MisterX wrote:
I think that if rev re-implemented userlevels they not only would make rev more hypercard like
I've long wished for enough time to make DeadCard: a pixel-for-pixel copy of HC's IDE for the Rev engine, with all the limitations: monchrome, force people to select only one object at a time, modal dialogs for property settings, no groups, only one fixed image layer, etc.
It would have two userlevels: "5" for authoring, and "infinity" which closes DeadCard and launches the Rev IDE.
The tagline for DeadCard would be: "Experience the living dead." ;)
(and prevent customers from modifying our guis as Bill said)
Some of us like having total control over our work environment.
but they would deliver a better economic pricing in a more satisfying way to their marketing avoiding the jaleousy of developpers paying 10X more for like capabilities (as Richard feels economically at risk)...
I think you're a few emails behind: <http://lists.runrev.com/pipermail/use-revolution/2005-December/072300.html>
On the other hand, as David Bovil proposed, making the MetaCard environment (no xp or osx skinning, no sql or enterprise tools) - would create a side economy that could boost the popularity of Rev inviting more serious professionals to their Pro-IDE studio or enterprise framework. What have they got to loose?
My upgrade fee, and the fee of anyone else who works with the MC IDE, which would be a lot if the engine came along with it for free.
OS X "skinning" (as well as native appearances for Classic and Win32) are part of the engine, so no matter which IDE you use that comes along for the ride.
As for SQL, the Rev libraries and the other parts that differentiate the product from the MC IDE, there's a great many of us who never use any of that while still cranking out a good many products every year.
There may be other ways RunRev could distinguish their pro product from their "inventive user" product, but relying on the spartan MC IDE would be at best a very difficult proposition: at once giving too much away, and in an environment that doesn't really appeal to anyone but pro-level scripters (and only a slender subset of those).
That said, I do believe that there is merit to a demo mode without a time limit, relying only on the built-in scriptLimits to pursuade. Sure, one might loose a few sales to the tiny handful of people who would be able to make something useful in only 10 lines per script, but I believe the value of putting a non-expiring copy of the engine on every hard drive far exceeds that minimal risk.
But no matter how much data I have about the efficacy of such a demo mode, Kevin tells me he has his own data which supports the current model. So rather than tell him and Mike Markula how to run their company, I simply run my own.
Until I can demonstrate the merits of my thinking in the success of my own company, anything less is just an opinion. There's no shortage of opinions, but demonstrated results are harder to come by....
-- Richard Gaskin Managing Editor, revJournal _______________________________________________________ Rev tips, tutorials and more: http://www.revJournal.com _______________________________________________ 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
