Re: A Philosophical Point

[Wolfgang M . Bereuter]

On 28.04.2005, at 20:55, Jim Carwardine wrote:
I don't need to know this, John.  How is RunRev to stay in business if 
they
don't charge for their product?  You of all people should know how much
overhead is required to produce bug-free code.  RunRev could not 
sustain
itself unless it turned open source and that's not the business model 
they
are running on.  For my sake, please stay off the list... Jim
Jim,
and for my sake please stay off with such useless coments...
regards
Wolfgang M. Bereuter
T-mapping© is PhotoLearning Mindmaps!
...
http://www.internettrainer.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
Edelhofg. 17/11, A-1180 Wien, Austria
Tel: ++43/1/ 479 6410
Fax: ++43/1/ 955 14 64-198
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: A Philosophical Point

[Jim Carwardine]

I didn't have my Cheerio's that morning.  Sorry list.  I'll work on my
flexibility a little harder... Jim

on 4/29/05 10:40 AM, Lynch, Jonathan wrote:

>> For my sake, please stay off the list... Jim
> 
> I strongly object to this sentiment. As one who participates in this
> list, I enjoyed this thread, and do not want John to "stay off the
> list."
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim
> Carwardine
> Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 2:55 PM
> To: Revolution Listserve
> Subject: Re: A Philosophical Point
> 
> I don't need to know this, John.  How is RunRev to stay in business if
> they
> don't charge for their product?  You of all people should know how much
> overhead is required to produce bug-free code.  RunRev could not sustain
> itself unless it turned open source and that's not the business model
> they
> are running on.  For my sake, please stay off the list... Jim
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

-- 

OYF is... Highly resourceful people working together.
<http://www.OwnYourFuture-net.com>

Own Your Future Consulting Services Limited,
1959 Upper Water Street, Suite 407, Halifax, Nova Scotia. B3J 3N2
Phone: 902-823-2339. Fax: 902-823-2139

What¹s New...

* Have you ever hired an employee who didn¹t work out?

* Did you do that on purpose?

Probably not...

If you want to greatly improve your hiring process,
 check out our new hiring process... www.HiringSmart.ca/ns
<http://www.hiringsmart.ca/ns>
  and...
www.KeepingTheBest.ca/ns <http://www.keepingthebest.ca/ns>



___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: A Philosophical Point

[Bill]

I thought John's comments were interesting. His upload of files is nice too
but I wish there was some descriptions both so you would know what file to
download and so search engines could find them.

In addition to the coding examples and help I also enjoy the various
conversations (Rev related) that occur on this list.


On 4/28/05 2:55 PM, "Jim Carwardine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I don't need to know this, John.  How is RunRev to stay in business if they
> don't charge for their product?  You of all people should know how much
> overhead is required to produce bug-free code.  RunRev could not sustain
> itself unless it turned open source and that's not the business model they
> are running on.  For my sake, please stay off the list... Jim
> 
> on 4/26/05 6:05 PM, Mathewson wrote:
> 
>> I recently completed a Master's thesis at the University of
>> Abertay, Dundee.
>> It was mainly concerned with designing a new Graphic User
>> Interface for computers (and may be read, in its entirety,
>> on my website at http://members.maclaunch.com/richmond),
>> and had at its heart a prototype developed using a version
>> of Runtime Revolution. The reason I chose to use Runtime
>> Revolution was based largely on the fact that I have 12
>> years of experience using what has come to be called
>> 'xTalk' but when I started was called 'HyperTalk'.
>> 
>> While I believe that Runtime Revolution produce an
>> extremely good programming interface that uses a dialect of
>> 'xTalk' I have a major philosophical disagreement with
>> them, of which many people who work with Runtime Revolution
>> are aware, but may not realise the reasons for.
>> 
>> On Friday 22 April I went to Sofia to the Webtech
>> conference and listened to Richard Stallman for close on
>> two hours. Dr Stallman's message was clear (and is well
>> known in programming circles), and for the first time I
>> heard somebody else say things that echoed, to a large
>> extent, my own ideas.
>> 
>> About 4 years ago I downloaded Runtime Revolution 1 and
>> started to play with it; over a period of time I developed
>> a wide variety of 'widgets' that I either uploaded to their
>> user site or made available through my own website.
>> 
>> During this time I developed a complete interactive CD-ROM
>> for an educational company based in St Andrews (Scotland);
>> my employer bought me the Runtime Revolution 1.1.1 manuals.
>> In working on this CD-ROM I developed various bits-and-bobs
>> that I spun off as 'widgets' made freely available via the
>> internet.
>> 
>> This culminated in my designing a complex extended toolbar
>> for Runtime Revolution 2. At no time did I ask for any
>> money for these contributions, and never tried to exercise
>> any copyright control. This was based on the fact that
>> Runtime Revolution was available as a free download that
>> could be used in a relatively unrestricted way without
>> having to pay for it. When Runtime Revolution released
>> version 2.0.3 the company suddenly removed that freedom and
>> beyond a 30 day 'trial license' expected payment. I felt
>> betrayed and said so, forcefully; for which I was slammed,
>> forcefully.  I subsequently stopped making widgets I
>> developed available via my website.
>> 
>> I expect there are a large number of people who felt sad
>> about the end of a free version of Runtime Revolution ?
>> although nobody else went so far as to state that.
>> 
>> What Runtime Revolution has done has ensured that their
>> product will only be used by commercial developers (i.e.
>> those who can pay), and stifled a whole section of the
>> programming community who would otherwise have contributed
>> to the growth of the product.
>> 
>> For my masters thesis I used Runtime Revolution 2.0.1 ? the
>> last free version. None of the free versions are available
>> for download any more.
>> 
>> John Richmond Mathewson. 27 April 2005
>> ---
>> The Think Different Store
>> http://www.thinkdifferentstore.com/
>> For All Your Mac Gear
>> ---
>> ___
>> use-revolution mailing list
>> use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

|||
   )_)  )_)  )_)
  )___))___))___)\
 )))_)\\
   _|||\\\__
---\   /- http://www.bluewatermaritime.com
 ^ ^
     ^^^^^
     ^^^

24 hour cell: (787) 378-6190
fax: (787) 809-8426

Blue Water Maritime
P.O. Box 91
Puerto Real, PR 00740



___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

RE: A Philosophical Point

[Lynch, Jonathan]

> For my sake, please stay off the list... Jim

I strongly object to this sentiment. As one who participates in this
list, I enjoyed this thread, and do not want John to "stay off the
list."


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim
Carwardine
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 2:55 PM
To: Revolution Listserve
Subject: Re: A Philosophical Point

I don't need to know this, John.  How is RunRev to stay in business if
they
don't charge for their product?  You of all people should know how much
overhead is required to produce bug-free code.  RunRev could not sustain
itself unless it turned open source and that's not the business model
they
are running on.  For my sake, please stay off the list... Jim




___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: A Philosophical Point

[Jim Carwardine]

I don't need to know this, John.  How is RunRev to stay in business if they
don't charge for their product?  You of all people should know how much
overhead is required to produce bug-free code.  RunRev could not sustain
itself unless it turned open source and that's not the business model they
are running on.  For my sake, please stay off the list... Jim

on 4/26/05 6:05 PM, Mathewson wrote:

> I recently completed a Master's thesis at the University of
> Abertay, Dundee.
> It was mainly concerned with designing a new Graphic User
> Interface for computers (and may be read, in its entirety,
> on my website at http://members.maclaunch.com/richmond),
> and had at its heart a prototype developed using a version
> of Runtime Revolution. The reason I chose to use Runtime
> Revolution was based largely on the fact that I have 12
> years of experience using what has come to be called
> 'xTalk' but when I started was called 'HyperTalk'.
> 
> While I believe that Runtime Revolution produce an
> extremely good programming interface that uses a dialect of
> 'xTalk' I have a major philosophical disagreement with
> them, of which many people who work with Runtime Revolution
> are aware, but may not realise the reasons for.
> 
> On Friday 22 April I went to Sofia to the Webtech
> conference and listened to Richard Stallman for close on
> two hours. Dr Stallman's message was clear (and is well
> known in programming circles), and for the first time I
> heard somebody else say things that echoed, to a large
> extent, my own ideas.
> 
> About 4 years ago I downloaded Runtime Revolution 1 and
> started to play with it; over a period of time I developed
> a wide variety of 'widgets' that I either uploaded to their
> user site or made available through my own website.
> 
> During this time I developed a complete interactive CD-ROM
> for an educational company based in St Andrews (Scotland);
> my employer bought me the Runtime Revolution 1.1.1 manuals.
> In working on this CD-ROM I developed various bits-and-bobs
> that I spun off as 'widgets' made freely available via the
> internet.
> 
> This culminated in my designing a complex extended toolbar
> for Runtime Revolution 2. At no time did I ask for any
> money for these contributions, and never tried to exercise
> any copyright control. This was based on the fact that
> Runtime Revolution was available as a free download that
> could be used in a relatively unrestricted way without
> having to pay for it. When Runtime Revolution released
> version 2.0.3 the company suddenly removed that freedom and
> beyond a 30 day 'trial license' expected payment. I felt
> betrayed and said so, forcefully; for which I was slammed,
> forcefully.  I subsequently stopped making widgets I
> developed available via my website.
> 
> I expect there are a large number of people who felt sad
> about the end of a free version of Runtime Revolution ?
> although nobody else went so far as to state that.
> 
> What Runtime Revolution has done has ensured that their
> product will only be used by commercial developers (i.e.
> those who can pay), and stifled a whole section of the
> programming community who would otherwise have contributed
> to the growth of the product.
> 
> For my masters thesis I used Runtime Revolution 2.0.1 ? the
> last free version. None of the free versions are available
> for download any more.
> 
> John Richmond Mathewson. 27 April 2005
> ---
> The Think Different Store
> http://www.thinkdifferentstore.com/
> For All Your Mac Gear
> ---
> ___
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

-- 

OYF is... Highly resourceful people working together.


Own Your Future Consulting Services Limited,
1959 Upper Water Street, Suite 407, Halifax, Nova Scotia. B3J 3N2
Phone: 902-823-2339. Fax: 902-823-2139

What¹s New...

* Have you ever hired an employee who didn¹t work out?

* Did you do that on purpose?

Probably not...

If you want to greatly improve your hiring process,
 check out our new hiring process... www.HiringSmart.ca/ns

  and...
www.KeepingTheBest.ca/ns 



___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: A Philosophical Point

[Judy Perry]

Marty,

When is your conference?

Judy

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Marty Billingsley wrote:

> replacement.  In fact, at NECC (National Educators Computing Conference)
> our presentation is a comparison of five multi-media environments for
> those looking for a HyperStudio replacement.
>
> I think that Revolution should target this market; this may be what
> they're aiming for with DreamCard.  I wish they hadn't gone with such
> a different name (RevCard or something), but that's beside the point.
>
> Now what they need to do is to become more high-profile and get some
> documentation out there aimed at teachers (guess I'll have to write
> that book I've been threatening to).  Now is the time to do it;
> in a year or two the education market will have settled on a new product.

___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: A Philosophical Point

[Marty Billingsley]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> Let's not forget that many of Revolution's customers were HyperCard
> users - and many of us started x-cards with HypercCard, because it was
> free. I got my first copy free with an SE 30 I bought in 1987, have
> since bought hundreds of copies of HyperCard.
>
> This all begs the real question: what is Revolution's target market -
> now that all the "low hanging fruit" (HC & MC users) are picked?

A lot of schools are turning away from HyperStudio (not supported for the
Mac any more, support for the PC seems to be waning) and looking for a
replacement.  In fact, at NECC (National Educators Computing Conference)
our presentation is a comparison of five multi-media environments for
those looking for a HyperStudio replacement.

I think that Revolution should target this market; this may be what
they're aiming for with DreamCard.  I wish they hadn't gone with such
a different name (RevCard or something), but that's beside the point.

Now what they need to do is to become more high-profile and get some
documentation out there aimed at teachers (guess I'll have to write
that book I've been threatening to).  Now is the time to do it;
in a year or two the education market will have settled on a new product.

  - marty

--
Marty Billingsley ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
The University of Chicago Laboratory Schools
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: A Philosophical Point

[Richard Gaskin]

Mark Wieder wrote:
Richard-
Wednesday, April 27, 2005, 7:25:59 PM, you wrote:
RG> We have at least one anecdotal data point in which the hobbyist was
RG> quite happy to use only the free version with narry a though about
RG> buying a license, and only after Rev discontinued the free version did
RG> he obtain one.
RG> I used to believe the old free version was a good idea, but it's hard to
RG> argue with data like that.  ;)

It's not hard at all to argue with a *single anecdotal data point*.
If I remember correctly, the free version never expired, but in order
to use the new features you had to upgrade. If said hobbyist wasn't
impressed with runrev, he could have passed on upgrading to a new
version and continued with the free one. Obviously that wasn't the
case. The free version hooked the user and made enough of an impact
that he decided to spring for a paid upgrade.
Seems to me like the free version was the cause of a sale.
As I read it the termination of the free version was the cause of the 
sale.  But the cause-and-effect is not entirely clear from the story, so 
I may well be mistaken.

Of course, I'm one of those weirdos who pays for shareware if I find I
like and use it, so don't take *my* word for anything...
Freak!  :)
I paid for Tex-Edit twice only because I liked it so much and use it so 
often and it's so affordable.  Same with GraphicConverter -- one of the 
best values in this history of software, IMO.

Personally I liked having the free version, and use a very similar 
feature-restriction-with-no-time-limite model for every package I make. 
 While I have no hard data on the efficacy of that approach for RR, for 
myself and my clients it's done very well.

But I don't run RR, and they don't run 4W, and we both like it that way. :)
Kee Nethery of the great Kagi.com feels strongly in favor of this model 
too, if memory serves -- Kee, care to share your experiences?

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Media Corporation
 __
 Rev tools and more: http://www.fourthworld.com/rev
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: A Philosophical Point

[Mark Wieder]

Richard-

Wednesday, April 27, 2005, 7:25:59 PM, you wrote:

RG> We have at least one anecdotal data point in which the hobbyist was
RG> quite happy to use only the free version with narry a though about
RG> buying a license, and only after Rev discontinued the free version did
RG> he obtain one.

RG> I used to believe the old free version was a good idea, but it's hard to
RG> argue with data like that.  ;)



It's not hard at all to argue with a *single anecdotal data point*.

If I remember correctly, the free version never expired, but in order
to use the new features you had to upgrade. If said hobbyist wasn't
impressed with runrev, he could have passed on upgrading to a new
version and continued with the free one. Obviously that wasn't the
case. The free version hooked the user and made enough of an impact
that he decided to spring for a paid upgrade.

Seems to me like the free version was the cause of a sale.

Of course, I'm one of those weirdos who pays for shareware if I find I
like and use it, so don't take *my* word for anything...

-- 
-Mark Wieder
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: A Philosophical Point

[Sarah Reichelt]

This culminated in my designing a complex extended toolbar
for Runtime Revolution 2. At no time did I ask for any
money for these contributions, and never tried to exercise
any copyright control. This was based on the fact that
Runtime Revolution was available as a free download that
could be used in a relatively unrestricted way without
having to pay for it. When Runtime Revolution released
version 2.0.3 the company suddenly removed that freedom and
beyond a 30 day 'trial license' expected payment. I felt
betrayed and said so, forcefully; for which I was slammed,
forcefully.  I subsequently stopped making widgets I
developed available via my website.
While I respect your decision to remain with an older version of 
Revolution so that you never need to pay, I find it sad that you feel 
unable to contribute to the Rev community for this reason. Presumably 
you no longer take advantage of other people's generous offerings in 
advice and stacks as this would be inconsistent with your philosophy 
unless you could be sure they were older stacks or techniques developed 
with the free version.

Some of your contributions have been very helpful and interesting - 
thanks for that. If you ever change your mind and wish to rejoin the 
Rev community, we'll still be here :-)

Sarah
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: A Philosophical Point

[simplsol]

Let's not forget that many of Revolution's customers were HyperCard 
users - and many of us started x-cards with HypercCard, because it was 
free. I got my first copy free with an SE 30 I bought in 1987, have 
since bought hundreds of copies of HyperCard.

This all begs the real question: what is Revolution's target market - 
now that all the "low hanging fruit" (HC & MC users) are picked?

Paul Looney
-Original Message-
From: Richard Gaskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: How to use Revolution 
Sent: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 19:25:59 -0700
Subject: Re: A Philosophical Point
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
> Many hobbyists that used the "limited" version AS HOBBYISTS for 
> a year or so, eventually became professional paying customers. 
> What did it hurt to allow free 10-line scripts to be created 
> for free? 
 
 We have at least one anecdotal data point in which the hobbyist was 
quite happy to use only the free version with narry a though about 
buying a license, and only after Rev discontinued the free version did 
he obtain one. 
 
 I used to believe the old free version was a good idea, but it's hard 
to argue with data like that. ;) 
 
--  Richard Gaskin 
 Fourth World Media Corporation 
 __ 
 Rev tools and more: http://www.fourthworld.com/rev 
___ 
use-revolution mailing list 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution 

   
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: A Philosophical Point

[Richard Gaskin]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Many hobbyists that used the "limited" version AS HOBBYISTS for
a year or so, eventually became professional paying customers.
What did it hurt to allow free 10-line scripts to be created
for free?
We have at least one anecdotal data point in which the hobbyist was 
quite happy to use only the free version with narry a though about 
buying a license, and only after Rev discontinued the free version did 
he obtain one.

I used to believe the old free version was a good idea, but it's hard to 
argue with data like that.  ;)

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Media Corporation
 __
 Rev tools and more: http://www.fourthworld.com/rev
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: A Philosophical Point

[J. Landman Gay]

On 4/26/05 4:05 PM, Mathewson wrote:
What Runtime Revolution has done has ensured that their
product will only be used by commercial developers (i.e.
those who can pay), and stifled a whole section of the
programming community who would otherwise have contributed
to the growth of the product.
The flaw in this logic is that a free version was tried and it did not 
contribute to the growth of the product.

--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: A Philosophical Point

[Judy Perry]

John,

What would you propose that the good folks  at the company use to pay
their electrical bills with? Water? Rent? Food?

I don't know about you, but my creditors want actual money.

It's great that you are willing to work for nothing. I do alot of free
work, too, but at the end of the day the only reason why this is possible
is that I have a nominally-paying job and a spouse who has a decent-paying
job.

By all means, keep working in 2.0.x or whatever the last "free" version
was.

Just keep in mind, however, that THAT version was made possible by the
folks like me who paid for version 1 & 2.0...

Judy

___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

RE: A Philosophical Point

[Lynn Fredricks]

> > If they make it free, how would they fund development?
> 
> I don't think that Richmonds point was that Revolution should 
> be opensource or freeware, but that removal of the free 
> "limited version" has turned away many potential future 
> programmers. Not everyone has even a mere $99 for which to 
> experiment and learn using DreamCard.

But their target customer does have $99.

I can tell you from experience that offering a free version does not
necessarily equate to a large paying customer base later. Within the group
that opts to take you up on the free version, there are many who abandon at
various stages, and then there are those who like it but there is some
disqualifier for them to become paying customers (no money, not enough time,
work makes them use product X, etc).

Runtime ran several free offers through various UK magazines wherein you
could pick up Revolution for free (abeit an older version). If that didn't
yield gold then they rightfully may expect that offering a free version
(especially one without some sort of call to action) would provide very
little.

Best regards,

Lynn Fredricks
President
Paradigma Software, Inc



___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

RE: A Philosophical Point

[Lynch, Jonathan]

Yah - I agree with that. A limited freeware version seems like a good
idea.

There are a number of ways it could work - limiting script size,
limiting the range of available functions, limiting stack size or number
of cards.

I bet a knowledgable Rev programmer could create a self limiting version
of RunRev just with the creative use of user rights and locked front end
and back end scripts that contain scripts for limiting various aspects
of the program.

If someone did that, and they were able to get permission for RunRev to
distribute it, they could potentially attract quite a few future
customers for RunRev, and quite a few customers for their own custom
programming business.

Just speculation, of course.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 10:12 AM
To: How to use Revolution
Subject: RE: A Philosophical Point

> If they make it free, how would they fund development?

I don't think that Richmonds point was that Revolution should be 
opensource or freeware, but that removal of the free "limited version"
has 
turned away many potential future programmers. Not everyone has even a 
mere $99 for which to experiment and learn using DreamCard. And 30 days 
just isn't enough if you are a student with no money. Many hobbyists
that 
used the "limited" version AS HOBBYISTS for a year or so, eventually 
became professional paying customers. What did it hurt to allow free 
10-line scripts to be created for free? Did it really take away that
much 
of RunTimes revenue? Just remember that every kid, or every student that

could have had a pleasant learning experience with the free "limited" 
version will eventually grow up and be a potential customer. Wouldn't
you 
want "Revolution" to be the name that comes to mind when they are in a 
position to choose their tools of the trade. Without that availability,
I 
believe that Richmond is correct. The potential customer base is greatly

reduced to only the current generation of professional adults.

Roger Eller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution


___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

RE: A Philosophical Point

[Roger . E . Eller]

> If they make it free, how would they fund development?

I don't think that Richmonds point was that Revolution should be 
opensource or freeware, but that removal of the free "limited version" has 
turned away many potential future programmers. Not everyone has even a 
mere $99 for which to experiment and learn using DreamCard. And 30 days 
just isn't enough if you are a student with no money. Many hobbyists that 
used the "limited" version AS HOBBYISTS for a year or so, eventually 
became professional paying customers. What did it hurt to allow free 
10-line scripts to be created for free? Did it really take away that much 
of RunTimes revenue? Just remember that every kid, or every student that 
could have had a pleasant learning experience with the free "limited" 
version will eventually grow up and be a potential customer. Wouldn't you 
want "Revolution" to be the name that comes to mind when they are in a 
position to choose their tools of the trade. Without that availability, I 
believe that Richmond is correct. The potential customer base is greatly 
reduced to only the current generation of professional adults.

Roger Eller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: A Philosophical Point

[Thomas McGrath III]

John Richmond,
I read your thesis, and it was very interesting. It seemed that you 
thought through it well.

I do have a question about one of your presuppositions. You state a 
good argument for a very linear approach using an interface that takes 
a user step by step to a final conclusion (a finished application). My 
question is what happens when a user decides 12 steps later that they 
don't like a decision they made 12 steps back? or What happens if they 
are not sure how far back the error in their decision making was?

It seems that to back out of that would be simple enough, but if there 
were dozens or hundreds of steps involved I think that a cognitive 
overload would then occur. I have studied the decision making steps 
that users make while doing day to day work on their computers. Maybe 
if you had another set of question/answer steps to solve changes or 
mistakes on the users part that that could possibly work.

But if that is the case then I would tend to have an argument against 
this concept being able to replace an entire WIMP/GUI for generalized 
use. I do think in a highly specialized/restricted environment that 
this approach would be a viable alternative. But in a 
generalized/expanded environment the sheer number of 
options/choices/questions/answers would still result in a cognitive 
overload as is found in today's modern GUIs.

I therefore think that to a certain point this would be a good approach 
but that, after that a point of complexity is reached and you would 
possibly find yourself back at the initial problem.

My critique is offered humbly and with out malice. I have also been 
facing this issue with alternative interface development for the past 
eight years. I am author of 512 patent claims resulting in new 
approaches for GUI interaction and I am part owner of a company taking 
this new approach to the Cell Phone, Smart Phone and PDA environments. 
We are still in initial startup and I can't share too much more just 
yet because of copyright issues. Sorry. But I can say that with just 18 
buttons I can control every single command/function currently on any 
phone or PDA. But the complexity involved in changing the way people 
think in order to understand our system is much harder then just going 
with the already accepted approaches and I can understand why 
people/companies "stick to what doesn't work!"

Thank you for the opportunity to read your thesis and I hope it is 
received well.

Yours truly,
Tom McGrath
On Apr 26, 2005, at 5:05 PM, Mathewson wrote:
I recently completed a Master's thesis at the University of
Abertay, Dundee.
It was mainly concerned with designing a new Graphic User
Interface for computers (and may be read, in its entirety,
on my website at http://members.maclaunch.com/richmond),
and had at its heart a prototype developed using a version
of Runtime Revolution. John Richmond Mathewson. 27 April 2005
---
The Think Different Store
http://www.thinkdifferentstore.com/
For All Your Mac Gear
---
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Thomas J. McGrath III
SCS
1000 Killarney Dr.
Pittsburgh, PA 15234
412-885-8541
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: A Philosophical Point

[Bill]

I have always admired the public domain software community. I think the
stuff on source forge is excellent and everybody knows the story of Apache
and how even IBM's engineers came to use it. But everyone of those projects
released under the GNU license that have gotten really successful spun off
some kind of money-making business. Look at Red Hat Linux. But there are
still people working with Linux and add-ons for it and programs for it that
are released under GNU even though Red Hat is making money. The same thing
is true for Apache. It is public domain but there are plenty of servers with
an Apache core that are sold and making everyone's software experience
richer. Please don't feel betrayed because RunRev has to make a living. I
hope instead that you will keep making some incredible additions to RunRev
that we can all enjoy released to the public domain but also use the
reputation you gain from the release of that software to make some money
yourself also programming with RunRev.

I think it will help if you look at incredible software as an enriching
empowerment experience for the people that get to use it and to realize that
for most people whether it is free or cost less than $200 makes very little
difference.


On 4/26/05 5:05 PM, "Mathewson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I recently completed a Master's thesis at the University of
> Abertay, Dundee.
> It was mainly concerned with designing a new Graphic User
> Interface for computers (and may be read, in its entirety,
> on my website at http://members.maclaunch.com/richmond),
> and had at its heart a prototype developed using a version
> of Runtime Revolution. The reason I chose to use Runtime
> Revolution was based largely on the fact that I have 12
> years of experience using what has come to be called
> 'xTalk' but when I started was called 'HyperTalk'.
> 
> While I believe that Runtime Revolution produce an
> extremely good programming interface that uses a dialect of
> 'xTalk' I have a major philosophical disagreement with
> them, of which many people who work with Runtime Revolution
> are aware, but may not realise the reasons for.
> 
> On Friday 22 April I went to Sofia to the Webtech
> conference and listened to Richard Stallman for close on
> two hours. Dr Stallman's message was clear (and is well
> known in programming circles), and for the first time I
> heard somebody else say things that echoed, to a large
> extent, my own ideas.
> 
> About 4 years ago I downloaded Runtime Revolution 1 and
> started to play with it; over a period of time I developed
> a wide variety of 'widgets' that I either uploaded to their
> user site or made available through my own website.
> 
> During this time I developed a complete interactive CD-ROM
> for an educational company based in St Andrews (Scotland);
> my employer bought me the Runtime Revolution 1.1.1 manuals.
> In working on this CD-ROM I developed various bits-and-bobs
> that I spun off as 'widgets' made freely available via the
> internet.
> 
> This culminated in my designing a complex extended toolbar
> for Runtime Revolution 2. At no time did I ask for any
> money for these contributions, and never tried to exercise
> any copyright control. This was based on the fact that
> Runtime Revolution was available as a free download that
> could be used in a relatively unrestricted way without
> having to pay for it. When Runtime Revolution released
> version 2.0.3 the company suddenly removed that freedom and
> beyond a 30 day 'trial license' expected payment. I felt
> betrayed and said so, forcefully; for which I was slammed,
> forcefully.  I subsequently stopped making widgets I
> developed available via my website.
> 
> I expect there are a large number of people who felt sad
> about the end of a free version of Runtime Revolution ?
> although nobody else went so far as to state that.
> 
> What Runtime Revolution has done has ensured that their
> product will only be used by commercial developers (i.e.
> those who can pay), and stifled a whole section of the
> programming community who would otherwise have contributed
> to the growth of the product.
> 
> For my masters thesis I used Runtime Revolution 2.0.1 ? the
> last free version. None of the free versions are available
> for download any more.
> 
> John Richmond Mathewson. 27 April 2005
> ---
> The Think Different Store
> http://www.thinkdifferentstore.com/
> For All Your Mac Gear
> ---
> ___
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
> 
> 

|||
   )_)  )_)  )_)
  )___))___))___)\
 )))_)\\
   _|||\\\__
---\   /- http://www.bluewatermaritime.com
 ^ ^
     ^^^^^

Re: A Philosophical Point

[jbv]

"Lynch, Jonathan" a *crit :

>
> If they make it free, how would they fund development?
>

Paypal donations ?

Just kidding, of course...
JB

___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

RE: A Philosophical Point

[Lynch, Jonathan]

I have a question for you John...

For folks using RunRev in a commercial setting - we need the program to
be developed further - bug fixes, more extensive utilization of html in
fields, better table objects, that sort of thing.

Under an open source model, or a freeware model, would the resources be
available for the development of RunRev to continue at the necessary
pace?

I recall that at one point some folks were developing a program called
'Free Card' that was to be an open source Xtalk style program (I believe
this is correct, but am not certain on this point). It seems like that
project did not blossom (or at least, I have not heard much about it - a
quick search on Google did not turn up much).

Personally, I would rather pay for the program, and have rapid
development of the IDE.

My opinion - I think they need a freeware version to lure in new users,
but that would not be the same as making it open source or making the
full product freeware.

You sound as if you have done a good bit of research into freeware and
open source business models, so I am genuinely asking for your knowledge
on this topic.

If they make it free, how would they fund development?


Cheers,

Jonathan


___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

A Philosophical Point

[Mathewson]

I recently completed a Master's thesis at the University of
Abertay, Dundee.
It was mainly concerned with designing a new Graphic User
Interface for computers (and may be read, in its entirety,
on my website at http://members.maclaunch.com/richmond),
and had at its heart a prototype developed using a version
of Runtime Revolution. The reason I chose to use Runtime
Revolution was based largely on the fact that I have 12
years of experience using what has come to be called
'xTalk' but when I started was called 'HyperTalk'.

While I believe that Runtime Revolution produce an
extremely good programming interface that uses a dialect of
'xTalk' I have a major philosophical disagreement with
them, of which many people who work with Runtime Revolution
are aware, but may not realise the reasons for.

On Friday 22 April I went to Sofia to the Webtech
conference and listened to Richard Stallman for close on
two hours. Dr Stallman's message was clear (and is well
known in programming circles), and for the first time I
heard somebody else say things that echoed, to a large
extent, my own ideas.

About 4 years ago I downloaded Runtime Revolution 1 and
started to play with it; over a period of time I developed
a wide variety of 'widgets' that I either uploaded to their
user site or made available through my own website. 

During this time I developed a complete interactive CD-ROM
for an educational company based in St Andrews (Scotland);
my employer bought me the Runtime Revolution 1.1.1 manuals.
In working on this CD-ROM I developed various bits-and-bobs
that I spun off as 'widgets' made freely available via the
internet.

This culminated in my designing a complex extended toolbar
for Runtime Revolution 2. At no time did I ask for any
money for these contributions, and never tried to exercise
any copyright control. This was based on the fact that
Runtime Revolution was available as a free download that
could be used in a relatively unrestricted way without
having to pay for it. When Runtime Revolution released
version 2.0.3 the company suddenly removed that freedom and
beyond a 30 day 'trial license' expected payment. I felt
betrayed and said so, forcefully; for which I was slammed,
forcefully.  I subsequently stopped making widgets I
developed available via my website.

I expect there are a large number of people who felt sad
about the end of a free version of Runtime Revolution ?
although nobody else went so far as to state that.

What Runtime Revolution has done has ensured that their
product will only be used by commercial developers (i.e.
those who can pay), and stifled a whole section of the
programming community who would otherwise have contributed
to the growth of the product.

For my masters thesis I used Runtime Revolution 2.0.1 ? the
last free version. None of the free versions are available
for download any more.

John Richmond Mathewson. 27 April 2005
---
The Think Different Store
http://www.thinkdifferentstore.com/
For All Your Mac Gear
---
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution