Re: Script limit - clarify please

[RCS]

What exactly does all of this mean anyway? I cannot distinguish between
rumor and fact:

- Scott promises the MetaCard IDE will always work with the Revolution
engine.
Is this his 'wish' or is this in writing somewhere.

- Revolution promises that the Revolution engine will work with the MetaCard
IDE.
I see no time frame here. My MetaCard engine could be broken with the next
update to Windows or OSX...maybe next week?

- Scott promises that the MetaCard IDE is 'open source'.
Wasn't it always?

- Scott Raney works 'for' Revolution.
I doubt that.

- Revolution takes orders from Scott.
I doubt that too.


This is what I have interpereted from all of this (and my general 'gut'
feeling):

The MetaCard IDE is open source (a lot of good that does for me...really).
The MetaCard IDE depends on several features that Revolution is taking out
(or deciding to).
Revolution will NOT maintain the MetaCard engine (i.e. to be compatible with
the Revolution changes).
Revolution will NOT update the MetaCard engine with bug fixes, even for
current license holders.
There is NO upgrade path for current MetaCard users (current license).
Scott Raney is on a beach somewhere...never to be heard from again.

Am I close?

RCS

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: MC & OpenGL (update)

[jbv]

>
>
> I am excited about your work.

Thank you so much.After the lack of response to my post from 2 weeks ago,
I thought everyone had lost interest in it...

> It would extra cool if we could
> import 3d objects in from modeling apps as well.
>

I didn't include that option in the demo, but it's one
of the easiest thing to do I guess most 3D modelers
export to openGL format. And if they don't, there are
more than enough translators available on the net.
Format translation is also an option that could be
implemented...
I wasn't planing to create a 3D modeler with MC
anyway.
But I strongly believe that a set of (scriptable) tools to
process / modify 3D data (extrude, stretch...) could be
a great feature, because interactive 3D doesn't only
mean moving & rotating objects...

JB


___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Script Limits

[José L. Rodríguez Illera]

El  8/8/2003 15:22, jbv  escribió:

> And BTW again, did anyone contact Kevin privately about this
> script limit thing, as suggested in his original message ?
> And did anyone get an answer ?
> I'm not so interested in the content of the answer, but much more in
> knowing if any answer has been received...
> 
> JB

I did it the same day he posted, but no answer until this moment. Seems that
'old' days when you got an answer in hours are gone.

Jose L. Rodriguez

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Shifted field text - what to do?

[Howard Bornstein]

>When I tab into the field, the text is highlighted, but pushed off
>to the left. For example, a field that says "United States" in it, but
>unselected shows "United S" would end up showing "d States" when it was
>highlighted. When you tab out of the field, it *leaves* it that way.

I can't figure out why the text is hilighted when you tab into the field. 
I set up a little test and it doesn't do this. Are you adding something 
to make this happen?

Depending on whether you are or not the following may or may not be 
helpful:

on openfield
  select char 0 of me
end openfield

Try this in the field that's giving you problems.

Regards,

Howard Bornstein

D E S I G N  E Q
www.designeq.com
___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

RE: SoCal RevDevCon: August 26

[Chipp Walters]

Lemme know when ya'll be in Austin :-)!!!

Wish I could be there :-(

-Chipp

> The next Southern California RevDevCon will be on Tuesday, August
> 26, at 7pm
> here at the Fourth World Embassy in downtown Los Angeles.
>
> These RevDevCons are small informal gatherings of Revolution and MetaCard
> developers in which we talk code, solve problems, and enjoy the rare treat
> of seeing listees in person.
>
> The agenda for the meeting:
>
> 7:00 - 7:30:  Introductions, gab about code.
>
> 7:30 - 8:30:  We'll walk 50 yards to the restaurant in this
>   complex, Barabara's (which has an excellent
>   wine list) for dinner and more gabbing.
>
> 8:30 - ?: We return to the Embassy where Geoff Canyon will
>   give a presentation about some cool new stuff
>   he's been working on, after which we'll gab some
>   more and eventually call it a night.
>
> If you'd like to attend just show up.  If you need directions drop me an
> email and I'll send 'em to you.  At the moment I know Ken Ray
> will be there,
> as well as Geoff and myself of course.  With any luck we'll have at least
> our half-dozen regulars and hopefully a few newcomers as well.
>
> See ya' then
>
> --
>  Richard Gaskin
>  Fourth World Media Corporation
>  Software Design and Development for Mac, Windows, Linux, and the Web
>  
>  [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.FourthWorld.com
>  Tel: 323-225-3717AIM: FourthWorldInc   Fax: 323-225-0716
>
> ___
> metacard mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
>


___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Script Limits

[Mark Talluto]

On Wednesday, August 6, 2003, at 08:50 AM, Ken Ray wrote:

I would still like to know exactly what the new changes will affect,
in case it is something that my current projects use.
Shari,

What it means is that any of your projects that use the phrase "set the
script of ..." will fail. You used to be able to do this, but the
scripts had to be less than 10 lines. With the new changes, you won't 
be
able to do it at all.


Is this going to affect licensed copies?

Best regards,
Mark Talluto
http://www.canelasoftware.com
___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Script Limits

[Mark Talluto]

On Thursday, August 7, 2003, at 02:42 AM, jbv wrote:

I know that this limitation will cause of to rewrite sections some of
my existing products.


I remember in HC and OMO using scripts of controls to hold
data. In case scripts of controls in MC are used for the same
purpose (holding data, and not executable code), could custom
props be a nice workaround ? Just asking, as I've never used
custom props much...

You bring up a point I did not think of till now.  Saving small 
snippets of data in a script is the only way to save encrypted data in 
a stack.  Data in a custom property can be viewed.  I know there are 
other ways to encrypt data, but this is a nice simple way.

In my case, I usually am updating code to controls with the set the 
script of   There is no other way to use the same control with new 
code.  You will have to literally replace the entire old control with a 
new one that is stored on an "update" card.  I do this now when the 
control that needs to be replaced has more than 10 lines of code 
anyways.  It goes something like this:

1.  Version 1 "standalone" of a product makes a particular document.
2.  You find bugs or better ways of doing something.  So you update the 
script in those controls.  You have a replica of each of those controls 
that get updated in the new standalone on an "update" card that the 
user never sees.
3.  User downloads version 1.1 of standalone.  Opens up their save doc 
in new version and the standalone recognizes that they have a version 1 
doc.  It updates their doc by replacing all the old controls with the 
updated versions from the new standalone.

Losing the set the script of   will take away the ability to easily 
update a card & stack script.

Best regards,
Mark Talluto
http://www.canelasoftware.com
___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: MC & OpenGL (update)

[jbv]

Hi again,

I'm afraid there's a little confusion in the word "implementation".
The only purpose of the demo I put online was to show that
realtime communication between MC and openGL was possible,
as well as displaying the rendered image in an MC img control.

Of course the final purpose is to have everything scriptable,
including 3D objects, textures they use and how they interact...

My question concerned mainly : HOW to do that in MetaTalk ?
A large set of functions and properties should be added to the
the language of course, but HOW should it be structured ?
As long as there's only a couple of textured spheres or cubes
floating around, that's not too complicated...
But what about a particule system made of metaballs bouncing
around according to a complex math function (for instance) ?

I'm presently working on a 3D sound processing app that would
display partials & spectrum of sounds in 3D (from Csound files),
and allow users to manipulate these data (first with the mouse and
various tools, and in the end with a data glove) like clay, and then
re-synthesise the sound.
So at every step of this work I try to figure out what would be the
best (read: more ergonomic / intuitive / productive) way to script it
in MT.
And sadly, it appears that coding it in C as an external with simple
calls from a MC scripts remains the most powerful & flexible way
to do... By powerful I mean : giving access to all openGL features.

>
>
> My suggestions would include a good look at Director and the 3D Lingo
> terminology and then to take the core of this and add something
> "special".

I had a look at 3D Lingo (I dropped Director around version 4, andit made
me feel strange to go back to this crappy sprite stuff)...
Please don't take it personal, but it's the typical example of what
I'd like to avoid...

>
>
> It's a vague suggestion, and I'm not up fully on the technical side -
> but the frustration I had then was the lack of ability to dynamically
> create a world. So I'd like to ba able to have an interface which would
> allow me to stream / add to / delete from / morph the OpenGL content -
> not just move around and interact with precreated environments.

This is closer to what I had in mind...

> Bringing up the open source theme again - the most exciting thing by far
> in the 3D realm from my point of view would be to take the Open Source
> code from the largest online 3D community - Blender and be able to use
> both the authoring tools and real-time engine to create and control 3D
> objects within the MC environment.

is Blender cross-platform ?

>
>
> It uses Python at the moment as a scripting language, and you could look
> at how this is implemented. From my view at the time it would make a
> more valuable product to use MC as a backend scripting language for a 3D
> front end than to play 3D windows within an MC front end?
>

Any useful link for that ?

Thanks,
JB


___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: tip - group margins

[Shari]

I've been making a little image editing stack and ran across 
something interesting.

I was using a group to display a crop rectangle, and kept finding 
that although I set the rect of the group to the rect of the image 
(when first showing the crop box), when I displayed the rects of 
both objects they were different by 4 pixels (even though appearing 
to be identical on screen).

The key is to remember that objects like groups have margins which 
are automatically applied, therefore in my situation I needed to do 
the following:

set the margins of group "crop" to 0

~ Rodney
The margins, or the borderWidth?

Shari C
Gypsy King Software
--
--Shareware Games for the Mac--
http://www.gypsyware.com
___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Script Limits vs dynamic programming

[Dar Scott]

On Thursday, August 7, 2003, at 04:31 PM, Dr. John R. Vokey wrote:

Thus, rather being an essential part of metacard/RR, this dynamism 
becomes a feature *only* licensed users (developers?) can use, but 
can't retain in the stacks they produce.  By all means, strip it out 
of standalones if need be, but leave it as an essential feature of 
stacks.
I'm not sure I'm following this.

To be used, a stack needs to be either in a standalone, used by a 
standalone, run by an engine or used in a development environment.  In 
the past there was the free version that--like the standalone--was 
unlicensed.  It could "run" stacks but in doing so was limited in "set 
the script of ..." capability to 10 "lines".

So, the limit is not in the stack but in the environment and in the 
intended use of the stack.  In some sense (and perhaps in a real sense) 
the engine is just a naked standalone.  It is the player that is 
handicapped to "license or don't set the script".

Or am I completely missing your point?

Dar Scott

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Script Limits

[jbv]

> I know that this limitation will cause of to rewrite sections some of
> my existing products.



I remember in HC and OMO using scripts of controls to hold
data. In case scripts of controls in MC are used for the same
purpose (holding data, and not executable code), could custom
props be a nice workaround ? Just asking, as I've never used
custom props much...

JB


___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Script Limits

[Richard Gaskin]

> Richard, what you suggest are all workabouts.

But the central thing that got lost in this discussion is that using script
space as data storage space is itself a workaround.  This is made even more
ironic by the history of this practice:  today it's desired in order to
provide encryption, but the habit was started with HyperCard and OMO which
provide no encryption for scripts or data at all; it started only because
these products had no other place to store data bound to an object.

That using script space as data storage works (and with Kevin's assurances
will continue to work) is a good thing.  But even better would be to
approach the root issue:

Could the engine be changed to prevent reading data
from custom props without a password?

Dar has provided a way to account for that in script, but it might be even
more secure to provide it in the engine.

Anyone care to put that enhancement request into Bugzilla?


> And the fact that this groups is 100% against the change does
> not mean it will not go into effect.

But nor does it mean it will, as we've seen from Kevin's post.

I don't have a crystal ball on these things, just a little management
experience in four industries over two decades:  pissing off your customers
is rarely a smart move.

Both Scott and Kevin are very smart people, so it's unlikely they would ever
implement a change that garners such a reaction from people who will
otherwise keep upgrading without question in perpetuity.

My $500 every year gets me access to what is arguably the best VM in the
business and Scott's hands-down-best-in-the-industry support.  While it's
hard to imagine anyone matching Scott's performance in support, as long as
the support is at least good my $500 is easy to get, year after year, no
fuss no muss.  I don't care about the IDE, I don't care about "market
positioning"; I only care about what my end-users experience, the engine,
which makes my $500 far more profitable than the cost to acquire and support
six new $79 licenses every year (and having dealt with Scott you learn to
submit only disciplined bug reports, usually with isolated examples of the
problem, something newcomers may not yet appreciate the importance of or
have the experience to do).

This is true for most of us MetaCard developers, and it would take an
unusually silly person to pass that up.  I see no evidence that Kevin or
Scott would do anything to disrupt that steady, high-ROI cash flow, as
Kevin's wise judgement on this script limits issue demonstrates.

-- 
 Richard Gaskin 
 Fourth World Media Corporation
 Developer of WebMerge: Publish any database on any Web site
 ___
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.FourthWorld.com
 Tel: 323-225-3717   AIM: FourthWorldInc

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Launching a local file in the default browser #3

[sims]

At 9:45 +0200 8/9/03, sims wrote:
If I use:

set this_item to ¬
	alias "Macintosh HD:Users:jimsims:Pictures:iPhoto 
Library:2002:10:29:taufeg.jpg"
tell application "Internet Explorer"
	open this_item
end tell

A file which I created with ColorIt or PhotoShop will launch with 
the indicated browser.
I suspect that the alias has some magical powers.

Is that what you are looking for?
NOTE   -   I never actually create an alias nor does applescript 
create an alias (as far as
I can tell) but it uses it as some sort of reference to enable the launch.
atb

sims

--
---
   http://EZPZapps.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Software - Internet Development - Consulting
___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Launching a local file in the default browser

[Brian Yennie]

Er... I guess I should probably get some sleep: my solution has this 
problem also for files that don't normally open in a browser.

If there's not a better way, you could work around this by creating a 
dummy HTML file that just redirects the browser to the correct file. 
That'll get you in the right app, *then* open the file.

There must be a better way buried somewhere in AppleScript...

Brian

Same here:  it launches the local file, but in the application that 
matches
the file's creator code and not the default browser. :(
___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: mcnews.rev

[J. Landman Gay]

On 8/11/03 5:32 PM, Scott Rossi wrote:

Recently, "Alain Farmer"  wrote:


go stack url
"http://www.tactilemedia.com/download/mcnews.rev";


I ran the stack with MetaCard 2.5. I was glad to
see that there were no Rev-only features to crash the party.


On my end, I continue to work in MC and save in Rev.  The engines are
identical, but contrary to what others have posted on the lists, I believe
an MC stack must be saved from within Rev to make it "Rev-compatible".  I
have often open MC stacks in Rev only to find they cannot be selected or
moved, and others have noted similar problems with my earlier stacks (I'm
thinking this might be due to some windowShape issue but haven't had time to
track it down).  To date, opening an MC-built stack within Rev and saving
has worked consistently for me.
I've seen the same thing often, sometimes with the native stacks that 
ship with Rev. It has to do with the file type and creator codes in OS 
X, but I haven't been able to quite pin it down. Sometimes reassigning 
the codes with a third-party utility makes the stacks visible in the Rev 
"open file" dialog, but occasionally even that doesn't work. I'm not 
sure it's entirely a Rev thing; I'm more inclined to blame the Finder.

--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Script Limits vs dynamic programming

[Dr. John R. Vokey]

On Thursday, August 7, 2003 Jeanne A. E. DeVoto wrote:

I don't understand what you mean by this. Your extensible stacks are 
your
products. ("Product" does not mean "commercial product", nor is it
restricted to standalone applications.) It sounds from your description
like your products would in fact impact the products you make, so my
suggestion of discussing this with Kevin is still my advice.

This is missing the point.  The principle advantage of metacard/RR is 
that it provides for dynamic programming *and* it does so in a 
cross-platform way.  I have and use c, c++ compilers, Futurebasic, 
RealBasic, and so on, but for different purposes.  None of these other 
programming environments is *dynamic*.  Scott Raney's important 
statement that metacard is written in metacard was not to make the 
point that, as with c or Basic or Fortran compilers one could write a 
c, or Basic or Fortran compiler with it, but rather that the system is 
bootstrapped. The possibility of producing ``standalones'' in hypercard 
and metacard  has unfortunately helped disguise this fact to the point 
where many (Shari C is a fine example, here, and more power to her) 
think of metacard/RR as just another IDE with fine cross-platform 
capabilities.  That it no doubt is, but that's not what makes it either 
unique or important: it is the possibility for dynamic programming that 
the engine provides, as with hypercard.  Limiting script length and 
``do'' to non-licensed RR users means that *only* licensed RR users of 
the stacks I produce can can partake of the dynamic nature.  Thus, 
rather being an essential part of metacard/RR, this dynamism becomes a 
feature *only* licensed users (developers?) can use, but can't retain 
in the stacks they produce.  By all means, strip it out of standalones 
if need be, but leave it as an essential feature of stacks.

For those who remember them, think of the completely different 
experience one has programming in and using TILs (threaded 
interpretative languages) such as APL, and forth: as with hypercard, 
programming is not distinct from using; they are seamlessly integrated. 
 *That* is what we will be losing by these limits.  For those who use 
metacard/RR to produce applications without those dynamic capabilities, 
I can understand why they don't feel these limits amount to much.  But 
for some, at least me, it is the dynamism that is my whole reason for 
using metacard, recommending it to students, and so on.

John R. Vokey

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Script Limits

[Kevin Miller]

On 8/8/03 2:43 pm, Robert Brenstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>> And BTW again, did anyone contact Kevin privately about this
>> script limit thing, as suggested in his original message ?
>> And did anyone get an answer ?
> 
> I did. No answer. But I did not list any specific product that is
> immediately impacted.

My current personal response time is averaging around 10 days.  Please be
patient.  And in case anyone is confused, I do not provide technical support
- that queue is only on my personal mail box.  Our technical support is
running smoothly at the moment with no unexpected delays.

Kevin

Kevin Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
Runtime Revolution Limited: Software at the Speed of Thought
Tel: +44 (0) 870 747 1165.  Fax: +44 (0)1639 830 707.

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: [OT] Thumbs up!

[FlexibleLearning]

Well done, Shari! Excellent news and well deserved. The learning curve may be steep, but the views when you get there are marvellous.

/H

_
Hugh Senior
The Flexible Learning Company
Consultant Programming & Software Solutions
Fax/Voice: +44 (0)1483.27 87 27
Email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: www.flexibleLearning.com

Kiddy Paint - Digital Camera's and Twain drivers.

[David Bovill]

I am making a sound and music machine for my daughter - unfortunately I
can't find the work i did a couple of years back on this and am running
out of time (it's a birthday present)- so am looking for any MC/Rev bits
and pieces that I can use to cobble this together.

The bits:

1) Pretty kid friendly painting package

2) MP3 juke box

Must be some bits out there?

3) Digital camera interface

I'll be connecting a digital camera that uses TWAIN drivers on the PC to
connect. At the moment I just launch a painting package that "can"
acquire the images from the camera - but this is a confusing interface.I
want it all within MC. So far can't find any code to do this (well not
under $80 at least).

Thanks


___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Script Limits and solid IDE evolution!

[jbv]

I personally dont see an economic
reason why this should be limited. I do see reasons to abandon MC/RR more
and more...
Sad but true...


I dont mind evolution of products,
but Im against limiting of features while essential things like a good
Script Editors or debugger are still as arcane as an sword against an automatic
rifle which put a major brake on your productivity are still not being
improved as they should.
Same remark for antialiased vector graphics which are non-existent in MC/RR,and
that would make of MC a good competitor to Flash...


Without competition most of the
world would be made of communist or socialists and using microsoft DOS.
Well, things aren't so straightforward... Please remember that USSR was
thefirst country to put a spaceship in orbit, to have robots landing on
Mars...
And BTW DOS wasn't invented by K. Marx... But this is getting OT...

The choir : "Wow! there's a communist on this list..."


More features, more freedom =
more users, more clients, more applications, more power to the developper
= MORE competitive IDE = more users = less competition!
 


Well, these days too often competition leads to standardization &
monotony...

At least we can agree on the following :
more features + more power to the developper = less users tempted to
switch
to another IDE...

JB

Re: SoCal RevDevCon: August 26

[Richard Gaskin]

Chipp Walters wrote:

> Lemme know when ya'll be in Austin :-)!!!
> 
> Wish I could be there :-(

Maybe we should hook up videoconferencing some time and have a distributed
worldwide RevDevCon

-- 
 Richard Gaskin 
 Fourth World Media Corporation
 Developer of WebMerge: Publish any database on any Web site
 ___
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.FourthWorld.com
 Tel: 323-225-3717   AIM: FourthWorldInc

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Script Limits

[Robert Brenstein]

Mark Talluto wrote:

 In my case, I usually am updating code to controls with the set the
 script of   There is no other way to use the same control with new
 code.
While I agree that the proposed change to script limits is likely more of a
problem in itself than a solution, there is at lease one other alternative
for your scenario.
Rather than writing self-modifying code you could set a property in the
object and handle the various behaviors in a backscript using a switch
block:
  on MySpecialBehavior
   switch the uBehaviorClass of the target
case "Something"
  doSomnething
  break
case "SomethingElse"
  doSomethingElse
  break
   end switch
  end MySpecialBehavior
The overhead of the switch block is a fraction of a millisecond and allows
you to centralize your code into a common library.  This may simplify
debugging, and likely simplify maintenance as well should you ever need to
alter the behavior.
--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Media Corporation
 Developer of WebMerge: Publish any database on any Web site
That is a nice approach if switching scripts was to support multiple 
functionality. However, it will not work if the 'set script' is used 
to update a distributed stack to a new version or fix a bug without 
having to replace the whole stack.

Robert
___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: MC & OpenGL (update)

[Mark Talluto]

On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 13:05, jbv wrote:
But my main question regarding the implementation of
openGL in MC was : how end users would like to access
3D properties and functions from within MetaTalk scripts...
Anyone who has some experience with openGL coding
in C/C++ or Java knows that using openGL is slightly more
complex than setting a few QT properties for instance...

I am excited about your work.  I do not have any coding experience with 
open/gl though.  I agree with David that using current terminology that 
Director uses would be a good start.  It would extra cool if we could 
import 3d objects in from modeling apps as well.

Best regards,
Mark Talluto
http://www.canelasoftware.com
___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Script Limits

[Jeanne A. E. DeVoto]

At 1:33PM -0700 8/6/03, Mark Talluto wrote:
>I know that this limitation will cause of to rewrite sections some of
>my existing products.  I don't see why this limitation must be imposed.

I'd urge people to drop a line to Kevin if this change would impact their
products, describing how you use the capability. I can't speak for Kevin
but I know he listens carefully to concerns of current customers when
changes are being considered.

--
Jeanne A. E. DeVoto ~ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Runtime Revolution Limited - Software at the Speed of Thought
http://www.runrev.com/


___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

RE: SoCal RevDevCon: August 26

[Chipp Walters]

Good idea.. I can round up Jerry Daniels and Mark Leutzelshwaub, and a
webcam. Pop a couple bottle caps with some chips -- and we'll have an online
Fiesta:-)

c


> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Richard Gaskin
> Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 4:11 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: SoCal RevDevCon: August 26
>
>
> Chipp Walters wrote:
>
> > Lemme know when ya'll be in Austin :-)!!!
> >
> > Wish I could be there :-(
>
> Maybe we should hook up videoconferencing some time and have a distributed
> worldwide RevDevCon
>
> --
>  Richard Gaskin
>  Fourth World Media Corporation
>  Developer of WebMerge: Publish any database on any Web site
>  ___
>  [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.FourthWorld.com
>  Tel: 323-225-3717   AIM: FourthWorldInc
>
> ___
> metacard mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
>

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Script Limits and solid IDE evolution!

[Richard Gaskin]

Mark Talluto wrote:

> On Thursday, August 7, 2003, at 06:30 AM, Robert Brenstein wrote:
> 
>> Since using 'do' one can relatively easily work around the 'set script
>> to' restriction (performance issues aside), we can only expect further
>> elimination of 'do' in standalones (do limit set to 0) in a near
>> future. It would be a logical followup to fully close that loophole.
>> This line of product development really scares me, particularly as it
>> is a rather expensive product (I paid for full MC license plus
>> renewal) comparing to either RB or CWP. I have my doubts about cutting
>> off multiplatform features from cheaper licenses but I see this as Rev
>> trying to maximize their income. I have no problems if the demo is
>> restricted in terms of dynamic scripting. But the engine embedded when
>> producing a standalone from a licensed environment could retain
>> current limits. Since the limits are clearly kept as parameters, there
>> must be ways to control them accordingly, including setting arbitrary
>> values for specific projects (as I suggested). I had big and long-term
>> plans for a number of MC-based projects, but the recent developments
>> really make me wonder whether I bet on the right horse.
> 
> Roger all that!  Cripple the demo version.  Keep things the way they
> are for paid versions of Rev.

The script limits do not come into play so long as there is a licenced Home
stack.

-- 
 Richard Gaskin 
 Fourth World Media Corporation
 Developer of WebMerge: Publish any database on any Web site
 ___
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.FourthWorld.com
 Tel: 323-225-3717   AIM: FourthWorldInc

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

RE: Announcing the new Open Source IDE (you just can't code withit)!

[MisterX]

2 things come to mind...

(Absolutely no offense intended to anyone, just MOHO)
(in hopes of more and better freer open software IDE)

1 - more features surely,
2 - more quality definitely

And that means speed improvements too.
Can the liberty of a program be called a quality?

Maybe this feature of economics will stop RR from continuing...
They are in they right of course! Im just hoping they consider
what the "market" reaction might be...

The more restrictions a programmer puts into a program,
the more maintenance will be required, which is time away from good features
the more hackers will hack it and break it
the Higher the price
the lesser demand
the less usefull applications will come out of it
the higher the price

High margins are nice but they keep more customers away.

In my IT Economics knowledge base it says
information has 4 economic variables
- Timeliness
- Certainty
- Frequency
- Value

as i see it, RR and MC...

MC is more timely - faster, keeps projects simple,
RR is deeper into using more of the many MC features "forgotten" in the MC
GUI
MC is more certain (because it's the core of RR too)
   Nowaday, it depends if the main engine being developped
   is RR or MC (later ported to the build of the other at
   the expense of time put on the primary engine...)
MC was more frequently available, now I bet it's RR's turn
RR is a good value in certainty (features, quality)


Im sure RR is much more polished than MC GUI wise but
it also imposes limits. Im learning Notes at work and I cant
tell you how HORRIBLE is it... But Notes has lots of power.

It's also more expensive... Im going to find out soon... ;)

My personal point of view is that we are battling over words
and features that dont even come in to play with products
from .

I applaud RR and am very jealous... ;) I love competition.
But I know that my IDE GUI is better IMOHO (I wish I had as
much time to put into it ;).

But for this reason I would rather keep MC.

Am I afraid of RR preventing me to develop this elsewhere?

I applaud them more though for making what MetaCard corp
could have done. Scott liked the shortcut, more power to
him! Im sure his arrangement isn't bad at all!

Im sure with a small investment Scott could have pulled a
winner app with just the same simple GUI. Scott's work is
also a jewel. It certainly needs lots of work but it's on
par with most other applications. I've seen some awesome
java and flash tools and as usual they are tops in quality.

What is however annoying is trying to translate programs
across these languages. Here there is a clear advantage to
c++, java and php. Im learning c++ porting some neural
networks and it's logic is awesome... new something...

And templates in MC are what those are! So with RR's plug-ins
and MC's many new features to come... It's only time and user
demand that lacks to build the many features needed to compare
MC to Flash, Java, Notes, etc...

I think MC or RR beat the crap out of java! but...
Where is java today compared to MC or RR?

More freedom in the demo IDE could build a new "market"...

You can still find more HC stacks than MC stacks in the net.

Got to go, got a new PHPNuke version to try...

--
Go WILD at http://monsieurX.com

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Launching a local file in the default browser

[Richard Gaskin]

Yep, the same ol' question:  how do I launch a local file in the default
browser on Mac OS X?

And for future reference:  Where is the definitive answer archived?

TIA -

-- 
 Richard Gaskin 
 Fourth World Media Corporation
 Developer of WebMerge: Publish any database on any Web site
 ___
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.FourthWorld.com
 Tel: 323-225-3717   AIM: FourthWorldInc

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Script Limits and solid IDE evolution!

[Klaus Major]

Hi David,

On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 13:13, Klaus Major wrote:
I still think the free StarterKit was the best thing ever.
I really could convince some of my customers to install the MC version 
for their
OS, after explaining that there would not be thousands of DLLs on their 
HD after
installation, and that it would be nothing more than a MC-Player (sic!) 
;-),
so i could deliver some of my projects as stacks...

...which is a fine thing, filesize-wise :-)

In the future i would have to spend some extra time to create some kind 
of
MC-Player from scratch. OK, its doable, but should be avoidable...

One could play with it, get used to the app and even build useful
things :-)
...and 30 (contiguous?) days may be not enough, even with no script
limits...
30 days is not enough for a significant market sector (students) to
decide they can build a business around creating Rev built products to
justify the licence fee.
Exactly!

P.S.
I confess i build a (not too) commercial CD-ROM with the starterkit
and bought my first MC license with the salary for that :-)
(Simple Image and video presentation, but what the egg...)
My guess is that it took you longer than 3 months to learn, build test
and release this product?
Hmm, i still learn something new in MC every day (and especially in RR 
;-),
but having a HC/SC background i could finish that CD in about 2 months,
including image editing in Photoshop (which i really love :-)...

It wasn't really more than something like "go next cd" etc...,
but someone had to do it ;-)
But yes, the learning curve IS very steep, but only because MC/RR is 
s powerful! :-)

Maybe that's what they are afraid of in scotland? ;-)
Easy - I'm half Scottish :)
Ooops, half apologizes then :-D

Regards

Klaus Major
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.major-k.de
___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Script Limits

[Mark Talluto]

On Wednesday, August 6, 2003, at 05:59 PM, Jeanne A. E. DeVoto wrote:

At 1:33PM -0700 8/6/03, Mark Talluto wrote:
I know that this limitation will cause of to rewrite sections some of
my existing products.  I don't see why this limitation must be 
imposed.
I'd urge people to drop a line to Kevin if this change would impact 
their
products, describing how you use the capability. I can't speak for 
Kevin
but I know he listens carefully to concerns of current customers when
changes are being considered.


Hi Jeanne,

I dropped him a line earlier today.  I am taking advantage of his 
invitation to discuss this.  Talking about his openly may be helpful.  
We can figure out ways to live without this in the event this is going 
to happen.

Best regards,
Mark Talluto
http://www.canelasoftware.com
___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Script Limits and the Open Sourcing IDE

[David Bovill]

On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 06:23, Mark Talluto wrote:
> >
> Hi Jeanne,
> 
> I dropped him a line earlier today.  I am taking advantage of his 
> invitation to discuss this.  Talking about his openly may be helpful.  
> We can figure out ways to live without this in the event this is going 
> to happen.
> 
> Best regards,
> Mark Talluto

OK - I agree a little open talk on this might help. I too have sent
Kevin an detailed email on this point because dropping this feature
pretty well destroys a project that I have invested several months work
into.

The product was an open source educational product - designed to teach
internet programming. Giving "students" the opportunity to programme 10
lines of code was pretty vital to the product and the marketing. 

As there would have been a free downloadable version it would have
introduced a lot of new people to the benefits of coding in
Metatalk/TranScript.



> I know that this limitation will cause of to rewrite sections some of 
> my existing products.  I don't see why this limitation must be imposed. 

> Not sure if I am explaining this in enough detail...but let me 
> stress that losing this feature will be a big bummer.
> 


To be fair I think RunRev had good reasons to do this given before the
acquisition (see below)...

> We all agreed not to create a competing product for MC and Rev when we
> bought the software.  It is in the EUA.  
> 

Not quite true. MC allowed you to create whatever IDE you liked. RunRev
took advantage of this, but there was always the option of producing
other types of IDE that could have competed with RunRev using MC.

Now with control over the engine and future licencing I don't see the
need to be so concerned.

Here is the rub - for me the fact that Scott got agreement to open
source the existing MC front end (which is a great opportunity for the
community) is effectively neutralised by removing the 10 line script
limit:

What use is an open source IDE for Revolution if those users
most attracted to it - students and open source programmers
preffering a minimal interface for coding - can't use it to do
even basic coding?


I'd urge anyone interested in retaining and developing a:


1) Minimal MC type front end to Revolution

2) An open source strategy for metatalk / revolution code libraries

3) Extending interest in metatalk / transcript to open source
developers and students.

4) Or just retaining the elegant ability to update the scripts of
simple objects in their distributions.


...to see if we can't collectively brainstorm to develop a viable open
source strategy for the MC front end. 

My feeling is that there is a small but highly motivated team of long
term MC coders, who would be interested in contributing. The revolution
(pun intented) can only benefit by harnessing these skills and extending
them out to the wider open source community.

But there is no point any of us doing this without the active support of
Kevin/Scott and the team. My view is that removing the 10 line script
limit undermines rather than supports this.Working together I think we
can thrash out a deal that protects RunRev's business model, while
retaining a viable open source strategy.





___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Script Limits and solid IDE evolution!

[Klaus Major]

Hi all,

On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 11:50, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

First, without the 10 line script limit, I would be using java or VBS
and would have never made a test product to justify buying MC let
alone renew the license.
This proves that the 10 line script limit is a minimum for anyone who
wants to try MC. Of course, a one month limit is as nice if not better
without the 10 line limit.
But that wasn't available then...
Roughly the same for me. Think I used the starter kit for around 4
months to build things before getting a licence. I would be using
another language if I had not been able to do this. Using "do" alone
would not suffice as I'd have lost the speed reasons for using MC.
100& ACK...

Same for me...

I still think the free StarterKit was the best thing ever.

One could play with it, get used to the app and even build useful 
things :-)

...and 30 (contiguous?) days may be not enough, even with no script 
limits...

Regards

Klaus Major
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.major-k.de
P.S.
I confess i build a (not too) commercial CD-ROM with the starterkit
and bought my first MC license with the salary for that :-)
(Simple Image and video presentation, but what the egg...)
Maybe that's what they are afraid of in scotland? ;-)

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Script Limits

[Wilhelm Sanke]

As the discussion has raised a number of points I had also tried to
express in a post to the use-revolution list on July 21st (when most of
the Revolution team was at the Mac Expo in New York) I repeat this post
here for those members of the Metacard list that are not at the same
time reading the revolution list:

July 21st
Subject: Re: Rev 2.02/New pricing
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

(snip)

On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 Geoff Canyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> The problem with the 10 line limit in the Starter Kit is that it's both
> too big and too small.
>
> It's too small in that anyone unfamiliar with Revolution thinks it's
> worthless.
>
> (snip)
>
> But it's also too large, in that anyone who knows what they're doing
> and are willing to put out the effort can get almost anything done in
> ten lines or less.
>
> So the Starter Kit has the dual problem of not being as effective as it
> could be at bringing in new users, and also of hurting sales because
> people find they can do whatever they need with it.
>
> regards,
>
> Geoff Canyon
>
>

These points could also be seen from a different perspective.

My impression is that the Starter Kit did *not* hurt sales. It did not
hurt you (the Revolution team) in amassing enough money so you could buy
out Metacard. The Starter Kit and the Free Edition helped you to get the
necessary money in the medium run, because quite a number of people
tried the Free Edition for a time longer than the meager thirty days of
a trial version and then bought a full license.

The Free Edition compares favorably with a number of other low-end
authoring systems (in the price range up to 150 US$) - in that is has at
least their potential - and will therefore diminish the sale of such
products.

On the other hand you are right when you say that "almost anything (can)
be done in ten lines or less" with the Starter Kit - that is one of the
many (may I say "former") beauties of Metacard/Revolution.
There may be indeed  that occasional programmer that puts out a
wonderful application, because he has overcome the ten-lines barrier
with much effort and ingenuity. But for any  programmer - other than a
casual hobbyist - that intends to create applications on a more regular
basis, the effort and time needed to overcome the ten-lines barrier by
far outweighs the money saved by not buying a regular license.
This occasional programmer will not hurt sales, on the contrary, by
showing what could be achieved with so much effort, his application
could be an incentive to buy a regular license that allows creating
similar programs without such tremendous effort and  in much less
time.--

We have a special problem here in case the Starter Kit should really
die:

In addition to a full license we have used the Starter Kit for a number
of years as an introductory tool for the (university) students in our
multimedia seminars and workshops. The students need to be able to work
on projects at home outside class hours. They can experiment,  try out
basic functions, and put together small projects. On the other hand,
they can get - or download from our ftp server (or from the many sites
that offer Metacard and Revolution stacks) - examples that have been
developed with a full edition and run them with the Starter Kit. These
stacks will be mostly small, because they are not standalones, and
because of that can be downloaded quickly (which is an important
consideration, because not many students have a DSL connection at home).

The students get a printed documentation  introducing them to a basic
set of commands and algorithms and a number of sample stacks especially
designed for this level.
When the semester finishes, they still have the Starter Kits and can
take second looks and maybe start anew exploring Revolution and showing
it to others.

Both by experimenting on their own and by looking at examples (and their
scripts) - also such produced with a full version -they can develop a
feeling for the rich potential of Metacard/Revolution and could either
be prospective buyers or people that spread the word and encourage
others to buy such a wonderful product.

>From obvious reasons it would be out of the question to expect that
these students would buy a product for 75 US$ (assuming this will be the
educational price for the Express version) at the beginning of a
workshop, a product they do not yet know at this point. Given our budget
restrictions it would be likewise impossible that our institution could
buy a number of new licenses each semester for the students.

Quite a  number of students have written research papers connected to or
supported by a Metacard/Revolution project. Since the pressure to
produce research papers is great - in most courses of studies leading to
M.A. level about 60 research papers have to be handed in before
admission to the M.A. examination process - students that have
participated in classes using the Starter Kit like to take advantage of
this creative situation and combine their projects 

Re: Multiple LAN cards & more..

[Alex Shaw]

Unfortunatly it seems that it's currently not possible to renew a
subscription online. I assume if you contact Heather she will help you out
though.
Yeah!!

I just got an email from Heather saying if I pay $300 for mc2.5.. I'll get 
a free upgrade to the 'Enterprise' ...

> I'm still unclear about my upgrade options..
>
> I have metacard 2.4.3.. develop for pc, mac & linux.. I want to upgrade..
>
> If I upgrade to 2.5 for $300 do I get a free crossgrade to revolution ? If
> so, which edition?
>
Yes, and the latest edition, with a years free updates.

> There are no crossgrade options on the runrev site anymore, do I have  to
> buy the new full 'Enterprise' edition for $599 to maintain creative freedom
> across platforms?
No, you don't. We will be maintaining the subscription model for MetaCard
customers. I'll put the crossgrade option back up very shortly,
Looking forward to playing with both 2.5 & runrev soon :)

regards
alex
___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Does your MC crash too?

[eric . allen . engle]

> Hi guys,
> since your message is from 13th - check if you have
> this W32.Blaster.Worm on
> your machine.
> regards
> eugen


Not in my case: I've had this problem for a few months
now actually. I really think, at least for me, it's an
OS problem (Win 98) since under 95 and Macos I had no
such problem. Further, the hyperlinks in my MC help
stack work just fine - when i have the machine set to 4
bit color :~/ 
Might also therefore be a driver problem...


I cannot imagine how the GUI would make the program
unstable. The engine is rock solid. 

Nope, I think me and whoever else has this problem just
needs a clean OS install try telling that to my old
school sysadmin/secretary. That's what's lovely about
academic secretaries - they're not in a subordinate
role, which means _I_ have to lick her boots, and not
the other way around (as in the private sector). Ah,
the joys of seniority...

My Home Page with free online legal information
Page perso avec liens juridiques

http://www.lexnet.bravepages.com/ind.htm
_
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

RE: MC/RR and Email launching

[Ken Ray]

Sorry... I gave a Revolution solution; 

Try:

  send "mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]" to program "Finder" with
"GURLGURL"

Works in OS X as well... (launched Mail on my machine)

Ken Ray
Sons of Thunder Software
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web Site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/ 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 8:30 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: MC/RR and Email launching


I am presently Mac-less :(

Could one of you let me know if this works on both flavours?

  put "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" into tURL
  if the platform is "MacOS" then
get the systemversion
set the itemdel to "."
if item 1 of it >= 10 then # OS X
  put "open location" && quote & tURL & quote into tScript
  do tScript as AppleScript
else # MacOS
  send tUrl to program "Finder" with "GURLGURL"
end if
  end if


Many thanks!

/H


___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Launching a local file in the default browser #3

[Brian Yennie]

FWIW, there's also this nugget:

~/Library/Preferences/com.apple.internetconfig.plist

You can also dig around in:

~/Library/Preferences/LaunchServices.plist

It seems that you can use these to find the actual applications 
assigned to various file formats.

Brian

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Admin Detection

[Scott Rossi]

Recently, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"  wrote:

>> I'm trying to detect whether or not the current Windows user has Admin
>> rights.  If the only way to determine this is to attempt to create a file,
>> what is the best path to use?

 
> on NT4 or W2K only... (it would be nice if someone posted the osx and linux
> variants ;) 
> 
> echo %username% 
> will give you the current user name.
> 
> Then, put the result in comparison with
> c:\net localgroup
> Choose the administrator group
> net localgroup "administrators"
> you should see your user name in there.
> 
> Alternatives: 
> In a NT domain, the local admin may be useless!
> You can find the admins in net group "domain admins" -- but only from the
> PDC... 
> Unless you have EnterpriseAdmin (obsolete I believe) -- more below...
> ...

Thanks for the suggestions.  Using the posted code verbatim on XP appeared
to fail (the handler function returned true while logged in as guest) but I
may not have set up everything correctly as in your post.

Alternatively, it seems that attempting to write to the registry is one way
to test admin privileges: writing to the registry returns an error when
logged in as guest.  So the only issue is a leftover empty key in the
registry once I am done admin testing (unless the latest version of Rev has
added some way to remove keys from the registry).

Regards,

Scott Rossi
Creative Director
Tactile Media, Multimedia & Design
-
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
W: http://www.tactilemedia.com

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: Script Limits and solid IDE evolution!

[Robert Brenstein]

Second, the problem with the MC licensing scheme is that it was too 
easy to abuse...
Here, I fully understand RR's way. You build a chain of buttons 
never breaking the limit of the 10 script lines but despite that, I 
dont know anyone who would in their right mind want to use such an 
IDE. Also, to Scott's demise, allowing compilation of an executable 
is a nice feature for a demo but it's part of the problem with 
runaway licenses...
Actually, this was an acceptable way to earn your wings and test the 
MC environment. Chaining 10-lines was not breaking any licenses 
AFAIK. I believe the reasoning was that any serious developer would 
pay rather than struggle all the time, but people who were not 
serious wouldn't pay anyway. Some post in this thread seem to confirm 
that this worked. (But then some complained that they can't truly 
evaluate the product with 10-line limit.)

No many IDE's have this feature on the other hand!
 Also, note that other than optimizing the IDE to improve your 
workflow, I dont see why anyone would want to go through the pain of 
creating an IDE.
Most RR and MC users create applications for their clients. None of 
them want their clients to develop more themselves!
It was not about competing GUI as far as I know. MC allowed for alt 
GUIs (it is Rev that had this restriction). However, if not for the 
script limiting, one unscrupulous programmer could produce a 
standalone that gave full access to the engine in developer mode for 
anyone. Indeed not a desirable situation for anyone seriously 
interested in this product. This is why standalones have always been 
running in the demo mode so do speak. Full features of the engine 
were only available in the development (paid) environment. As a 
result, we had a severly limited or full environment but nothing in 
between. As Scott explained to me at some point, there were some 
markets that he left out for that reason. Now Rev is changing the 
equation by further restricting the 'limited' end, crippling 
capabilities for our products even further. My reading on that is 
that Rev is focusing more on people who work only within dev 
environment rather than producing standalones distributed to others. 
In other words, while MC was meant as a tool for professional 
developers, Rev is mostly after the hobbyst market.

Following Robert's comments earlier, the removal of a feature or 
limiting a feature like dynamic scripting (the DO script), is IMOHO 
a terrible mistake and a SEVERE limit to the IDE's possibilities. Of 
which this one is almost unique among other IDEs.
Since using 'do' one can relatively easily work around the 'set 
script to' restriction (performance issues aside), we can only expect 
further elimination of 'do' in standalones (do limit set to 0) in a 
near future. It would be a logical followup to fully close that 
loophole. This line of product development really scares me, 
particularly as it is a rather expensive product (I paid for full MC 
license plus renewal) comparing to either RB or CWP. I have my doubts 
about cutting off multiplatform features from cheaper licenses but I 
see this as Rev trying to maximize their income. I have no problems 
if the demo is restricted in terms of dynamic scripting. But the 
engine embedded when producing a standalone from a licensed 
environment could retain current limits. Since the limits are clearly 
kept as parameters, there must be ways to control them accordingly, 
including setting arbitrary values for specific projects (as I 
suggested). I had big and long-term plans for a number of MC-based 
projects, but the recent developments really make me wonder whether I 
bet on the right horse.

Robert Brenstein
___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Re: MC in RR

[Jeanne A. E. DeVoto]

At 5:57 AM -0700 8/9/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Q1. Can I still use my MetaCard stacks in the RR GUI? Or do they have to
>be 'translated'? Or do I simply change the suffix?

You can use them as-is. (To get the "Open" item in the File menu to see
them on Windows/Unix, you do need to change the extension. On Mac you need
to change the file type. Or hold down the Option/Alt key when choosing the
Open item.) The file format's the same.


> Q2. Can I use RR in 'spartan metaCard mode' and continue to 'roll my own'?

You can go on using either interface (and you can add/modify things in
either interface for your use). I'm honestly not sure whether you can tack
the MC interface onto Rev - the engine is identical, but Rev includes some
libraries that aren't in MC, so you might run into some problems with
those. So I guess that one is filed under "not supported but you're welcome
to try it"


> Q3. I have been happy with mc2.3 and mc2.4 for ages and most of the new
>features have not really impacted on me (under the rule of appropriateness
>whereby 'Just because you can does not mean you have to'). As my
>subscription has lapsed, I am a tad confused about the
>upgrade/cross-grade/transfer licence and price. What's the cost to buy
>into the new equivalent?

The deal is that the next time you update your MC license for an additional
year for $299, you also get a Revolution key. So the effect is you renew
the same way you've always been able to renew an MC license, but you also
get a cross-grade to Revolution Enterprise for no additional cost.

--
Jeanne A. E. DeVoto ~ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Runtime Revolution Limited - Software at the Speed of Thought
http://www.runrev.com/


___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

RE: Drawers

[Ken Ray]

> Now, with the new command, I do not get here any sliding 
> effect. The drawer stacks simply open. Maybe there is a 
> sliding effect, but it is not visible for me. Is there maybe 
> another undocumented feature that can slow down the showing 
> of the drawer as in visual effects? This is on Windows with 
> Metacard 2.5.1B2. 

This feature only works on OS X.

Ken Ray
Sons of Thunder Software
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web Site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/ 


___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

Revolution 2.1 Beta 3 now available

[Heather Williams]

Dear Listees,

We're happy to inform you that Revolution 2.1 Beta 3 is now in testing -
thanks for all the feedback! Download from

http://www.runrev.com/Revolution1/developercentral/downloads.html

And as always, back up your files and report all bugs via Bugzilla

http://www.runrev.com/Revolution1/bugzilla/index.html

Warm Regards,

Heather
-- 
Heather Williams ~ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ http://www.runrev.com/
Runtime Revolution - User-Centric Development Tools
~~~ Check our web site for new Revolution editions & special offers ~~~

___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard