I agree with Richmond. But then I'm someone who doesn't understand why RunRev has devoted resources to on-rev and the plugin when things like unicode and quicktime integration are still broken.
I think that the true strength (and uniqueness) of Rev lies in fat-client development. Of course the tiny size of the engine makes the plugin possible, and the fact that revTalk works without a GUI makes the serverside code possible. But those are both areas in which Rev is facing long-established competitors. But in this day of youtube and lynda.com, it seems a mistake to not have videos on the runrev website demonstrating the point Richmond is making. In fact, in the code comparison pdf, the Rev line of code is so small it is actually possible to fail to see it (I did) and to concentrate on the other languages instead. To someone who was not paying attention, they might think that the code samples in Java etc. are actually representative of programming in Rev. We might recognize the difference between revTalk and Java - a novice won't know. The thing that Runrev needs to remember is that the number of non-programmers vastly outweighs the number of professional programmers. It is question of reaching those people and letting them know what is possible. That is why the opinions of people on slashdot and the serverside are irrelevant. If people were expecting on-rev to be the new ruby on rails, they were setting themselves up for disappointment. Bernard _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
