On 2007-05-15, at 03:29, Brendan Murphy wrote:

>
>  From another message:
>> Sorry, I forgotten to show an example of what I mean.
>>
>> When I tested you "demo" first time I get an crash... Your
>> explanation was that was an bug in RB, and so it was.
>> Just that bug is fixed now, but it take more than one year to fix! So
>> just in that time when I tested first time, my rate would be zero.
>> http://www.realsoftware.com/feedback/viewreport.php?reportid=chqeepni
>
> Maybe I am just misunderstanding you, but this doesn't make sense.
> If that is the way you feel about the RB environment in general,
> then why were you looking at the FTC in the first place?

Yes that is what I feel in general about the RB environment.
My first look at FTC was NOT today.


> The
> RB environment is relatively stable and people
> are producing polished professional applications with it, so I
> don't see the connection.

I se some, every new release new bugs.


> Sure it has problems, but it is not a
> doomsday scenario and I have had to workaround a handful of bugs
> in the RB framework while creating the FTC (like the one you
> pointed out above). The RB environment is what it is, but this is
> not germane to the pricing of third party vendor tools in the
> context of this discussion.


Yes it have, many times it is RS that set the price tag for your  
products, you can't offer a 500 dollars EditField to students and  
newbies, and  you need more than 20-30 professional in the user group  
to sell what you need/wanted to sell.

How much you sell is depending on RS and the quality of REALbasic.  
That is real simple, if more professionals is using RB then you also  
sell more and to the price you wanted.




> Obviously you are on the NUG and using
> RB for a reason which we all can appreciate.

Yes, I am still here, and I am also a very active on BETA list, and  
have written a lot of bug-reports. And the only reason is, that I am  
stupid and still hope that REALbasic could be that RAD tool so many  
talk about. For a year ago I said something similar, then RS announce  
UB and Cocoa 2006. So then I also give it a new try, joined the beta  
list and working many hours to write reports. BUT where is the Cococa??

This year, I have only seen it would be worse and worse, not better  
and better. REALbasic 2007R2 is an example.

And I am still using RB and also doing in the future, using the  
latest version of RB, but just to have my RB developed project up to  
date. NOT write any new Projects.


> I agree that RS needs
> to squash these legacy bugs and if you look at their release
> notes, it shows that is what they are doing.

Yes they are fixing bugs, and also added new..


> The numbers don't
> lie.
>

No numbers don't lie, check the feed-back system.


> When the FTC is finished, you will be well pleased with the
> results and it will be worth the $450 price tag. So just hold on.
>

I am already impressed with YOUR results. Now I don't remember you  
license agreements, but I think $450 is just peanuts, IF REALbasic  
could be a solid tool. Today my feeling is that there is no control  
that not have any issues, also a simple "Message box" (a small window  
with one button)..


Sven E

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Reply via email to