Re: LiveCode for Educators (was LiveCode for the Hobbyists)

On 27/02/2016 21:31, Tore Nilsen wrote: One thing I really would hope LiveCode will do, is to find room for this as a part of the program for the conference in Edinburgh in August. I have already registered and will attend. If there is anything I can do to help facilitate this, I am more than

Re: LiveCode for Educators (was LiveCode for the Hobbyists)

On 2/29/2016 9:45 PM, Peter M. Brigham wrote: On Feb 28, 2016, at 4:21 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: On 2/28/2016 9:07 AM, Peter M. Brigham wrote: The old RevOnline/User Samples was an attempt at this, but most people these days are used to using a browser to download files and resources. That

Re: LiveCode for Educators (was LiveCode for the Hobbyists)

On Feb 28, 2016, at 4:21 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: > On 2/28/2016 9:07 AM, Peter M. Brigham wrote: >> The old RevOnline/User Samples was an attempt at this, but most >> people these days are used to using a browser to download files and >> resources. That has the added advantage of showing up in

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

For what it's worth, I got the Indy license so that I could release github.Howstr.com under whatever license I wanted. In this case that's the MIT license. So for me it's not even about keeping it secret, it's about sharing with fewer restrictions than the GPL allows. Of course, I am turning

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

Bravo to Tore Nilsen in this thread. Spot on. I mighy call myself a Hobbyists too, but I LOVE the open source community version. Those with extra cash who desire to support the Mothership may want to invest into a new LiveCode feature from time to time. Or, attend a LiveCode event. I think the

Re: LiveCode for Educators (was LiveCode for the Hobbyists)

On 2/28/2016 9:07 AM, Peter M. Brigham wrote: The old RevOnline/User Samples was an attempt at this, but most people these days are used to using a browser to download files and resources. That has the added advantage of showing up in Google searches. Edinburgh really should set up a webpage on

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

And of course the Apple 'App Store' for the desktop is highly over-rated and has benefits for the developer and end user if avoided. On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami < bra...@hindu.org> wrote: > The "Hobbyist" using the community version cannot deploy on the App

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

> 28. feb. 2016 kl. 19.11 skrev Robert Mann : > > Use open sourced for in house commercial application! whouaou!! > that does not really sound very open source.. kind of twisting the game in > way. This is where I think you get open source wrong. Open source does not mean non

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 11:32:45 -0700, Roger Guay wrote: > Excellent point! What would you think about an inexpensive LC license > for non-profits and free apps? I dream of that ! ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

Excellent point! What would you think about an inexpensive LC license for non-profits and free apps? Roger > On Feb 28, 2016, at 11:00 AM, Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami > wrote: > > Just to throw in two mangoes from Hawaii > > Matt.. there is also the unspoken "Apple Policy"

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

Just to throw in two mangoes from Hawaii Matt.. there is also the unspoken "Apple Policy" problem. The "Hobbyist" using the community version cannot deploy on the App Store. This kind of throws an rusty wrench into what would otherwise be "all good" overall picture. But we cannot put that on

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

The Community version is 100% fantastic for hobbyists as well as anyone else who isn't fussed about protecting their code. I use the Community version on a daily basis to develop software for my business, where code protection is not an issue; I also use a commercial version (4.5) to develop

Re: LiveCode for Educators (was LiveCode for the Hobbyists)

LC has long been plagued with a multiplicity of source sites for LC stacks/applications/resources. There needs to be a central repository for all these. The old RevOnline/User Samples was an attempt at this, but most people these days are used to using a browser to download files and resources.

Re: LiveCode for Educators (was LiveCode for the Hobbyists)

thinking contributions. Robert -- View this message in context: http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/LiveCode-for-the-Hobbyists-tp4701530p4701607.html Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ use-livecode mailing

Re: LiveCode for Educators (was LiveCode for the Hobbyists)

They've put out a call for conference speakers. Maybe you could address it there, or set up a panel with other educators who attend. On February 27, 2016 3:33:05 PM Tore Nilsen wrote: One thing I really would hope LiveCode will do, is to find room for this as a part of

Re: LiveCode for Educators (was LiveCode for the Hobbyists)

Tore Nilsen wrote: > I do agree that this is a kind of task where we, as educators and > users of LiveCode should do the actual work. However, I think it is > vitally important that the outcome of such a process has an active > backing from the company... Oh indeed it does. One of the projects

Re: LiveCode for Educators (was LiveCode for the Hobbyists)

> 27. feb. 2016 kl. 21.51 skrev Richard Gaskin : > > What could happen if we change "LiveCode" there to "we”? > > The company has many deep technical obligations to complete, and education is > an area that really needs the insights of education specialists to guide

LiveCode for Educators (was LiveCode for the Hobbyists)

Tore - Thank you for that valuable contribution to this discussion. I think you nailed it perfectly here: In my opinion LiveCode should try to put together a package of resources that can help teachers to use LiveCode in accordance with the competence aims of their respective

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

Another item: I find https://www.pinterest.com to be a great resource to see what educators, especially in k-12 are doing. Lots of great ideas. Bill William Prothero http://es.earthednet.org > On Feb 27, 2016, at 9:05 AM, Earthednet-wp wrote: > > Tore, > Your idea has

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

Tore, Your idea has a lot of merit. In the early Apple days, HyperCard was very popular with educators. It was simple and revolutionary as a programming environment, and free with the computer. Livecode has the capability for this now, especially with the widgets and even more with Monte's

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

I’d like to chime in here: I love LiveCode and the folks who use, develop, produce and maintain it. I want them all to flourish. I am strictly a hobbyist developer, but did have an occasion where I donated work to the SETI Institute (a non-profit). This was a couple of years ago when I could

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

> 27. feb. 2016 kl. 03.35 skrev ambassa...@fourthworld.com: > >> Another good way to get a user base is to be available in schools. >> This is hard work, as network administrators, school boards, and >> politicians are often against all change. RunRev put a little >> effort into this a long time

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

> On 27 Feb 2016, at 11:07, Dirk prive wrote: > > So for new customers in Jan 2017 the price will be over 3 times what it was > for new customers in march 2015. I would say that is a price that goes up > way faster than one would expect. The company knows the numbers

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 9:55 AM, Terence Heaford wrote: > I would like a license with LiveCode but am not prepared to stump up > $499/year which I believe, is extortionate (forgive the word, but it is my > word). > I may be wrong but has it just gone up to $. > >

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

Hi again, I just re-read everything I received so far and have come to the conclusion that some things could have been communicated better by the company. *From their mail on feb 18th.* 29 More Reasons to Celebrate 8 We are committed to delivering a quality core product that offers great value

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

Is the existing method working? There always appears to be shifting sand, modifying this method for selling to renting, a different licence for this a different license for that, extensions for extra cash. All the shifting sands suggests to me that LiveCode are not making enough. What is

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

Howdy Folks, This is a very interesting thread with the pricing plan changing. LiveCode's Community Edition will fit the needs of many hobbyists perfectly, as others have rightly pointed out. But to be fair, it's unrealistic (false dichotomy) to believe that all software must be either

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

> Monte wrote: > Apples/oranges you are comparing proprietary extensions with something created > just for the fun of it with no intent to commercialise. Cheers Monte > Sent from my iPhone > > hh wrote: > > Why are you hiding your externals code? Could it be that a simple > > student who has a

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

Apples/oranges you are comparing proprietary extensions with something created just for the fun of it with no intent to commercialise. Cheers Monte Sent from my iPhone > On 27 Feb 2016, at 11:17 AM, [-hh] wrote: > > Why are you hiding your externals code? Could it be that

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

Mark Schonewille wrote: Another good way to get a user base is to be available in schools. This is hard work, as network administrators, school boards, and politicians are often against all change. RunRev put a little effort into this a long time ago and I don't think they currently do anything

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

OK I'm completely confused. I'd like to suggest it's my inability to grasp the English language but I read some of these post over and over and I can't just come to any other conclusion the world has turned upside down. Way back people were complaining that Revolution was too expensive. The

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

> Monte wrote: > > On 27 Feb 2016, at 9:28 AM, [-hh] wrote: > > Build on the next generation, who will become decision maker in a few > > years. And, if they *know* the software, may also become possible > > buyers of LC-related products: > > Give teachers and their students in class FREE copies.

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

Donation are ok and all other variants of raising money too in my opinion. Also the free community version was needed which was a must-have because it protects investment to some degree, and the market required it. The question - as I interpret some contributions here - is more about the "how"

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

Maybe something along the line of as paying license customers we can have some expectations/influence. For instance I would like Android support on par with iOS support. As someone that just donated once, I feel like I have no voice, since I'm not a customer. And yes Android support has been a

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

> On 27 Feb 2016, at 9:28 AM, [-hh] wrote: > > Build on the next generation, who will become decision maker in a few > years. And, if they *know* the software, may also become possible > buyers of LC-related products: > Give teachers and their students in class FREE copies. >

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

There is no need for code protection for hobbyists. But why not have a budget offer for some benefit? Simple, straightforward, and not just a donation. Whether is it worth the effort now, I also do not know. The idea behind is still to help development which is never for free, but not to ask for

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

Okay, I think I follow that. It seems like a very specific case in that you could just not share the software publically and then there's no conflict. It sounds like the public use of the compiled software is a nice-to-have. Maybe in the case that you want to let the world use the software in its

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

Yes, Matt, I have no problem with open source, especially not in those areas you point too, and I also said it. I share my code, why not? Personally I am fine with the free version license until a professional need arises and I would be confident enough to allow for professional work. And then

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

You might need to fill in some blanks for me on why that is important for a hobbyist? I would say one feature of a hobbyist with a budget market license could be no code protection so it's an important point to clarify. Sent from my iPhone > On 27 Feb 2016, at 10:29 AM, [-hh]

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

> Matt M. wrote: > But, if you're a hobbyist, and not charging for what you distribute, > why would you need to close the source? Because, not always but sometimes, you would like to share the code with some people only, not with all. And at the same time you are willing to share your product

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

I'm still not clear on how the community edition of Livecode isn't sufficient for hobby purposes. It's got tons of functionality, and it's free, and the main restriction is that anything you distribute has to be licensed GPL. But, if you're a hobbyist, and not charging for what you distribute, why

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

Really good points, Roland. Let me add explicitly this one. Build on the next generation, who will become decision maker in a few years. And, if they *know* the software, may also become possible buyers of LC-related products: Give teachers and their students in class FREE copies. Give

Re: LiveCode for the Hobbyists

A good way to grow the community is to give something away for free. That's what RunRev has done by open-sourcing. I'm not sure this was a good strategic move as far as earning are concerned, but it was definitely a good way to attract more users. It is also necessary to be present in tech

LiveCode for the Hobbyists

The disussion comes from (taken from: Players in HTML5 - ETA for Full Functionality?) Dirk Prive: "I think the lack of interest in supporting the hobby programmers will hurt the company in the not too distant future. As a hobby user myself I have paid for a license for a long long time. "