Hello Shari, Kevin and y'all > I know folks have been discussing something > about players, but it sounded more like an > issue for those who wanted to create a > competing program to Rev.
>From a business point of view: "sounded like" is not sufficient. As an entrepreneur, I must know *exactly* what the terms of the licence are BEFORE considering whether it is wise to switch-over or not. Moreover, I would like to be reasonably-sure that the terms won't change [much] in the next versions/upgrades so that I am NOT subsequently forced into licencing terms that I cannot subscribe to. > In other words, I did not connect this > to what I create, which are programs > that have a standalone, and usually > several separate stacks that go with > it. Is there something that would > affect my standalones in some way? This is precisely the question that I'm asking. Which licence(s), if any, allow us to create standalones? Are we allowed to bundle one|more stack(s) with it? (which of course remain editable). Can we continue to bundle a player of our stacks in the form of a custom splash screen? Keeping the whole set of stacks in an editable form is definitely the best practice here. A separate application to download and install, which is bloated because it has EVERYTHING in it, and splashes a Runtime advertisement on startup, is NOT a desirable alternative to a custom solution with a custom splash screen. Naturally, we are trying to 'hide' the xCard origins of our custom solutions when releasing wares. Solutions crafted with C++, for example, don't advert the tools that they were edited and compiled with! It is not appropriate for us either. More grievous still would be to obligate our customer to download, install & run a separate app to use our stack-based solutions; an application which Runtime self-avowedly admits that it wasn't up to expectations AND, irregarless of this, it is a proprietary app that we have *no* control over (the *licencing* as well as the code, I might add). Sorry for giving you such a hard time about this, Kevin, but I am evidently not the only one who is concerned about the licencing terms for Rev [2.7+]. Please inform us unambiguously as to the terms of your licences so that we may make an informed decision about porting to Rev [2.7+] or not. Prospective Runtime customers need to know what's-what and what to expect in the future. Apparently, some of your existing customers are un-clear about this, too; but I cannot speak 'for' them because I am NOT one of them yet. But I *could* be, if ... ;-) Alain __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ metacard mailing list [email protected] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
