Kevin Miller wrote:
I'm leaning towards shortening the banner time to 5 seconds.
That would be a very good option, IMO.
When SuperCard introduced a splash screen delay they originally went for
10 seconds, but I suggested they try the breath-holding test: when the
splash screen appears
Hi from Beautiful Brittany,
Terry Judd wrote :
What about creating a personal 'player' application that starts up
automatically and is just left running in the background.
That's what I do. I have my favourite stack names in a tiny list,
displayed by a Call.app loaded in my Mac Startup,
On 11/16/2010 12:23 PM, Francis Nugent Dixon wrote:
Hi from Beautiful Brittany,
Terry Judd wrote :
What about creating a personal 'player' application that starts up
automatically and is just left running in the background.
That's what I do. I have my favourite stack names in a tiny list,
On 15/11/2010 23:31, Alex Tweedly a...@tweedly.net wrote:
(2) There is no way to distinguish your standalone running on your own
machine from your standalone running somewhere else. Any way to detect that
it is running on the same machine as the one used to develop the given
standalone will
That's because they are just kids. This target market is seasoned developers
looking for a better way to do what they already can.
Bob
On Nov 16, 2010, at 3:02 AM, Richmond wrote:
That's what I do. I have my favourite stack names in a tiny list,
displayed by a Call.app loaded in my Mac
Hey, back then 10 seconds was lightening quick for ANY application to launch! I
can remember waiting a minute or more for Photoshop.
Bob
On Nov 16, 2010, at 6:06 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
Kevin Miller wrote:
I'm leaning towards shortening the banner time to 5 seconds.
That would be a
On 11/16/2010 06:46 PM, Bob Sneidar wrote:
That's because they are just kids. This target market is seasoned developers looking for
a better way to do what they already can.
Bob
I was not replying to some question about what RR/LC's target market
might or might not be.
I was replying to
On 11/16/2010 06:53 PM, Bob Sneidar wrote:
Hey, back then 10 seconds was lightening quick for ANY application to launch! I
can remember waiting a minute or more for Photoshop.
Bob
I cannot get upset about a 10 second wait; as it takes about 4 minutes
for my Linux box to boot and
login, and
Sorry if I sounded snobby Richmond. Not my intent. I was just saying that I
don't think the point about telling too much about a developer environment to
people who already show aptitude for the skill is a valid one for the reason
stated.
Bob
On Nov 16, 2010, at 8:56 AM, Richmond wrote:
I'd be happy with that too.
Pete Haworth
On Nov 16, 2010, at 6:06 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
Kevin Miller wrote:
I'm leaning towards shortening the banner time to 5 seconds.
That would be a very good option, IMO.
When SuperCard introduced a splash screen delay they originally went
for 10
That is interesting. I use a Help Desk/Inventory system called Spiceworks, that
is free, with the caveat that the side bar has rotating ads. It's actually not
too bad. They are not invasive at all, no popups over content, and they are ads
specifically targeting the IT community. I've actually
On 13.11.10 at 17:14 +0100 Malte Brill apparently wrote:
Even though I can understand splash screens feel annoying, I can not
see this as a surprise, as this is clearly stated on the runrev.com
homepage:
Applications created with this license will include a splash screen
or watermark. The
On 15/11/2010 10:12, Robert Brenstein r...@robelko.com wrote:
Even though I can understand splash screens feel annoying, I can not
see this as a surprise, as this is clearly stated on the runrev.com
homepage:
Applications created with this license will include a splash screen
or watermark.
5 or 10, it's still very annoying, sorry.
Mark
On Nov 15, 2010, at 7:30 AM, Kevin Miller wrote:
On 15/11/2010 10:12, Robert Brenstein r...@robelko.com wrote:
Even though I can understand splash screens feel annoying, I can not
see this as a surprise, as this is clearly stated on the
Uh, no. There's a counter on the banner that counts down from 10.
Kevin Miller ke...@runrev.com wrote:
It's only set to be up for 5 seconds, not 10. Obviously that can be
influenced by the length of time it takes for your application to load,
if
it loads a lot on startup then it will take
On 15/11/2010 16:07, Pete Haworth p...@mollysrevenge.com wrote:
Uh, no. There's a counter on the banner that counts down from 10.
Ah, I thought you were talking about the iOS platform where there is only a
5 second banner. You're correct, the desktop platform does do this.
Please bear in mind
I understand Kevin. I just don't like the fact that a standalone
application I create from code I have written myself on my own
computer still has this delay in it when I run it on my own computer.
Pete Haworth
On Nov 15, 2010, at 9:32 AM, Kevin Miller wrote:
On 15/11/2010 16:07, Pete
I agree. It is very annoying. If this were free software, then it would be
alright, but one has paid 99 dollars for it! One should not be nagged by a paid
product, regardless of how low or high the price is.
--
Best regards,
Mark Schonewille
Economy-x-Talk Consulting and Software Engineering
I'm just going to pop in and point out that LiveCode isn't the only product
that does this with personal edition development tools. In fact, LiveCode is
actually awesome in that it will let you build a standalone. Most personal
use development software only allow you to run from within the IDE and
Hi Jeff,
That's exactly my (and probably also others') point: if the window would appear
only for 2 or 3 seconds, it can't be called a nagging window anymore and it
would be perfectly fine.
--
Best regards,
Mark Schonewille
Economy-x-Talk Consulting and Software Engineering
Homepage:
Le 15 nov. 2010 à 19:17, Jeff Massung a écrit :
I'm just going to pop in and point out that LiveCode isn't the only product
that does this with personal edition development tools. In fact, LiveCode is
actually awesome in that it will let you build a standalone. Most personal
use
On 15/11/2010 17:42, Peter Haworth p...@mollysrevenge.com wrote:
I understand Kevin. I just don't like the fact that a standalone
application I create from code I have written myself on my own
computer still has this delay in it when I run it on my own computer.
Ah, I see. But why build a
I do that all the time. The IDE is for development. Standalones for using your
stacks.
--
Best regards,
Mark Schonewille
Economy-x-Talk Consulting and Software Engineering
Homepage: http://economy-x-talk.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/xtalkprogrammer
KvK: 50277553
Follow Economy-x-Talk on
I have a totally separate set of files and databases for testing in
the IDE than I do for live running with the standalone.
Pete Haworth
On Nov 15, 2010, at 12:01 PM, Kevin Miller wrote:
On 15/11/2010 17:42, Peter Haworth p...@mollysrevenge.com wrote:
I understand Kevin. I just don't
On Nov 15, 2010, at 1:01 PM, Kevin Miller wrote:
On 15/11/2010 17:42, Peter Haworth p...@mollysrevenge.com wrote:
I understand Kevin. I just don't like the fact that a standalone
application I create from code I have written myself on my own
computer still has this delay in it when I run
On 15/11/2010 20:23, Jeffrey Massung mass...@gmail.com wrote:
Ah, I see. But why build a standalone for your own computer?
Sorry to be blunt, but isn't that a bit of a silly question? If the personal
edition is for personal use, and RunRev's position is why build a standalone
for your own
Folks,
It all boils down to two things:
(1) The personal edition has a splash screen that takes 10 seconds to vanish
and people are unhappy. This amount of time could be fixed to five or six
seconds to better suit the personal users. Even so, the personal edition
watermark/splash is not
If I want to install my application on my laptop as well as my desktop
all for my own use, you're suggesting I install a pirate copy of the
IDE on one of my computers (I think).
Pete Haworth
On Nov 15, 2010, at 12:33 PM, Kevin Miller wrote:
On 15/11/2010 20:23, Jeffrey Massung
On 15/11/2010 20:43, Peter Haworth p...@mollysrevenge.com wrote:
If I want to install my application on my laptop as well as my desktop
all for my own use, you're suggesting I install a pirate copy of the
IDE on one of my computers (I think).
No, we allow you to install the IDE on multiple
That's good to know. But there are still good reasons to keep the IDE
and standalone versions separate even for personal applications.
Pete Haworth
http://www.mollysrevenge.com
http://www.sonicbids.com/MollysRevenge
http://www.myspace.com/mollysrevengeband
On Nov 15, 2010, at
Having kept quiet and followed this thread all the way through I can
only say that I think RunRev's new (as in Livecode) marketing
model is not as good as their previous model.
How about a RevMedia type of thing to replace the $99 version,
adjusted in such a way that the resultant stacks cannot
But Andre,
the 157 secs for GraphicConverter doesn't happen once you've actually
*paid* for it; it's nagware to encourage you to buy it.
(How do I know this? Because I haven't paid for it since they had a
long-standing bug that annoyed me; prior to that, I paid for it and no
nagware
Comparing LC - a development environment - to a generic piece of software (like
GC or Notepad), is like comparing apples and oranges.
One splash/nag is there because you haven't paid and is encouraging/reminding
you that software isn't free and could you please support them by paying for
the
On 15/11/2010 20:37, Andre Garzia wrote:
(2) There is no way to distinguish your standalone running on your own
machine from your standalone running somewhere else. Any way to detect that
it is running on the same machine as the one used to develop the given
standalone will not be tamper proof.
Far of all these considerations, a simple question: how many times you
open your application a day?
Regards,
--
-Zryip TheSlug- wish you the best! 8)
http://www.aslugontheroad.co.cc
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
When I'm testing and fixing bugs - a lot!
Pete Haworth
On Nov 15, 2010, at 3:45 PM, zryip theSlug wrote:
Far of all these considerations, a simple question: how many times you
open your application a day?
Regards,
--
-Zryip TheSlug- wish you the best! 8)
http://www.aslugontheroad.co.cc
That would depend on the ability to prevent spoofing the presence of a licensed
copy of the IDE. It's that old circular argument about copy protection again.
At some point you have to give up because to make it really really inconvenient
for the pirate, you also have to do the same for the end
That's exactly what I would like to see. Unfortunately, it seems as
if Revolution has moved away from license keys so I doubt it will
happen.
Pete Haworth
On Nov 15, 2010, at 3:31 PM, Alex Tweedly wrote:
On 15/11/2010 20:37, Andre Garzia wrote:
(2) There is no way to distinguish your
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Peter Haworth p...@mollysrevenge.com wrote:
When I'm testing and fixing bugs - a lot!
Pete,
Oh in the debugging process. Ok I understand.
My advice could be: let the app opened, open the corresponding project
in the IDE as well and fixes in live the bugs you
What about creating a personal 'player' application that starts up
automatically and is just left running in the background. You could then
open your projects as you do in the IDE (e.g. drop them on the app icon,
retrieve them from a recent list or open them via a file selection dialog)
without
Yes, matter of fact I did just recently. Turned out to be a data
problem in my application which didn't manifest itself in the IDE but
caused big performance problems in the standalone. The only way I
could track it down was to keep trying things/writing messages to a
debug log,
I did this even though I'm currently using the commercial version. All it
is is a list that I can drop .rev or .livecode files on and that launches
them with a double click. Keeps the IDE out of the way, don't have to mess
with actually building standalones. And the bonus is, it only loads the
Alex-
You beat me to it. I was just about to suggest the same thing. I think
I'd still be in favor of cutting the splash screen down to 5 seconds,
though.
--
-Mark Wieder
mwie...@ahsoftware.net
___
use-revolution mailing list
Hello,
I totally agree.
Since I've seen that my educational license shows a nagging startup screen
every time an application is launched, I've decided that I won't use the new
version of LiveCode.
I've bought a legal copy of it and made some applications that are distributed
at not charges in
Even though I can understand splash screens feel annoying, I can not see this
as a surprise, as this is clearly stated on the runrev.com homepage:
Applications created with this license will include a splash screen or
watermark. The Server Deployment Pack comes with a limit on the number of
I agree it wasn't a surprise, but sometimes the reality of things
doesn't match expectations (there's no mention of the banner staying
on the screen for 10 seconds). At this point, I have no plans to
offer my application for commercial use but I ought to be able to run
a standalone on my
I opted to go for the personal version of LiveCode when the name
change happened. I understand that I can't distribute apps with this
version but I personally find it objectionable that I have to endure
the banner announcing that for 10 seconds every time I start a
standalone app - I'm
Pete, thanks for bringing this up. I just today installed LC and I, too, chose
the personal version, being unaware of its limitations. I believe that I could
have chosen another one if I had wanted and probably will try to change my
license if I can figure out a way to do that.
I've already
On 11/13/2010 06:52 AM, Peter Haworth wrote:
I opted to go for the personal version of LiveCode when the name
change happened. I understand that I can't distribute apps with this
version but I personally find it objectionable that I have to endure
the banner announcing that for 10 seconds
49 matches
Mail list logo
