Dave,
I'm a little late responding to this thread, but I'd urge you to review any
messages you've sent to the list and be sure your thoughts on the desired
vs. actual behavior -- whether you deem them software bugs, documentation
bugs, or enhancement requests -- are dutifully recorded in
On 14 Nov 2006, at 16:42, J. Landman Gay wrote:
Dave wrote:
The problem is when a new user sits down in front of the IDE and
after a little playing their (say) Application Browser Window
will not appear, they blame the whole RunRev envorment not just
the IDE. It just gives an impression
On 14 Nov 2006, at 15:09, Bernard Devlin wrote:
Dave said:
I'm not talking about me, I'm talking about trying to sell it to a
whole programming department that is currently using a mix of Macs,
Windows and Linux machines and programming tools such as C/C++,
RealBasic, AppleScript, XML, PDF,
On 14 Nov 2006, at 20:12, Lynn Fredricks wrote:
As far as I am concerned, with Rev the glass is certainly more than
half-full. In fact, if I had the money I'd be trying to buy the
company.
I'm not talking about me, I'm talking about trying to sell
it to a whole programming department that
On 14 Nov 2006, at 13:56, Bernard Devlin wrote:
Dave said:
I decided early on that to be really efficient in
RunRev you need to develop your own framework (or use a 3rd party
system), if you do this right you can obtain the maximum code and
screen design re-use. The problems that I found
On 14 Nov 2006, at 22:21, Lynn Fredricks wrote:
That's very interesting - I had no idea that Rev was
receiving any mainstream coverage as a platform. I'll have
to take a look at that book next time I'm in a bookshop. Now
that I think of it, it is obvious that any book that was
really
Dave said:
The point is that all those technologies could be replaced by RunRev
and the whole system would be much more stable. They are finding it
really hard to find the right people because of all the different
technologies and tools involved. In short it would be much better and
reliable to
Dave said:
I can't believe you called me pessimistic! I find this post to very
pessimistic basically saying it's a toy, don't try to make it
mainstream, give up now cos it will never happen!
Please don't put words in my mouth. I didn't call you pessimistic,
and I didn't say Rev was a toy.
hi
With both mc rev the documentation has been weak I believe a good
idea is an official Runrev tutorial wiki of some sort where all the
bright minds on this list can contribute.
Things have improved thru the forums but personally I don't use it much
because basically it take more effort
On 15 Nov 2006, at 13:28, Bernard Devlin wrote:
Dave said:
The point is that all those technologies could be replaced by RunRev
and the whole system would be much more stable. They are finding it
really hard to find the right people because of all the different
technologies and tools
On 15 Nov 2006, at 13:29, Bernard Devlin wrote:
Dave said:
I can't believe you called me pessimistic! I find this post to very
pessimistic basically saying it's a toy, don't try to make it
mainstream, give up now cos it will never happen!
Please don't put words in my mouth. I didn't call
Bernard Devlin wrote:
For those who want Rev to have a higher profile, I hope 1 day
to see some amazing product or technique that will give us all a sense
of smugness.
One of my clients is taking our work to MacWorld this January. He says
he wants to win best of show. While I doubt that will
Bernard, I really admire your passion for Rev, but may I suggest that
you may be reading Dave stronger than he writes? I've been reading his
posts carefully, and I believe we may have another Bill Marriott in the
making here:
I used to misread Bill's posts as being more critical than they
There are times when C/C++ is the only way to go. But there are
specific advantages to a product like Revolution, and one
of them is
the ability to whip out a prototype or custom utility very, very
quickly, and deploy it on multiple operating systems - very, very
quickly on runs
Richard,
I respectfully disagree with some of the points made.
Dave specifically stated:
The problem is that when they read the sales small print (in this case)
and see support is not included.
I believe he was referring to his company's Enterprise developers and
management when he said
On 15 Nov 2006, at 20:49, Chipp Walters wrote:
Richard,
I respectfully disagree with some of the points made.
Dave specifically stated:
The problem is that when they read the sales small print (in this
case)
and see support is not included.
I believe he was referring to his company's
Chipp wrote:
Richard,
I respectfully disagree with some of the points made.
...
Support fees are widespread in Enterprise-- especially in software
development.
I suppose so, but I didn't write about Rev's support.
I replied to the comments about upgrade fees:
Yep, Dave seems to confuse the concept of upgrades vs support. He tends to
use them interchangeably, when arguably, they are not.
On 11/15/06, Richard Gaskin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suppose so, but I didn't write about Rev's support.
I replied to the comments about upgrade fees:
I asked:
Is there some kind of deal on Rev
On 11/15/06, Lynn Fredricks reponded:
Aha, that would be telling! ;-)
On 11/15/06 Sarah Reichelt did some snooping:
According to the web page
http://www.dummies.com/WileyCDA/DummiesTitle/productCd-0470088702,subcat-PROGRAMMING.html
,
this is
On 11/16/06, Chipp Walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On a lighter note, Chris and I were compiling our list of
You know you're an Enterprise Developer when...
...
8. When someone's says Mac your first thought is add fries with that
gee, and I thought: 00:d9:95:0a:bd:d0 :-)
On 11/15/06, Kay C Lan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I
On 11/15/06, Lynn Fredricks reponded:
Aha, that would be telling! ;-)
Lynn responded to Sarah with:
Its not telling the whole story there :-)
Give it a day or two, I'm sure Lynn will point us to the answer over at the
rev forums ;-)
On 10 Nov 2006, at 17:44, Bernard Devlin wrote:
Dave said:
then RunRev will stop growing and eventually die.
I think that these kind of doomsday prognostications are
particularly unhelpful. Do you have any evidence that Runrev's
financial position is suffering?
Just going by my past
On 10 Nov 2006, at 15:37, Bernard Devlin wrote:
Hi Dave,
I'm not sure if you intended this email to come to the list (some
stuff in it sounds oddly private), but since it is now in the
public domain, I'm going to reply to it. I'm not sure if I'm
getting all the mail that goes to the
On 10 Nov 2006, at 17:43, Bernard Devlin wrote:
Dave said:
I think it's really sad that this is the case, and, the new
way of selling support or updates compounds that problem and makes it
harder to sell (in my experience).
It might make it harder for you to sell. That doesn't mean that
Dave said:
I'm not talking about me, I'm talking about trying to sell it to a
whole programming department that is currently using a mix of Macs,
Windows and Linux machines and programming tools such as C/C++,
RealBasic, AppleScript, XML, PDF, PERL, JavaScript, etc.
But why are you trying to
Dave said:
I decided early on that to be really efficient in
RunRev you need to develop your own framework (or use a 3rd party
system), if you do this right you can obtain the maximum code and
screen design re-use. The problems that I found were because I was
doing things that probably had not
Dave wrote:
The problem is when a new user sits down in front of the IDE and after a
little playing their (say) Application Browser Window will not appear,
they blame the whole RunRev envorment not just the IDE. It just gives an
impression of instability in the whole environment, they think
As far as I am concerned, with Rev the glass is certainly more than
half-full. In fact, if I had the money I'd be trying to buy the
company.
I'm not talking about me, I'm talking about trying to sell
it to a whole programming department that is currently using
a mix of Macs,
Lynn said:
Just point them to the wildly popular Wiley Publisher's Dummies book:
Beginning Programming for Dummies 4th Edition recently released where
Revolution receives a lot of coverage, esp compared to ALL of the above.
That's very interesting - I had no idea that Rev was receiving any
That's very interesting - I had no idea that Rev was
receiving any mainstream coverage as a platform. I'll have
to take a look at that book next time I'm in a bookshop. Now
that I think of it, it is obvious that any book that was
really interested in getting someone started with
On 11/15/06, Lynn Fredricks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Only three languages are covered in the book - one is Rev and yes, its
treated very favorably :-) Wally Wang has been working on this revision
for
over a year.
Is there some kind of deal on Rev as well (Free 2.2.1 license?) Whenever
I've
Is there some kind of deal on Rev as well (Free 2.2.1
license?) Whenever
I've purchased this kind of book before there's always been
some kind of
restricted use product (Codewarrior/RB) with deals on
upgrading to the full
package.
Aha, that would be telling! ;-) Once must acquire the
Only three languages are covered in the book - one is Rev and yes, its
treated very favorably :-) Wally Wang has been working on this revision
for
over a year.
Is there some kind of deal on Rev as well (Free 2.2.1 license?) Whenever
I've purchased this kind of book before there's always been
According to the web page
http://www.dummies.com/WileyCDA/DummiesTitle/productCd-047008
8702,subcat-PROGRAMMING.html,
this is what comes with the book:
Liberty BASIC, REALbasic, Dev-C++, Valentina, Galaxy, and
Revolution Studio demo versions
Its not telling the whole story there :-)
Best
This is REALLY lovely news!
Gotta go buy that book! If nothing else, I can show it to my department
the next time I ask..., er, beg, them for new Rev licenses for my lab :-D
Judy
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006, Lynn Fredricks wrote:
Is there some kind of deal on Rev as well (Free 2.2.1
license?)
:
Hiya,
I was going to post this in a reply, but thought it might be better
on its own.
Rev_rant
If I perceive a failing in an environment, I will state it, whether
or not I decide to utilise that environment in my projects.
There will come a point, if that environment has not evolved
Dave wrote:
The fact that it turned into a rant and abuse was thrown was
unfortunate, but perhaps understandable.
Where things tend to go south here is not from an open discussion of
legitimate quality concerns, but the manner in which they are sometimes
discussed.
Some of your posts may
Hi Dave,
I'm not sure if you intended this email to come to the list (some
stuff in it sounds oddly private), but since it is now in the public
domain, I'm going to reply to it. I'm not sure if I'm getting all
the mail that goes to the list, so apologies if I'm posting out of
context.
Dave said:
I think it's really sad that this is the case, and, the new
way of selling support or updates compounds that problem and makes it
harder to sell (in my experience).
It might make it harder for you to sell. That doesn't mean that
(overall) it is a less profitable way for Runrev to
Dave said:
In my opinion RunRev should concentrate
on one Bug-Fix release and fix as many old bugs as possible without
adding too many (if any) new features. I really think the IDE needs a
big overhaul, since this is the first thing a new user sees.
As I say, I do not experience Revolution as
Dave said:
then RunRev will stop growing and eventually die.
I think that these kind of doomsday prognostications are particularly
unhelpful. Do you have any evidence that Runrev's financial position
is suffering? As far as I can see, Runrev are going from strength to
strength. Do
Hi Richard,
You just made me go back and re-read his posts to see if I missed
anything, as I certainly did not not have a recollection of any flaming
arrows being released in my general direction...
And, indeed, I didn't find any!
Bravo!
Judy
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, Richard Gaskin wrote:
Some
Kay C Lan wrote:
we wouldn't want anyone else joining
Richmond as a recipient of the UserList
Medal of Dishonour;-)
OOO! When's the presentation? Wouldn't want to
miss it :)
or, as my English Granny once said; Sh*t sticks.
And, as I seem to have won this award I would
like to make a
On 8 Nov 2006, at 02:35, Kay C Lan wrote:
[...] as a recipient of the UserList Medal of Dishonour;-)
On 7 Nov 2006, at 18:27, Heather Nagey wrote:
The rules of participation in this list include courtesy and
tolerance of each other. It is not a venue to make personal attacks
of any kind,
Dear Folks,
On 8 Nov 2006, at 09:29, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Love, Abuse and other muffled noises, Richmond :)
LOL. Thank you. I needed a laugh this morning.
God bless Richmond, our inhouse Exasperation De-Luxe. You may keep
the medal for now and remember, list membership is a
Here is another newbie opinion:
Rather than comparing Rev to some ideal perfect dev solution (by the
way, what is the name of that?), to me, the only pragmatic view is
comparing it to other available options.
I have worked with (mostly past versions of) Flash, RealBasic, Xcode,
Director,
As the folks on this list who know me understand quite well, I work with a
number of different tool sets depending on the problem I'm trying to solve,
the deployment environment called for, and other variables.
For the problems for which it is the appropriate solution -- and the size of
that set
Hiya,
I was going to post this in a reply, but thought it might be better on
its own.
Rev_rant
If I perceive a failing in an environment, I will state it, whether or
not I decide to utilise that environment in my projects.
There will come a point, if that environment has not evolved
I'm really not sure what the purpose of your publicized issue is, unless
you're just trolling for negative responses. I'd have assumed you have
received enough of them by now.
AFAIK, and I've been active with RR for many, many years, there are no fewer
or greater 'delayed bug fixes' than there
On 11/7/06 9:42 AM, Luis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I perceive a failing in an environment, I will state it, whether or
not I decide to utilise that environment in my projects.
Understood. But I'd only suggest three things here: (1) that your comments
are framed in a constructive way, and (2)
On 11/7/06, Luis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Definitely a Tuesday.
No, it's definitely a Wednesday, and it was Wednesday 10 hours ago
when you sent your email:-)
We all have a different experience.
I think Ken's point is very good, we wouldn't want anyone else joining
Richmond as a recipient
51 matches
Mail list logo
