I'd really like to know what the profile of a 'typical' MC user was/is. I strongly suspect that it would be different from that of a 'typical' RR user. We seem to be pretty good at feedback, judging by this list...
I think MC users were once described as "mature". If that means mature as in cheese (i.e. old and smelly) then it fits one user's profile at least. Living Fossils all of us, so you should feel at home, Graham. :)
One reason for lack of feedback on Xavier's additions to the MC development environment may have been a perceived lack of need by many MC users. Not that we don't see shortcomings in the IDE, but I imagine each user has his/her own ideas for what would constitute an improvement. And as modifying the environment or making additions is relatively easy, many have probably made their own "improvements". In my own case, many of these changes are made ad hoc. Typically, I'll make a utility stack for each project I work on which lets me poke and pry to my heart's content. These utlities won't win prizes in the interface stakes, but they get the job done. It's this kind of flexibility that endeared me to Metacard. (And probably turned others off.)
When Rev was first released, the IDE was the only thing that differentiated it from Metacard. Therefore the MC users who enjoyed MC's flexibility saw no reason to switch. Since then, RunRev have added some *heavy* features as externals (database connectivity and XML) giving solid reasons for us obstinate MC users to purchase Rev. And many have done so, I believe.
I guess too that Rev's feature-rich IDE gives higher expctations to users. You don't hear too many complaints from old-timers about the MC IDE in the same way you don't get complaints about the food served in the local greasy-spoon.
Now that RunRev has brought the engine and IDE under the same roof, I think there is less need for them to make the IDE the main selling point of the product, and they can afford to make the IDE more flexible. However, I wouldn't want them to rush to do that. Improvements and additions to the engine would be my choice of priorites. The continuing development of a solid and general purpose IDE would be next. And the opening up to alternative IDEs would come after that.
Cheers Dave (getting hungry from all these food analogies) _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
