Re: Linux deployment . . .
On 29/01/2010 01:55, Sarah Reichelt wrote: On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 1:49 AM, Richard Gaskin ambassa...@fourthworld.com wrote: Richmond Mathewson wrote: How many users of this list think that RunRev are wasting their time, effort and limited resources continuing development of a Linux version ? Count me among them. In the iPadding around thread, you seemed to be in support of RunRev continuing Linux development. But here you say you think they are wasting their time. Confused. I do not think RunRev are wasting their time developing for Linux; far from it. This is a question that is a real question rather than a rhetorical one. When we look at where Linux is being used I see enormous opportunities for specialized apps, even commercial ones, of the vertical sort Rev is ideally suited for. That's interesting. I have never come across any commercial market for Linux apps of the sort that I thought I could create using Rev. Lest we forget, where would we be without publicly-funded software? OS X is BSD at its core, created at publicly-funded UC Berkeley. And the first web browser, Mosaic, which spawned Navigator and ultimately Mozilla's Firefox, began life at the publicly-funded NCSA. I certainly don't expect Linux to go away, but I just don't think it fits well with RunRev. We can't create a browser or an operating system in revTalk. So I am with Richard's statement above (which may not say what he meant it to say) and you can also count me among the people who think RunRev's resources would be better allocated elsewhere. I also feel that it would be more honest of them to admit that Linux is a second-class citizen in the Rev world and does not have all the features of the other platforms. Apart from one post by Richard, every post that I can remember about Rev on Linux has been negative. This is not good for RunRev and not fair to their customers. Well, I for one, have been deploying EFL content and reinforcement standalones across my Ubuntu boxes in my school without a single problem for 5 years. I have nothing negative to say in this respect about RunRev on Linux. My only 'grunt' (and I am repeating myself) is the difficulty end-users have in installing a font on Linux somewhere where RunRev will 'see' it. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Linux deployment . . .
I really hate myself for what I'm about to say On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 5:46 AM, Bill Vlahos bvla...@mac.com wrote: WinMobile is dead I'm going to seem like I enjoy being cussed. I've hated Microsoft for as long as I can remember (because of their attempts to kill all competition). Since OS X 10.1 I deliberately bought, supported and recommended Apple to all and sundry, just to do my bit to keep the competition alive. Among people I know, that's what they buy and what they recommend to others, so I had my small degree of success. However, when it came to buying a mobile phone a couple of years ago I could not bring myself to buy an iPhone. Instead I bought a Windows Mobile phone. I have been very impressed with it (maybe that's because I had such low expectations from MS). But I've not one OS crash in all those years (wish I could say the same for Vista). I have only had to reset it twice. And I never switch it off. That's pretty impressive. Then there's the range of apps I could get for it - there's nothing I wanted that I couldn't find. It provides tethering out of the box. I used to think the most impressive thing MS ever did was the move from Windows 95 to NT. But Windows Mobile also ranks as one of the few things they've done that impressed me. Compared to the Symbian phones I've used, Windows Mobile is out in front. Admittedly it is a HTC phone, and they do 'skin' it to some degree and add some of their own UI features. I might be a bit less impressed without that tweaking. I'm going to be getting a Maemo phone next though. I expect great things from that too. Bernard ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Linux deployment . . .
Sarah says: Apart from one post by Richard, every post that I can remember about Rev on Linux has been negative. This is not good for RunRev and not fair to their customers. I don't mean to be negative. I like Rev very much, the people have always been very fair and helpful, the list is great. It has its disadvantages for the platform I've chosen to work on, but so does anything, and for what I use it for, its fine, they can be worked around. Its easy to use, and it delivers. For me. But you cannot expect professional developers to tolerate on their main platform what people like us tolerate very cheerfully. The real business strategy issue for Rev in the Linux space is: what about Python? How are we positioned against that? Its not an issue for Windows or Mac. If I were a professional developer on either platform, I'd have no hesitation in choosing Rev over Python. People on this list have sometimes made off-hand negative remarks about WXPython and similar packages - and for Windows or Mac, given the Rev alternatives, they are quite right. When you come to Linux, if you are a professional developer on that platform, well, its not so clear. Is there a market for Linux paid apps? Probably not for the standard desktop type apps, but for very specific ones in industry, may well be. Is there a market for commercial Linux development environments with the host of free ones available? Dunno. I think there may be. You'd have to talk to people who make a living doing development on Linux, for whom Linux is the main platform, not a nice afterthought. Rev has unique advantages. It may be possible for it to become a real contender, with only a bit more polish and feature parity. I may sound harsh sometimes when talking about the feature gap, but am very pleased with Rev in very many ways. And actually grateful to the Rev team for doing as much as they have. Its just that, in terms of business strategy and positioning, I am probably not the one Rev needs to please. Richmond neither. Its the Linux equivalent of Jacque or Daniels Mara, or Trevor DeVore. That's the issue. -- View this message in context: http://n4.nabble.com/Linux-deployment-tp1370414p1415296.html Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Linux deployment . . .
I am using it on Linux to do various tasks (check availability of our services, etc, etc, etc...), so I would like RunRev to continue supporting Linux and I (wish to) believe I am not alone with this :-) All the best Viktoras Richmond Mathewson wrote: Here we go again: How many users of this list think that RunRev are wasting their time, effort and limited resources continuing development of a Linux version ? How many people who favour continued Linux development think it might be sensible of RunRev to concentrate their efforts on one 'family' of Linux distros (e.g. Debian derivatives) ? ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Linux deployment . . .
Richmond wrote: How many people who favour continued Linux development think it might be sensible of RunRev to concentrate their efforts on one 'family' of Linux distros (e.g. Debian derivatives) ? I certainly would appreciate having a list of distros being known to work without major flaws. If it is branded Linux I expect *any* distribution (as far as that may be possible) to work. If it was to say, works on UBUNTU and XYZ, for the rest you´re on your own my friend, I certainly could live with that. I think the major Problem is that there is no such thing as Linux - the operating system. there are many of those out there. All a little different All the best, Malte___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Linux deployment . . .
On 28/01/2010 15:47, Malte Pfaff-Brill wrote: Richmond wrote: How many people who favour continued Linux development think it might be sensible of RunRev to concentrate their efforts on one 'family' of Linux distros (e.g. Debian derivatives) ? I certainly would appreciate having a list of distros being known to work without major flaws. If it is branded Linux I expect *any* distribution (as far as that may be possible) to work. If it was to say, works on UBUNTU and XYZ, for the rest you´re on your own my friend, I certainly could live with that. I think the major Problem is that there is no such thing as Linux - the operating system. there are many of those out there. All a little different All the best, For quite a long time now the Ubuntu people have been urging people to say that their PC is running Ubuntu rather than 'Linux'. Now that quite a few Linux distros are mature operating systems it does seem as disingenuous to describe Ubuntu or Red Hat as 'Linux' as describing Mac OS X as 'UNIX', or Windows as 'DOS' (OK, OK, I know Windows stopped floating on DOS back with Millennium). 5/6 years ago I spent about 6 months messing around' with any number of 'Linux' operating systems (the CDs now come in extremely useful as firelighters) until I settled on Ubuntu, as that suited my needs for my school. Ubuntu is the most popular desktop Open Source OS. There are a variety of operating systems that are built on an Ubuntu foundation, so, as well as speaking of 'Debian derivatives' (such as Ubuntu) we can now speak of 'Ubuntu derivatives'; so it might be reasonable to label RunRev as runs on Ubuntu and derivatives. One would even have to be more careful as RunRev 4 'Linux' will not run on Ubuntu 5.10, but will run on 8.04 (frankly cannot be bothered to test 'places' in between), nor can RR 4 standalones. I also use 'Damn Small' on an old Pentium 2 with 32 MB RAM - keep it in the back of the car for diagnostic stuff when people have problems with their networks - the thought of trying to run RunRev or a standalone on it makes me feel very odd indeed. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Linux deployment . . .
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Malte Pfaff-Brill revolut...@derbrill.de wrote: I certainly would appreciate having a list of distros being known to work without major flaws. If it is branded Linux I expect *any* distribution (as far as that may be possible) to work. If it was to say, works on UBUNTU and XYZ, for the rest you´re on your own my friend, I certainly could live with that. As a wise man who contributes to this list would say: Amen to that, brother :-) I would prefer that one distro could be chosen and be supported. I've never been a great fan of Ubuntu in the past (preferring most of the better-known distros, in fact), but having installed Ubuntu on my netbook, I've have been very pleased with it. My frustrations have been with the idea that RunRev supports Rev on Linux, when in fact the problems with Rev on Fedora, Suse, Mandrake are manifold. In fact, it was my desperation to find just one distribution where I can use Rev that made me resort to Ubuntu. I think Peter and some of the others may not be Ubuntu users, so they may not endorse this line of thinking. I really hope that if this was adopted there could be a push for feature parity e.g. revBrowser on Linux. Bernard ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Linux deployment . . .
Richmond Mathewson wrote: How many users of this list think that RunRev are wasting their time, effort and limited resources continuing development of a Linux version ? Count me among them. How many people who favour continued Linux development think it might be sensible of RunRev to concentrate their efforts on one 'family' of Linux distros (e.g. Debian derivatives) ? To me it seems sensible to allocate resources proportionate to the distro audience. Accordingly, Ubuntu would be the primary target since it's the clear #1 for consumers, with others coming along for the ride as resources and compatibility permit. It's a shame that after so many years there still isn't a single standard for deploying apps (with icon and file associations, installation, etc.) for all desktop distros. Kinda silly, really, and further evidence that the most significant thing holding back Linux adoption today is that its core base are too skilled in it to prioritize affordances for newcomers. But in spite of its unnecessarily fragmented nature, Linux is growing at a rate that merits attention, thanks in no small part to the Ubuntu and Gnome teams' focus on the consumer experience. I've been on the Gnome usability discussion list for the last few years, and have been as impressed by their detailed work as I have with the outcomes I see in Ubuntu with every new version. The governments of Brazil, India, Berlin and many others have standardized on Linux, as has the US Army, reported to be the single largest install by number of desktops. And then there are the countless universities around the world which are adopting Linux, and so much of the developing world for which a free OS is creating opportunities that were unthinkable in the old world where each desktop always carried a $100 OS tax. There are now options. Linux's price is unbeatable, Ubuntu's implementation very easy to install and use, and running the Ubuntu Netbook Remix Edition on a sub-$300 netbook opens up a lot of computing options for people who had previously been locked out of participating in the Internet revolution. Many vast new markets are coming online. When we look at where Linux is being used I see enormous opportunities for specialized apps, even commercial ones, of the vertical sort Rev is ideally suited for. And some software can be made with grants. A lot of shops do well on grant money alone. My first paid gig as a developer was funded by a grant from the US Dept. of Energy, many weeks of work that let me buy a new car while delivering prototypes of new imaging techniques for subsurface exploration, a win-win all around. I'm currently pursuing grants for a new app, and am awaiting response on another grant-funded Rev project. With one of the apps I manage we have a competitor whose product was initially funded, from initial design through v1.0, by a grant from the US Navy, who have since moved on to become a sustainable commercial entity. Lest we forget, where would we be without publicly-funded software? OS X is BSD at its core, created at publicly-funded UC Berkeley. And the first web browser, Mosaic, which spawned Navigator and ultimately Mozilla's Firefox, began life at the publicly-funded NCSA. While I find many things in The Cathedral and the Bazaar to be a bit optimistic in some regards, there are in fact a great many opportunities in software that runs on free OSes, both commercial and non-commercial. -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Rev training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com Webzine for Rev developers: http://www.revjournal.com revJournal blog: http://revjournal.com/blog.irv ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Linux deployment . . .
I see no evidence that, for Rev as presently distributed, supporting multiple distros is even a small part of the problem. The problem is not that rev Browser fails to work on Slitaz. It is that it doesn't exist. The problem with revPrintField is common to all distros that I have tried. The failure of multiple desktops to work is common to all desktops and distros. In fact, distros differ rather little at the level of Rev. Rev does not use an installer. You decompress and run. Put the uncompressed folder wherever you want. So its immaterial how menus work differently. I've never found Rev to fail to work, or work differently, on any distro I've tried, including DSL and Slitaz. I think it quite understandable that Rev might drop Linux in favor of mobile. That would be fine and if its commercially sensible, by all means, people like me will move to Python, and there are probably no professional Linux developers using it full time anyway. What is not understandable is to have three platforms, nominally, but not to support one of them at a level where you have a viable professional platform. That makes no sense. -- View this message in context: http://n4.nabble.com/Linux-deployment-tp1370414p1393066.html Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Linux deployment . . .
Well, I don't share Richard's admiration for either Gnome or Ubuntu - especially not for Ubuntu. And not for Gnome in its increasing incarnation of the school of taking out all the useful functionality in order to make it easier to use. But the question is, if you think it is taking excessive work to deliver Rev in a distribution agnostic way, what work is that exactly? If you think it should only run on Ubuntu, what exactly would be done differently? I think you would have to do stuff deliberately to make it not run on all distros. What applications can you think of that are distribution specific and will not run on others than the chosen one? Every app I have ever run has worked pretty much the same on any distro I've been using, and we are talking lots - Mandriva in most releases, Slitaz, DSL, Slackware and its derivatives including Zenwalk, Slax. Early versions of Red Hat, late versions of Fedora. Suse, in early and mid versions. The thing you need to watch out for is fonts, and window managers/ desktops. But every other application for Linux manages this, its a matter of doing things by the book. I run Gnome and KDE apps from Fluxbox or OpenBox, it is just not an issue. People talk about Linux proliferating distros. Yes, it has. But from the point of view of applications that are not integrated into the repositories, like Rev, that is just irrelevant. The issue for Rev is, does it want to be a professional developer's tool on Linux, or does it want to be a hobbyist or amateur's tool, on account of the compromises using it on Linux requires. That's the choice, and you can't evade it. Discussion of which distros to support is a complete distraction. Its not the issue. -- View this message in context: http://n4.nabble.com/Linux-deployment-tp1370414p1393654.html Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Linux deployment . . .
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 1:49 AM, Richard Gaskin ambassa...@fourthworld.com wrote: Richmond Mathewson wrote: How many users of this list think that RunRev are wasting their time, effort and limited resources continuing development of a Linux version ? Count me among them. In the iPadding around thread, you seemed to be in support of RunRev continuing Linux development. But here you say you think they are wasting their time. Confused. When we look at where Linux is being used I see enormous opportunities for specialized apps, even commercial ones, of the vertical sort Rev is ideally suited for. That's interesting. I have never come across any commercial market for Linux apps of the sort that I thought I could create using Rev. Lest we forget, where would we be without publicly-funded software? OS X is BSD at its core, created at publicly-funded UC Berkeley. And the first web browser, Mosaic, which spawned Navigator and ultimately Mozilla's Firefox, began life at the publicly-funded NCSA. I certainly don't expect Linux to go away, but I just don't think it fits well with RunRev. We can't create a browser or an operating system in revTalk. So I am with Richard's statement above (which may not say what he meant it to say) and you can also count me among the people who think RunRev's resources would be better allocated elsewhere. I also feel that it would be more honest of them to admit that Linux is a second-class citizen in the Rev world and does not have all the features of the other platforms. Apart from one post by Richard, every post that I can remember about Rev on Linux has been negative. This is not good for RunRev and not fair to their customers. Regards, Sarah ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Linux deployment . . .
Lest we forget, where would we be without publicly-funded software? OS X is BSD at its core, created at publicly-funded UC Berkeley. And the first web browser, Mosaic, which spawned Navigator and ultimately Mozilla's Firefox, began life at the publicly-funded NCSA. I think I must disagree to some extent. BSD Unix is no longer BSD, although the first renditions were. I don't believe there are any more bits and pieces of BSD in Apple's most recent offerings. But I think the argument about the viability of LINUX for Rev really depends on how difficult it is to cross develop for both platforms. If the compiler used for Rev is of the sort that provides a high degree of portability, then properly written link libraries should solve most of the issues. I don't pretend of course to be that kind of programmer, but I know enough to see (I think) that the differences between the now UNIX OS X and Linux are CONSIDERABLY less than the differences between OS X and Windows. Remember the debacle Microsoft foisted on everyone when they wrapped their windows compile of Office in an interpreter and sold it as Office Mac? So the question really is how MUCH more difficult is it for Runrev to develop for Linux? None of us really know, do we? Bob ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Linux deployment . . .
Sarah, I never used Rev under the Linux platform to code desktop GUI apps and can't say more on this subject. On the other hand, i had to deliver abour 20 production web / ria application's servers over the last 15 years and, appart one deployed under OS X 10.3.9 and two under Solaris 9 and 10, all went deployed on top of MC or Rev under Suse, Debian, Red Hat or Linux PPC distros. What i learned there is that a POSIX compliant MC / Rev engine is the onest that can be linked (via an external socket listener-translator - writable in any langage supported as an Apache module) to Apache, SQL db, Streaming servers, etc... as an xinetd protected process. No ways to get the same config up under the Windows nor OS X server platforms without big improvments of the rev engine for thoses platforms and if RunRev want to gohead with the irev tech, it will be very difficult without choosing a POSIX platform as the most usable one of the revServer deployment. No sure that the multiplatform support of the revServer is the best way to get a rock-solid version of it. I would be more confident if a realistic choice could be done in about this part of the RunRev projects (POSIX compliant server engine first, Linux or BSD prefered there lots before Solaris, always less reactive on low cost hardware configs and yet owned by Oracle). So, in short : iRev will probably never become a real PHP, Perl, Python or Ruby challenger if it's not mainly developped and targeted to the Linux platform, with secondary ports to the OSX and Windows platform, if possible. But perhaps is that all not so important for most of the Rev customers and only RunRev knows about the strategic gates they will choose to go with. Regards, Le 29 janv. 10 à 00:55, Sarah Reichelt a écrit : features of the other platforms. Apart from one post by Richard, every post that I can remember about Rev on Linux has been negative. This is not good for RunRev and not fair to their customers. -- Pierre Sahores mobile : (33) 6 03 95 77 70 www.wrds.com www.sahores-conseil.com ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Linux deployment . . .
Bob Sneidar wrote: BSD Unix is no longer BSD, although the first renditions were. I don't believe there are any more bits and pieces of BSD in Apple's most recent offerings. True, but how far do you think NeXT would have gotten if they had to write it from scratch? Which do we Mac folks use now: a NeXT variant, or Taligent/Copeland/Gershin? ;) ...I know enough to see (I think) that the differences between the now UNIX OS X and Linux are CONSIDERABLY less than the differences between OS X and Windows. I think that's a very key point. The world is now pretty much in just two camps: UNIX-based OSes, and Microsoft. So the question really is how MUCH more difficult is it for Runrev to develop for Linux? None of us really know, do we? Certainly not me, but I know this much: Rev already has a Linux engine. Heck, the Rev engine was born on UNIX, and for the first half-decade lived there exclusively (my first exposure to MC was on Sun). And don't forget the other half of the world, the server: there Linux dominates, and Rev's there too. So it's not really a question of whether Rev has to port to Linux. It already did; indeed, it was the other way around. The only question now is when they'll be in a position to tighten up the GTX implementation to take care of some performance and cosmetic issues. Sure, there are a few crashers, but if you've been reading the RQCC as often as I have you know that's not an OS-specific feature. ;) Feature-parity would be nice, but the engine differs on the other two platforms anyway so for me that's less of an issue. One of the few things I'd like to see is RevBrowser for Linux, but since that's an external I'll bet we could find funding for it if we really needed it, so it wouldn't slow RunRev down on anything else they're pursuing. In a related thread you wrote: My point is that unless LINUX has something UNIQUE to offer the mass of users in the computing world (aside from the fact that it makes a great server OS for some things), it's never going to really get into the client computing game. Some would say it's already in the client computing game, with an estimated market share similar to what Apple had back when people used to say it would go out of business. ;) But like Apple, Linux only continues to grow, and currently at a pace faster than any other. Sure, feature-wise modern OSes are becoming increasingly similar, ever more commoditized. That's the point: it's an OS, it shouldn't be something you have to think about, it should simply do its job of getting you to your apps and your documents and not require much of your conscious attention at all so you can focus instead on the tasks you turned on your computer to do (IMNSHO Apple understands that far better than MS). Being the world's only free and open alternative means a lot to several tens of millions of people. Free and open represent a truly UNIQUE value among OSes. -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Rev training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com Webzine for Rev developers: http://www.revjournal.com revJournal blog: http://revjournal.com/blog.irv ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Linux deployment . . .
Sarah Reichelt wrote: On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 1:49 AM, Richard Gaskin ambassador at fourthworld.com wrote: Richmond Mathewson wrote: How many users of this list think that RunRev are wasting their time, effort and limited resources continuing development of a Linux version ? Count me among them. In the iPadding around thread, you seemed to be in support of RunRev continuing Linux development. But here you say you think they are wasting their time. Confused. And rightfully so. I misread Richmond's comment. Of course I find Linux a useful addition to the mix of OSes Rev supports. When we look at where Linux is being used I see enormous opportunities for specialized apps, even commercial ones, of the vertical sort Rev is ideally suited for. That's interesting. I have never come across any commercial market for Linux apps of the sort that I thought I could create using Rev. Sometimes the value can be strategic, but with one app I'm managing it's a direct cash investment: we have several universities with wallets open to pick up our Linux port as soon as we finish it, all for the low cost of just fixing a few paths and clicking a checkbox in the Standalone Builder. I certainly don't expect Linux to go away, but I just don't think it fits well with RunRev. We can't create a browser or an operating system in revTalk. I think there may be a misunderstanding of what Linux is. It's not a development environment, it's an OS, like OS X or Windows. Most of the millions running Linux aren't making browsers, they're just enjoying the web with them. And they don't need to make an OS; like us Mac folk they already have one they like. :) Scripting languages are a natural fit on any OS, esp. one with a uniquely integrated object model like Rev. Have you seen the articles at Novell.com on how they use Rev on their SUSE installations? Fun stuff, and not all that different form the sorts of things we make for in-house use here. -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Rev training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com Webzine for Rev developers: http://www.revjournal.com revJournal blog: http://revjournal.com/blog.irv ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Linux deployment . . .
I think it is important to continue to support Linux for a few reasons. First, it makes a great statement about the ability for Rev to be truly multi-platform. I remember a rep from Borland a long time ago claiming they were multi-platform because they supported a couple of flavors of Windows. They were serious. Second, even though Linux folks don't actually buy software, I like the ability to say that my software runs on Windows, Macintosh, and Linux just for the marketing aspect. Particularly since it is so easy to build for it and test it. Third, there are some situations where Linux would be the preferred distribution because these are embedded systems. I would like the Linux builds improved a little which is happening. I don't use Linux as my development platform so I can't comment on the folks who are saying it leaves some to be desired. I generally write and build on Mac for Windows and Linux but text on all the systems. This has worked well for me. I'm very interested in the iPhone version. WinMobile is dead and I don't really know how viable the Blackberry application market is. Android looks promising but it looks like it will be a difficult environment to build for. Different model phones with different feature sets and screen resolutions and even different versions of the firmware to deal with. The Blackberry market suffers the same problems with different models. With the iPad being so similar to the iPhone/iPod Touch it makes for a very predictable market to sell to. I can't wait. Bill Vlahos _ InfoWallet (http://www.infowallet.com) is about keeping your important life information with you, accessible, and secure. On Jan 28, 2010, at 5:31 AM, Richmond Mathewson wrote: Here we go again: How many users of this list think that RunRev are wasting their time, effort and limited resources continuing development of a Linux version ? How many people who favour continued Linux development think it might be sensible of RunRev to concentrate their efforts on one 'family' of Linux distros (e.g. Debian derivatives) ? ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
