Richmond Mathewson wrote:
For what its worth - my few thoughts:
1. Microsoft Windows has, for better or worse, successfully dominated the desktop market. 2. Linux, being a diffuse, amorphous "thing" (unlike a tightly centred organisation like Microsoft) has not pumped big bucks into an advertising campaign to put some of the myths promoted by Microsoft in perspective. 3. People are suspicious of a free lunch. 4. Runtime Revolution for Linux is not up to scratch. But why would a commercial organisation bother to invest vast amounts of effort in developing something for an operating system that is largely used by "wierdos" with no financial clout? The answer to this is rather like the answer I recieved when I queried a version of Runtime Revolution for RISC OS - nothing at all, because anybody with a few more business-like braincells than me would have realised that nobody was going to buy it. My feeling about this is that if you want to develop childish language teaching tools for Linux (which is what I do) then RR is absolutely super - and the Novell 2.2.1 version suffices. But if you want to develop the sort of more sophisticated stuff that other people are developing with RR for Mac and Windows on Linux you should use a different RAD, or, perish the thought, an "old-fashioned" computer language. ----------------------------------------------------- Your thoughts are appreciated. Thanks for that. The only problem about terminating one's love-affair with Rev/Linux, though, is the fact that the other RAD tools are not yet up to scratch for the production of normal commercial level products either. Very frustrating! However, Rebol, Ruby and Gambas among others are making great strides. As usual, we will have to WAIT and see! Regards, Bob Warren _______________________________________________ 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
