Bill, Richard, et al,
I won't touch the "don't need it debate" with a ten foot pole at this
point. Personally, I don't need it and would prefer to use any of the
other fine tools for browser-based content, HOWEVER, I see no problem
with anyone else salivating over a Rev plugin. Heck, I'd probably find
some use for it if there was one.
What I wanted to comment on is:
That is fine, but don't dismiss it on spurious "technical" grounds,
because
there really aren't any. (Or at least not any more than any other
comparable
plug-in.)
It's not spurious. There's history here. Roadster (Supercard web
plugin) did an excellent job of sucking resources and falling on it's
face with a company similarly equipped to RunRev (i.e., small). And
Roadster was a significantly smaller technical feat, because it only
ran on one platform.
Revolution is hugely intertwined with OS-specific calls, file system
access, multiple windows and a ton of other stuff that just doesn't fit
in a browser window.
I'm not saying it's impossible. Of course it's not. But raising
technical objections is quite sound here. I've written externals for
Revolution, compiled and modified Mozilla from the source, am familiar
with the browser plugin API -- and I can barely imagine trying to fit
Revolution in there. It's a much taller task than any plugin I know of.
There ARE technical reasons why you don't see entire RAD environments
running inside browsers. And no, Flash is not a RAD tool.
Anyway, perhaps we can agree - there are more than spurious technical
hurdles, but some of us think they would be worth it (even though I do
not).
- Brian
_______________________________________________
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
