parts of REV project also to C
And GUI part of REV project to ObjC - Cocoa.
This is forbidden by the new license. There can be no translations. All
Le 9 mai 2010 à 08:28, J. Landman Gay a écrit :
This is forbidden by the new license. There can be no translations. All work
must be created originally by Apple-specified tools.
This is outside my powers of comprehension... Both points of view technical (if
it is possible...), ethical and
Sarah, your new demo applets all seem to work, and very nice too, I was
thinking of some in the past that required the plugin to be installed in
the browser, and of course there wasn't one for Linux.
So basically it goes like this, doesn't it?
We want to write on-rev material, we can, we use a
On 8 May 2010, at 2:38 pm, Sarah Reichelt wrote:
Subject: Re: Accessing data from HID compliant USB device
Reply-To: How to use Revolution use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
This one has been churning around in my head for ages, and I finally bought
a couple of joysticks to experiment
So basically it goes like this, doesn't it?
We want to write on-rev material, we can, we use a text editor, then we
load it onto the Rev run on-rev server, and it works fine in Linux or
anything else, in any web browser. Presumably there's a handbook with a
guide for how to do this
Rene, it is really quite simple what is happening.
Apple has an App Store. As part of the license for the OS that runs on the
device, you are allowed to install apps only from that App store. They then
say that only Apps written in certain ways will be allowed into the App
store.
They can set
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 3:22 AM, Chipp Walters ch...@altuit.com wrote:
Interesting. Very interesting.
Richard, how long do you suppose until Apple bans web apps for the
iPhone/iPad AppStore unless they are only made with their new tool?
Probably shortly after they make it illegal to lend
On May 9, 2010, at 4:28 AM, René Micout wrote:
What mean translations ? What mean originally ?
Literally, if you write a single line of your Rev stack using a 'Talk syntax
(ask What is your name for example), you've gone against the license
agreement, because it takes a translation layer
Have you the exact terms of the license? I could not read the license agreement
to iPhone SDK 4.0 as is usually the case when opening an application and I
found nothing on the Apple site. I would like, to understand what it is,
consider the exact terms of this license and if possible in French.
Is this correct ? iPhone SDK license 4.0 version ? :
3.3.1 Applications may only use Published APIs in the manner prescribed by
Apple and must not use or call any unpublished or private APIs.
3.3.2 An Application may not itself install or launch other executable code
by any means, including
On 08/05/2010 07:32, Richard Gaskin wrote:
Apple developing Flash alternative named Gianduia
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/05/07/apple_developing_flash_alternative_named_gianduia.html
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World
Rev training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
The funny thing is that if you have signed the agreement, you can't talk about
it! Only people who didn't sign can I suppose.
Here is an example page that talks about one of the parts of the agreement, in
English:
http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/iphone_agreement_bans_flash_compiler
and
On May 9, 2010, at 8:21 AM, René Micout wrote:
Is this correct ? iPhone SDK license 4.0 version ? :
3.3.1 Applications may only use Published APIs in the manner prescribed by
Apple and must not use or call any unpublished or private APIs.
That's the old agreement, before the changes.
Thank you ! I have not signed the agreement...
Le 9 mai 2010 à 14:32, Colin Holgate a écrit :
The funny thing is that if you have signed the agreement, you can't talk
about it! Only people who didn't sign can I suppose.
Here is an example page that talks about one of the parts of the
On May 9, 2010, at 8:45 AM, René Micout wrote:
Thank you ! I have not signed the agreement...
I have, that's why I gave you a link to a page, rather than simply pasting the
text here!
___
use-revolution mailing list
3.3.1 ... Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary
translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited.
• It is the node of the problem : in a precedent post I talk about a system
witch allow to write in RevTalk the code of an application. This code is
translated
But perhaps the ideal tool (RunRevMobile?) as I described is not technically
feasible and it is another problem ...
Le 9 mai 2010 à 15:05, René Micout a écrit :
3.3.1 ... Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary
translation or compatibility layer or tool are
Peter, if you want to put up a web page on the on-rev server to give it a try
I'd be happy to give you a folder to fool around with. I'm using about a
millionth of my alotted space at the moment.
Part of what Peter Alcibiades wrote:
So basically it goes like this, doesn't it?
We want to write
On 9 May 2010, at 14:05, René Micout wrote:
3.3.1 ... Applications that link to Documented APIs through an
intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are
prohibited.
Again - that is the OLD version of 3.3.1. The new one is much more
restrictive.
Ian
P.S.
It is a part of § 3.3.1 of 4.0... I think... Colin ?
And if it is, this is the problematic line... I think...
Le 9 mai 2010 à 15:26, Ian Wood a écrit :
On 9 May 2010, at 14:05, René Micout wrote:
3.3.1 ... Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary
translation or
On May 9, 2010, at 9:26 AM, Ian Wood wrote:
3.3.1 ... Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary
translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited.
Again - that is the OLD version of 3.3.1. The new one is much more
restrictive.
No, that's from the new
Rene, this is the text in question:-
3.3.1 — Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed
by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs. Applications must be
originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the
iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/08/apple-ipad-uses-the-most_n_568384.html#s89092
-- might have to paste in browser due to line break
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe,
Thank you Peter.
I understand all of that... :-)
Le 9 mai 2010 à 16:13, Peter Alcibiades a écrit :
Things are 'originally written' in, for
instance, French, when this was the first version of the novel that was
written. Translations into English are not originally written in English.
It
Apple does not restrict your viewing of the web content. It does restrict web
plugins that it believes will eat up battery and processor.
Rodeo is a tool to help you create web pages that work like apps in an iPad web
browser. Any browser in the App store can view those pages. No plugin is
Oops...meant to say:
Apple does NOT care how web pages are made.
Best,
Jerry Daniels
Use tRev's buy link during your free trial to get 20% off:
http://reveditor.com/tag/shouldiswitch
On May 9, 2010, at 9:49 AM, Jerry Daniels jerry.dani...@me.com wrote:
Apple does care how web pages are
--
Thomas McGrath III asked:
--
Where is there a list of iRev commands available?
I just tried revSpeak in iRev and got a handler not found error and would like
to know what else is not available.
--
Jacqueline
Hi Chipp,
How would you suggest paying for all of this? Just wondering...
Do you really think the current revenue stream can prop up
this luxurious road map?
Cost control is part of the secret sauce that is my...secret sauce. One way
of doing this is through my kind of cost control, but
-
Randall Reetz' Rejoinder:
--
Really, I can edit my web page in the browser just by drawing and dragging?
Wrong.
Mike's Meticulous Reply:
Randall, don't give up so easily. Drawing: With
Richmond-
Sunday, May 9, 2010, 5:25:41 AM, you wrote:
Is that Glandula as in glandular, or something vaguely
Italian? Because if it is the former they seem to have chosen
an unwise name.
If you follow up and look at the link you'll see in the fourth
sentence that Gianduia is named after an
When you press and drag on an html5 canvas, it doesn't do what you had in mind,
it just causes the web page to move.
That might be solvable by having your own WebKit based App that has the springy
setting turned off. ___
use-revolution mailing list
My job is, in another, write specifications for contracts,
and what I read about (because I could not read directly
concerned §) in § 3.3.1 does not seem admissible in France's
legal perspective. In France the law is above the contract,
perhaps is it different in the USA (?)
The law is
Thanks for the info Colin. Back to the drawing board.
Mike
--- On Sun, 5/9/10, Colin Holgate co...@verizon.net wrote:
From: Colin Holgate co...@verizon.net
Subject: Re: Check out Jerry's new videos
To: How to use Revolution use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Date: Sunday, May 9, 2010, 11:10 AM
On May 8, 2010, at 11:28 PM, J. Landman Gay
jac...@hyperactivesw.com wrote:
Ruslan Zasukhin wrote:
RevMobile before it seems was going generate c# sources?
Strange choice as for me.
Main engine should go to C,
Some parts of REV project also to C
And GUI part of REV project to ObjC -
Is that Glandula as in glandular, or something vaguely
Italian? Because if it is the former they seem to have chosen
an unwise name.
Apple sometimes gives different departments different names or code
names so they can trace leaks.
___
I suspect that just as Jerry chose Rodeo for his new service, name picking
is done by the people coming up with the design and choose what they like. I
know in the 90's when I was in charge of a global technology call center, I
went to Apple for a best practice visit and they had named their
On 09/05/2010 20:18, Josh Mellicker wrote:
Is that Glandula as in glandular, or something vaguely
Italian? Because if it is the former they seem to have chosen
an unwise name.
Apple sometimes gives different departments different names or code
names so they can trace leaks.
Leaks of what?
On 09/05/2010 20:25, Neal Campbell wrote:
I suspect that just as Jerry chose Rodeo for his new service, name picking
is done by the people coming up with the design and choose what they like. I
know in the 90's when I was in charge of a global technology call center, I
went to Apple for a best
Richmond-
Sunday, May 9, 2010, 10:46:49 AM, you wrote:
Leaks of what? Last time I looked computers don't have glands; maybe
I'm getting out of date.
I'm fairly sure my Windows computers have bile glands.
--
-Mark Wieder
mwie...@ahsoftware.net
On 09/05/2010 20:55, Mark Wieder wrote:
Richmond-
Sunday, May 9, 2010, 10:46:49 AM, you wrote:
Leaks of what? Last time I looked computers don't have glands; maybe
I'm getting out of date.
I'm fairly sure my Windows computers have bile glands.
Oh, Gosh, here I am back at my computer
Not true. There was much web talk about this on various dev blogs and the
consensus was Apple would definitely be able to create a tool to identify Flash
apps created from C ported to Xcode.
The reason is simple. even though Flash (and Rev) generates C code, they have
to use their own C
Michael Kann wrote:
--
Thomas McGrath III asked:
--
Where is there a list of iRev commands available?
I just tried revSpeak in iRev and got a handler not found error and
would like to know what else is not available.
The most complete
Much appreciated, as always.
--- On Sun, 5/9/10, J. Landman Gay jac...@hyperactivesw.com wrote:
From: J. Landman Gay jac...@hyperactivesw.com
Subject: Re: iRev Functionality
To: How to use Revolution use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Date: Sunday, May 9, 2010, 3:26 PM
Michael Kann wrote:
No, not money, just code to download:
http://www.nxfx.com/blog/web-design-articles/web-development/
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
Wow, the logic in your argument makes absolutely no sence and is in no way
comparable in this context.
To wit. The problem to which you allude is one of people attempting to build
flash apps from C source. Of course thus would violate apples policy! But the
discussion here is centered on
I'm sure what was in his mind was the right way around, and it is true to say
that Apple can tell ARM code Apps that were originally Flash. It's likely they
could tell ones that were from Rev too.
___
use-revolution mailing list
Randall,
What you fail to see again despite our insistence to tell you is that such
tool to generate C code from Rev Stacks is precisely what is now forbidden
by the new agreement. I am beginning to think that you can actually speak
English or that my English is surprisingly awful because I've
They can tell of course. But they can not dictate pre-compiled source. They
just want in before and during the compilation process.
-Original Message-
From: Colin Holgate co...@verizon.net
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2010 3:04 PM
To: How to use Revolution use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
No it isn't and I will be willing to bet a large sum that apple's only desire
is to control the compiling process. That way they know what their devices
will be running. And, importantly, they can not legally go beyond this level
of control. What you guys are afraid of isn't being expressed
On May 9, 2010, at 6:17 PM, Randall Lee Reetz wrote:
They can tell of course. But they can not dictate pre-compiled source. They
just want in before and during the compilation process.
They are trying to dictate precompiled source. That's the whole problem.
By installing the RunRev 3.5 engine on any Apache server you can get just
about the same functionality as you would get on the on-rev server
Thanks, I had not appreciated that. Could certainly be significant.
Peter
--
View this message in context:
I was just speaking of a simple text parser and term search and
replace. Certainly not worth the effort, it would be easier to just
write in Xcode!
While you're correct about the dangers of writing for Apple, some
developers continue to risk it because the potential is in some cases
On May 9, 2010, at 6:21 PM, Randall Lee Reetz wrote:
No it isn't and I will be willing to bet a large sum that apple's only desire
is to control the compiling process.
Amongst the many companies still worried about all this is Unity3D. When you
make iPhone apps with Unity, you do the
The 'early release notes' and the quick update email are what I have to
refer to for on-rev:
http://samples.on-rev.com/irev-engine-notes.txt(mark's original notes)
here's additional info from a later mark w. email
-snip---
on-rev clients
* Mac
wrong
-Original Message-
From: Colin Holgate co...@verizon.net
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2010 3:24 PM
To: How to use Revolution use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Subject: Re: Check out Jerry's new videos -- REV to ObjC - iPhone
On May 9, 2010, at 6:17 PM, Randall Lee Reetz wrote:
They can
On May 9, 2010, at 6:55 PM, Randall Lee Reetz wrote:
wrong
You may have the mistaken idea that Objective-C is compiled code, but it's not,
it's uncompiled source text, that then gets compiled to the processor on the
device. Apple saying that you can only use certain languages is directly
Unity3D:
We haven’t heard anything from Apple about this affecting us, Our
current best guess is that we’ll be fine.
Full quote:
Unity and the iPhone OS 4.0
by David Helgason on Rants Raves
Hey guys,I just wanted to thank our forum users for their support and
thoughtful analyses about
This is a protocol war on the surface, a malware customer protection scheme,
and a way to know exactly what code is running on its devices, and leaves the
door open for intentional tracer code apple could insert that would allow run
time reporting and surveillance of app functionality. What is
There is no technical reason that rev would have to export any pre-compiled
code objects or libraries. Now, if what you aren't saying but meaning, is that
rev would expose its internal data model and that this could expose the company
to piracy of core IP, well that is an issue that should be
Exactly . And no, I am not confused. I have been more than careful to always
use the word source when asking for C source output from rev. Source is
text. Un-compiled source text. No confusion here. Try another straw man
attack?
-Original Message-
From: Colin Holgate
On May 9, 2010, at 7:04 PM, Thomas McGrath III wrote:
Unity3D:
We haven’t heard anything from Apple about this affecting us, Our
current best guess is that we’ll be fine.
That quote is from April 10th, and I check for later news perhaps several times
a day!
I did a presentation on
Should have read: ... deeply defend-able IP... Sorry.
-Original Message-
From: Randall Lee Reetz rand...@randallreetz.com
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2010 4:16 PM
To: How to use Revolution use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Subject: RE: Check out Jerry's new videos -- REV to ObjC - iPhone
There
I hope I'm not the only one who sees the funny side of this.
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Colin Holgate co...@verizon.net wrote:
So, although the best guess from Unity 30 days ago was that they would be ok,
they still haven't managed to get a definitive answer from Apple. Which is
good
On May 9, 2010, at 7:20 PM, Randall Lee Reetz wrote:
Exactly . And no, I am not confused. I have been more than careful to always
use the word source when asking for C source output from rev. Source is
text. Un-compiled source text. No confusion here. Try another straw man
attack?
I have expanded that. You should read my posts before responding. Io even
atomized on several occasions why apple wants in at the source level. Try yet
another straw man attack.
-Original Message-
From: Colin Holgate co...@verizon.net
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2010 4:26 PM
To: How to use
Hi all,
Please, read this recent news:
http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/05/07/apple-is-now-nintendos-biggest-problem/
Now, refresh your memory with Sony's president presentation
in MacWorld 2005:
http://www.hardwarezone.com.au/reviews/view.php?cid=47id=1380pg=2
Thanks for this, Lynn. Hope this can be understand as it need to be to become
realy helpfull ;-)
Le 9 mai 2010 à 02:29, Lynn Fredricks a écrit :
An Application Server system requires a lot of thought and investment, both
for planning development and its relationship to rev, and also on
On May 9, 2010, at 7:45 PM, Randall Lee Reetz wrote:
I have expanded that. You should read my posts before responding. Io even
atomized on several occasions why apple wants in at the source level. Try
yet another straw man attack.
No, I think I'll leave you to say whatever you want to
Randall, do you understand that Apple never sees any source code? The XCode
compiler does its work on YOUR computer. Apple only sees the finished object
code. Analyzing the object code can imply what libraries were used to produce
it, hence the problem. An intermediate step of C code that
Peter Alcibiades wrote:
By installing the RunRev 3.5 engine on any Apache server you can get just
about the same functionality as you would get on the on-rev server
Thanks, I had not appreciated that. Could certainly be significant.
Peter, you really should take up that offer for an iRev
Stephen, thanks for the info.
You might enjoy this:
When George Melly asked Mick Jagger how his face got so many creases, he said
laughter lines. Nothing is that funny, Melly replied.
--- On Sun, 5/9/10, stephen barncard stephenrevoluti...@barncard.com wrote:
From: stephen barncard
Randy,
I get the fact you're not a very technology smart individual. Let me dumb it
down a bit for you.
A tool which generates C code from xtalk code, creates similar patterns of C
code, which when compiled, are unique, like human fingerprints. So, it's easy
to figure out where the initial C
I'm beginning to think there is something wrong with your brain. Have you not
bothered listening to anything that has been said here or on the web? The whole
point of the license is to make sure developers used Apple's and only Apple's
tools. What part of that is hard to understand?
Actually,
And the sky is falling too! You have to get your mind around the motivations
behind apple's demands. Do that and you won't have to move to idaho and build
a bomb bunker.
-Original Message-
From: Chipp Walters ch...@altuit.com
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2010 6:06 PM
To: How to use
Randall: Stop. We've had enough. Everyone else: don't feed it. Don't
even answer this post to agree.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
___
use-revolution
Josh,
Except, if a tool like Rev were generating the code to paste in, it would
inevitably contain large portions of identical code across projects. Apple
could easily ban any app that matches those very clear signatures.
On May 8, 2010, at 11:28 PM, J. Landman Gay
What's the best way to identify Mick and Keith?
faceprint.
On 9 May 2010 17:56, Michael Kann mikek...@yahoo.com wrote:
Stephen, thanks for the info.
You might enjoy this:
When George Melly asked Mick Jagger how his face got so many creases, he
said laughter lines. Nothing is that
On 10/05/10 12:40 PM, Brian Yennie bri...@qldlearning.com wrote:
Josh,
Except, if a tool like Rev were generating the code to paste in, it would
inevitably contain large portions of identical code across projects. Apple
could easily ban any app that matches those very clear signatures.
And why would they? What is apples motivation? Is it to piss everyone off?
Is it to appear anti-competitive? Is it to kill innovation? Is it a vendetta
against xtalk or other programming languages?
Look at it this way... Lets say a some terrorists take out the world trade
centers with
In so many ways, Apple has done everyone a favor. I know, I know. Hear me out.
1. Objective C is the industry standard, and has the best compilers, it has
become the rosetta stone of computer languages. Only ANSI C is more standard
and it is targeted directly to hardware (where objects
81 matches
Mail list logo
