> after a pause of nearly four months, I decided to go back to > REALbasic on Linux and asked for a licence number that I get > faster than the speed of light, thanks Andrew. > > I will not told you about the password that I forget and all > of the hasle of the installation process. > > I will just concentrate my attention to what I was... > > It seems to me that REALbasic on Linux is the pauper parent > of the three platforms. > > Why ?
I don't know if this is the issue or not but, I can say with some experience that traditional vendors have a hard time figuring out a Linux strategy that they are happy with because it isnt all that easy to calculate return on investment. For example, my understanding of RB on Linux is that Standard is free but Pro costs money - you are paying for cross-platform compilation. IMO this is an excellent strategy - the problem though is internal perception of this value. Consider... -On the spreadsheet, it looks like there is no value coming from any work associated with a free standard version. As a result, many vendors put no effort into improving a free version - it doesn't appear to generate any real new or upgrade revenue EXCEPT when it results in sales of the Pro product. Yet, how do you know if that was the result of using the free Standard first? A LOT of vendors think that if you cannot easily trace a sales back to specific marketing actions (like conversion of Google AdWords) then those market actions have no value - huh? -Historically we know that Linux users do not like to pay for software. That affects assumptions about worthiness of the market, for the vendor and also for various channels. What is being done to change that perception so one's own infrastructure isnt sabotaging efforts? Ive seen some efforts on Linux partnering at REAL so something positive is happening but that may not be a pervasive feeling in the company. -Its hard to be good at everything. REALbasic was a MacOS product for years. The Windows version reached a really usable stage at version RB 5.5.x (I still use it vs RB 200X - and Im sure many are happy with it, esp those who got it free during one of the various giveaways). From an engineering standardpoint - is there a full time Linux developer working on the engine (assuming the port of the IDE to RB native means the IDE really isnt an issue there)? Is any work on it treated as an afterthought? -Linux doesn't mean open source and that's a problem. These two are often jumbled together in many venues and if you arent open then you cannot benefit as a vendor from the venue. Valentina isnt available on Linux yet, though it's a goal that if all goes well will reach fruition in 2007. For my Proactive International (http://www.proactive-intl.com) clients, Ive come up with strategies to solve the biggest issues above. > a. Lack of a French language version (France, Belgium, Swiss, > eventually Quebec), > [I am quite sure that they would publish the articles on > other european languagesif it have success] The Linux version hasn't been ported to French? Best regards, Lynn Fredricks President Paradigma Software, Inc Joining Worlds of Information Deploy True Client-Server Database Solutions Royalty Free with Valentina Developer Network http://www.paradigmasoft.com _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives of this list here: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
