Re: The State of Rev (Was Re: [ANN] Rodeo IDE preview video)
And the flip side of that is that, sometimes, things written using languages/environments perceived to be swans produce profoundly ugly ducklings: http://www.doubledivision.org/DoubleDivisionCalculator.html I offer the challenge of finding the third-grader who finds this sort of presumably Jobs-approved stuff compelling... :-p Judy On Tue, 1 Jun 2010, J. Landman Gay wrote: Let's face it, Revolution is an odd duck. It really is. A most amazing, magical, useful and inspiring duck, but still odd. Ugly ducklings are really swans. ___ 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: The State of Rev (Was Re: [ANN] Rodeo IDE preview video)
There seems to be a big change just around the corner. As I see it.. for linux runrev TOGETHER yes : TOGETHER a) a bundle ready to install and b) an openSource ShellTalk command line interface to make it much more accessible to everybody, including grand-ma. How about that!? Ha and commands that.. hw to say that : match the people use rather than the computer needs (please, show today's new files, thanks ; please, change the rights of folder myfolder and all (its) files to categoryofRights, thanks) hint : that openSOurce ShellTalk would need to be driven though by an insitution, and it could be in the interest of runrev to do it, but keep it openSource. a) more and more people are educated.. and perhaps more linux capable. In particular, I personnaly would switch back to a very simple desktop with a command line system if a xTalk command line tool appears. Imagine a shell layer, that would understand english like commands, really polished and evident, well documented and stream-lined to these 80% need... I found Andre Garzia contribution of the linux and runrev bundle distro great, great! I think a step further would be such a ShellTalk interface. This would solve the bigest problem of linux : all these distributions that rely on interface subtleties.. trying to implement some visual interfaces. A ShellTalk could allow to have a simpler core distro, which would not rely on sophisiticated interfaces... and in the end be so much more simple!? b) the netbook wave is putting forward the linux proposition, with the small thing running swiftly (how many netbooks run linux?) - there is a true actual need and nearly a demand? c) the de facto huge power of windows is being challenged, at least in the minds : google unplugging windows is a huge sign to businesses. Its the biggest business in the industry that says we want only unix (mac os and linux). d) the magic apple effect is getting challenged too in the minds. More and more people are concerned about being closed in, even in a really cool hotel. Having to pay 200 dollars a night.. just to see the curtains move in a progressive motion, like iPhones menus... does raise questions. I beleive Apple made a fantastic jump these recent years, but that might just not hold the next wave, beyond magic animation!? (did anybody make the common denominator between Apple and Disney etc??) e) android will definitely hit the spirits and most important launch an app store. So people will come to buy linux apps. f) the free world will be balanced, people will realize that it is ok to pay for things... but cheap, much cheaper than before. And that is the major apple store effect. Go for mass at reduced price. And linux could be the best potential platform for that. And that does not mean that many apps cannot be sold at a medium price in their niches. g) last, I wonder if and when a mjority of tech users will change focus and see computers as.. just simple tools.. and not magical promisses... that could change a lot and favor linux again (some realize they mostly use email, webbrowser and 2 or 3 tools..!). Someday more people will realize we do not need the funky animated stuff and that it sucks (our mind sometimes!) h) and this awareness when it reaches back, will bring in simple OS that respond to a kind of natural ShellTalk. Personnaly I'm working on one app where the interface is stripped off and which is driven by a dialog. Recently, Apple bought a personnal assistant web service that works just like that. And I do beleive that this will be the next chapter. And for that, runrev is well placed and that is why I chose it.. and a shellTalk unix thing would.. well : I'm ready to invest! smile.. What do you think? -- View this message in context: http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/The-State-of-Rev-Was-Re-ANN-Rodeo-IDE-preview-video-tp2237387p2242187.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: The State of Rev (Was Re: [ANN] Rodeo IDE preview video)
If I don't say please will it crash to desktop and send me to my memory partition without supper? Bob On Jun 3, 2010, at 12:07 PM, Robert Mann wrote: There seems to be a big change just around the corner. As I see it.. for linux runrev TOGETHER yes : TOGETHER a) a bundle ready to install and b) an openSource ShellTalk command line interface to make it much more accessible to everybody, including grand-ma. How about that!? Ha and commands that.. hw to say that : match the people use rather than the computer needs (please, show today's new files, thanks ; please, change the rights of folder myfolder and all (its) files to categoryofRights, thanks) ___ 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: The State of Rev (Was Re: [ANN] Rodeo IDE preview video)
I agree with both Andre and Richards responses to these issues brought up in this excellent thread. One of the things Peter brought up was about the idea of having to buy a 3d party add on to get expected functionality out of the Rev IDE. Andre and Richards responses were right on/spot on about this. But, Peter mentioned the editor as one of these and I agree with him that the internal editor is too flaky (thanks Andre) and as a result of too many crashes related to the built-in editor have had to buy tRev/switch to tRev in order to get some of my latest projects out the door. I would rather have 'chosen' to use tRev because of its great features (of which it has many, many great features), than having 'had' to use it because the internal editor just doesn't work well enough for professional development. I think Peter's inclusion of the Editor points to a real problem and to the impressions that he points out. I think this impression is accurate only in the case of the built-in editor which, I hope, will be fixed in the next release. The other Rev-Select Add-ons fall into the 'really great enhancements to RunRev' category and do not necessarily fall into the 'need to make up for something that should work but doesn't ' in RunRev category. I think the more important thing to learn here is what some of the current impressions of RR are and why. How RR is perceived (especially by new comers to the world of RR) should help point us/RR to the areas that need the most improvement. Great thread, Tom McGrath III Lazy River Software http://lazyriver.on-rev.com 3mcgr...@comcast.net I Can Speak - Communication for the rest of us... http://mypad.lazyriver.on-rev.com I Can Speak on the iPad Store http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/i-can-speak/id364733279?mt=8 ___ 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: The State of Rev (Was Re: [ANN] Rodeo IDE preview video)
The word bootstrap comes to mind. Microsoft tipped because they got into the market at it's infancy and lots of investors were inspired and saw an opportunity for returns on their investments. Later the Macintosh OS was able to tip because they were a unique way of going at the computer experience that promised, again, new markets for people heretofore unwilling or incapable of grasping computer interfaces. And also they shipped several usable apps bundled with the device to get them going, until other developers got up to speed. Linux strikes me as an OS that hit the market too late to tip the scales, and with no real incentive for new developers to invest money into an OS whose reputation was the OS where you could get free stuff. I think that Open Source, while a great and very successful approach in terms of community, works contrary to itself in that developers do not want to invest in a market where people who charge for software are rather resented. I know I am going to get lots of responses from all the Linux people. I apologize in advance. But if my opinion is worth anything, I would say let Runrev focus on IDE's and engines for OS'es with a demonstrable hold on existing markets. Bob On May 31, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: Currently, Linux is at the pre-tipping-point stage characterized by this catch-22 as a key contributing factor: end-users want more apps on Linux before they switch, and developers want to see more end-users on Linux before they deploy. ___ 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: The State of Rev (Was Re: [ANN] Rodeo IDE preview video)
I get the impression that Jerry likes the built in editor just fine the way it is. ;-) Let's face it, Revolution is an odd duck. It really is. A most amazing, magical, useful and inspiring duck, but still odd. What other paradigm in the software development world is like Revolution? It's BECAUSE it's not Java or C++ or ObjectiveC or even Pascual that I can use it. But some of it's edges are unpolished. Still, it's come a long way from where it was when I first got ahold of it, and one of the reasons I pony up each year, and recently for 5 years in advance, is because I see it as an investment. So long as revolution thrives and continues to become even just a little bit better, I will be a happy camper. I can actually write useful apps with this thing!! Given my lack of patience, and the time needed to write a really professional looking app, Revolution feels like it was made just for me. I don't mind then a few feathers out of place here and there, especially since others like Jerry and Trevor and so many others that don't get as much credit as they deserve, are doing a bit of preening on our beloved duck. I rather like the whole crazy odd little setup we have going here. Bob On Jun 1, 2010, at 6:38 AM, Thomas McGrath III wrote: I would rather have 'chosen' to use tRev because of its great features (of which it has many, many great features), than having 'had' to use it because the internal editor just doesn't work well enough for professional development. I think Peter's inclusion of the Editor points to a real problem and to the impressions that he points out. ___ 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: The State of Rev (Was Re: [ANN] Rodeo IDE preview video)
Bob Sneidar wrote: Let's face it, Revolution is an odd duck. It really is. A most amazing, magical, useful and inspiring duck, but still odd. Ugly ducklings are really swans. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.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: The State of Rev (Was Re: [ANN] Rodeo IDE preview video)
Linux strikes me as an OS that hit the market too late to tip the scales, and with no real incentive for new developers to invest money into an OS whose reputation was the OS where you could get free stuff. I think that Open Source, while a great and very successful approach in terms of community, works contrary to itself in that developers do not want to invest in a market where people who charge for software are rather resented. I know I am going to get lots of responses from all the Linux people. I apologize in advance. But if my opinion is worth anything, I would say let Runrev focus on IDE's and engines for OS'es with a demonstrable hold on existing markets. Linux as a market is still evolving - I don't think tipping works the same way with it, and that in itself is a frustration to those who were banking that it would. Linux absolutely has a place, and there are many ways to make money off of it. I just think making money from Linux requires a different sort of focus than what many are used to. As a desktop OS, its coming along at its own pace and Ubuntu is looking better and better. In fact, I think Android in the market will help Linux, too, because it demonstrates that there are alternatives to Mac OS and Windows. Runrev cannot drop Linux without seriously damaging the promise of cross platform development, and that would reduce overall sales. Ive sold a lot of software over my 20 odd years in the industry. One phenomenon I am aware of is the Mac Mirage. For example, in some markets, you'll see a jump in the sales of Windows products if there is a Mac version available too. The number of units of Mac product sold may be significantly less than Windows, but there are Windows units sold BECAUSE there is Mac version. The absense of the Mac version would reduce sales; looking at overall sales then means the Mac version deserves more consideration than just looking at the number of units sold. I think if anyone is looking solely at Linux IDE (as in Rev Studio for Linux) sales, then they would be missing the point. There are a lot of free tools for developing on Linux, and that makes it very challenging to sell IDEs on Linux. A different sort of sales model could be built around a RevServer/On-Rev. Best regards, Lynn Fredricks President Paradigma Software http://www.paradigmasoft.com Valentina SQL Server: The Ultra-fast, Royalty Free Database Server ___ 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
The State of Rev (Was Re: [ANN] Rodeo IDE preview video)
Folks, Motivated by the discussion started by Peter, I decided to write a piece. First following the split in two classes that Peter did, I don't think that Rev is not suitable for professional development by the second class. For those that did not read Peter piece, he does not mean a first and second class that are on some kind of hierarchy but an horizontal split where the first group is the one that bought many addons and the second group is using plain old vanilla rev. He then argues that the second group is loosing its value since many things that should be in rev are then in the paid third party addons and that people from the second group might migrate to some other language due to the increased need for third party paid tools to create professional software. This is just a summary. I am here doing a counter-post detailing my own experience with Rev in the last months and years which I think is valuable to this specific discussion. I own ALL of the Rev addons, I even own multiple licenses for the addons and for Rev itself since I am a sucker for bundles. I am also on a very good position in the community since I went to all the Rev conferences that happened so far, so this gives me perspective and passport stamps. In the last few years I've shipped both desktop applications and web applications, all of which were professional. Even though I have all the addons, there's only two addons I ever used in a professional project. Not that the addons are useless or not to be trusted, they are all wonderful but so is Rev, so even though I use a lot of addons on my own projects, I could handle most of my development with pure Rev. The last software I built which is the Hinduism Today Navigator ( available at http://www.hinduismtoday.com/ ) is my first professional software to use third party addon. It uses SQL Yoga and GLX App Framework (a close addons and a FOSS one). Using those libraries cut my development time but that does not mean that I could not do it without them. The previous version called Hinduism Today Digital Edition was a pure Rev application and worked quite well. The benefit of SQL Yoga and GLX App Framework was that I could borrow Trevors brain a little which is way better than mine and let him solve the database and bootstrapping stuff for me thru the use of his own libraries. It is like delegation, could I build myself some kind of generic database layer for me, yes I could, would it be SQL Yoga, hell no, SQL Yoga is just magical. Can you ship professional software without it, yes you can. Using the knowledge I acquired from The Richard Gaskin Institute Of Successful Business Studies, I learned all that the third party addons do is reduce your development/support time which in return helps your ROI which makes your business more likely to succeed. Most of Rev addons are Rev built anyway. Sometimes is a wise investment to use third party tools to improve your business, some other times, you can just do without it. I strong believe that the sign that a development community is actually evolving is the appearance of commercial third party tools. That usually means that there is a healthy market in it and the key word in this is healthy and not market. It means that entrepreneurs see that there is an opportunity there to make an investment and that they believe this will be good since the community is healthy. The appearance of third party tools also show us where Rev could use some more love. Entrepreneurs will often ship products that will cover some Rev deficiency or extend some feature with things that are desired by a great bunch of people. By seeing which addons are more popular, one can grok where Rev needs to improve. Like Peter said, the current Linux version is almost unusable. While the engine is solid, the IDE is quite flaky (thanks dictionary.app for the right adjective). There is a huge need for improvement in the Linux area before Rev can be used by sane professionals in that OS. I would like to migrate all my development to Linux soon but right now I can't. Like me there are others. As for tRev, Rodeo and other wizardries by Jerry. They like the flux capacitors in Back to The Future, while a DeLorean is a nice professional car, that gizmo makes it something unique. tRev is a wonderful editor, I tend to move from it to Rev IDE quite a lot, for sometimes I like Revs own debugger better, I like stepping thru code. This just my development process to move from tRev to Rev Script Editor and back, I am just glad that the process work quite well. Rodeo is Jerrys and Sarahs response to Apple Stupid Decision regarding languages and the iPhone/iPad. Other responses will probably follow. This is GOOD. While I don't believe that RunRev is being negligent, I would like them to stop the baking process and work on the dishes that are getting colder while waiting for the dressing. We need bugfixes and we need feature parity at least among Mac, Windows and Linux. Right now there is
Re: The State of Rev (Was Re: [ANN] Rodeo IDE preview video)
Andre Garzia wrote: I learned all that the third party addons do is reduce your development/support time which in return helps your ROI which makes your business more likely to succeed. Most of Rev addons are Rev built anyway. Sometimes is a wise investment to use third party tools to improve your business, some other times, you can just do without it. This is a valid point. I don't argue that the Rev Linux needs work -- we all agree on that -- but as far as RevSelect tools go, they are all written in RevTalk and the same functionality could be implemented by anyone. I'm not trying to make excuses because I fully agree with what Peter says about Linux, but just want to point out that there isn't anything magical about these tools. They do not implement things the engine lacks, as Peter suggests. They simply use the existing engine to create shortcuts for those who want to save some time. For myself, and possibly for other tools vendors, I didn't implement Zygodact for Linux because I am missing some critical info about the Linux OS that I would need to do that. I could find out what I need pretty easily I think, but as far as I know, there's little market for Zygodact on Linux. I have never received a request for that platform. If I ever do, I'd be happy to do the research required and create a build. But how many people are shipping commercial products for Linux that require a serial key system? In fact, as far as I know, most Linux users expect free software. Zygodact has no market on Linux if that's true. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.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: The State of Rev (Was Re: [ANN] Rodeo IDE preview video)
I think the market for Rev and Linux is not an end user market, like selling to users but creating custom software for enterprise and organizations and all the web stuff such as RevServer. In the future and Linux gets even more widespread, creating commercial linux tools might be a good option. 2D Boy proved that you can sell linux games and sell a lot (of course world of goo is a cross platform game, but they sold a lot of linux licenses anyway) Andre On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 12:30 PM, J. Landman Gay jac...@hyperactivesw.comwrote: Andre Garzia wrote: I learned all that the third party addons do is reduce your development/support time which in return helps your ROI which makes your business more likely to succeed. Most of Rev addons are Rev built anyway. Sometimes is a wise investment to use third party tools to improve your business, some other times, you can just do without it. This is a valid point. I don't argue that the Rev Linux needs work -- we all agree on that -- but as far as RevSelect tools go, they are all written in RevTalk and the same functionality could be implemented by anyone. I'm not trying to make excuses because I fully agree with what Peter says about Linux, but just want to point out that there isn't anything magical about these tools. They do not implement things the engine lacks, as Peter suggests. They simply use the existing engine to create shortcuts for those who want to save some time. For myself, and possibly for other tools vendors, I didn't implement Zygodact for Linux because I am missing some critical info about the Linux OS that I would need to do that. I could find out what I need pretty easily I think, but as far as I know, there's little market for Zygodact on Linux. I have never received a request for that platform. If I ever do, I'd be happy to do the research required and create a build. But how many people are shipping commercial products for Linux that require a serial key system? In fact, as far as I know, most Linux users expect free software. Zygodact has no market on Linux if that's true. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.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 -- http://www.andregarzia.com All We Do Is Code. ___ 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: The State of Rev (Was Re: [ANN] Rodeo IDE preview video)
Andre Garzia wrote: I think the market for Rev and Linux is not an end user market, like selling to users but creating custom software for enterprise and organizations and all the web stuff such as RevServer. In the future and Linux gets even more widespread, creating commercial linux tools might be a good option. 2D Boy proved that you can sell linux games and sell a lot (of course world of goo is a cross platform game, but they sold a lot of linux licenses anyway) Currently, Linux is at the pre-tipping-point stage characterized by this catch-22 as a key contributing factor: end-users want more apps on Linux before they switch, and developers want to see more end-users on Linux before they deploy. An example of this dynamic was provided by Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols of Computerworld recently: Ubuntu wants Adobe, even if Apple doesn't ... Canonical marketing manager Gerry Carr told me that in a recent survey we did of the Ubuntu User base where we got 32,000 plus responses, Adobe Photoshop as a potential application for Ubuntu got a 3.52 rating out of 5 being the second most popular potential app after Skype. ... Carr added, More interestingly 12000 people gave suggestions for apps we had not suggested. The Adobe family of products featured far and away beyond apps from any other vendor by an enormous margin. So, empirically, there will be a very welcome home for Adobe of they chose to [move to Linux, no matter] whatever individual comments might say. ... http://blogs.computerworld.com/15991/ubuntu_would_welcome_adobe_to_linux For myself, I'm not waiting: My WebMerge product is already on Linux, and even though we've sold only a few copies it's already paid for itself because with Rev it was just a checkbox in the Standalone Builder and a few adjustments to paths in my code. For one of my long-term clients we've been collecting pledges for Linux, offering a form in which they tell us they want a Linux version and how many copies they'd be likely to buy once it's available. This app is for the academic market, and as Andre pointed out that's a good fit for Linux: even if only half of the pledges turned into sales, we'd sell more than a hundred licenses in the first quarter after release, most in bulk license packs of 5 or 10 as is common in academic markets as departments standardize on your app. Needless to say, this Linux port is in progress and we've very much looking forward to delivering it this summer. Ken Ray and Trevor are also working on ports of some of their apps, and I would expect Trevor's ScreenSteps to do well as it appeals to higher ed and will likely get bulk sales from the many universities around the world which have at least some departments with disproportionately high numbers of Linux installs. Sure, as with the engines for Mac and Win there are some things that can be problematic using Rev on Linux. But like the Mac and Windows engines there's enough working in Rev for Linux to get me going delivering good value to our customers today as we also look forward to enhancing those versions in the future as the Rev Linux engine gets even better. I don't expect to get rich from Linux deployments, at least not for another few years. But with a conservative estimated market share for Linux on the desktop at more than 1% it's more than enough to pay for itself if you're using Rev, and establishes a foothold for your company in a community that's as exciting to be a part of as the early days of Mac. And as we know from the history of technology adoption, the second percent won't take nearly as long as the first, and the third will be easier still. After 24 years the Mac has only a 5.4% share; Linux will hit half of that sooner than one might think. Linux isn't going away. It's getting more and more significant every week. The only thing making it a slow process is the lack of apps - so the more we make apps for Linux, the more Linux customers will come into the fold to buy them. And as Andre mentioned, there also are opportunities beyond commercial apps: you'd be surprised how many institutions will pay your normal rate to deliver apps for them which they give away for free. One of my most recent clients is that sort, and my very first commercial contract in 1989 was funded by a federal grant. It's a big, diverse world out there, ripe with a million opportunities waiting to be discovered. For the low cost of a few minutes' time to set up an old PC with Ubuntu and click a checkbox in the Rev standalone builder, you can diversify your revenue opportunities and have fun doing it. :) -- 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
Re: The State of Rev (Was Re: [ANN] Rodeo IDE preview video)
On 31/05/2010 20:46, Richard Gaskin wrote: Andre Garzia wrote: I think the market for Rev and Linux is not an end user market, like selling to users but creating custom software for enterprise and organizations and all the web stuff such as RevServer. In the future and Linux gets even more widespread, creating commercial linux tools might be a good option. 2D Boy proved that you can sell linux games and sell a lot (of course world of goo is a cross platform game, but they sold a lot of linux licenses anyway) Currently, Linux is at the pre-tipping-point stage characterized by this catch-22 as a key contributing factor: end-users want more apps on Linux before they switch, and developers want to see more end-users on Linux before they deploy. An example of this dynamic was provided by Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols of Computerworld recently: Ubuntu wants Adobe, even if Apple doesn't ... Canonical marketing manager Gerry Carr told me that in a recent survey we did of the Ubuntu User base where we got 32,000 plus responses, Adobe Photoshop as a potential application for Ubuntu got a 3.52 rating out of 5 being the second most popular potential app after Skype. Umm . . . I cannot quite see what the advantages of Adobe Photoshop are now that we have GIMP and SUMO: http://www.sumopaint.com/app/ between the 2 of them I think they have Photoshop just about sewn up. I am not trying to run down the idea of commercial software on Linux; but I would like to point out that the fact that the vast majority of Linux distros are FREE does tend to set up users to expect everything that follows to be free, and, where adequate substitutes that are free exist, tend to choose them over commercial ones; both from financial considerations and from the everything should be free mentality that Linux (and even more, everybody's favourite hairy nutcase: Stallman) pushes people towards. The most important bit of what I wrote above is: where adequate substitutes that are free exist and there's the rub: there will be a race for commercial developers to plug perceived niches where a demand exists but an Open Source / Free solution does not exist; followed by an Open Source / Free equivalent hard on its heels. The 'trick', if indeed there is a trick at all, is to find a niche which won't be plugged directly after your commercial offering by an O-S/free alternative which will make you go rajj because of all the time, RD and effort you put into your 'thing' for the peanuts you get paid before one of Saint Richard Stallman's acolytes get you by the small and curlies. I, myself, run my Macintosh on the basis of the software that comes with the system install DVD, Open Source / FREE stuff, and RunRev (which I paid for, only because there is no adequate substitute and I cannot find a suitable (FREE) anti-addiction programme to get me off it): Now part of the reason for this is: a. I cannot afford much commercial software, b. I feel slightly queasy about using pirate software (although it would be disingenuous to say I have never used it; age does funny things with one's morals), c. I can see absolutely NO reason at all to shell out hard-earned money for anything unless no other choice exists. -- I do believe that Linux might be about to tip: in fact I hope it is. However, I don't think this means that all those people who suddenly stop using Windows and Mac, will suddenly be digging deep into their wallets for costly programs such as the Adobe suite. I believe something different will happen: 1. Apple and Microsoft will have to completely rethink and rearrange their way of doing things; both need to iron out some of the warts in their operating systems. Windows, for a start, is going to have to be so much better than Linux that users are going to put up with viruses, and on top of the OS, shell out monthly fees for anti-virus sofware. Mind you, it escapes me why people do now: just run ReactOS: http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html 2. The commercial 'majors' will have to radically cut their pricing structure, and make sure that their offerings are killer apps. I am sure, should Linux 'tip', this will NOT result in a Stallmanesque heaven, where there is pie in the sky and endless free beer (well, even if only because I want to pay for RunRev 5!), but a more mixed system, with a freer sort of competition. I also hope, that to buy a laptop without anybody's OS preinstalled will not involve a hunt across 3 continents . . . :) - Quite apart from my, probably, ill-informed speculations; I do know that RunRev have to look to their Linux version and sort it out lickety-split, less they lose out to others. ___
Re: The State of Rev (Was Re: [ANN] Rodeo IDE preview video)
I got so carried away with my Linux fanboism that I forgot to address the main point of this thread, the third-party afermarket: Andre wrote: When Peter says things should be on the core product, I think he means, it should be available when you have the core product. The difference is subtle since the second phrase means that the features he want could be produced by anyone but should be available. If we had a Free Open Source Movement here (wearing by David hat now) we could fix many issues and ship some good stuff to solve our problems while waiting for RunRev to fix theirs. While I don't believe all the products could be FOSS since we all have bills to pay (I have lots of them), I think everyone would contribute to some Standard Library or set of libraries if possible. About commercial add-ons: Two things communicate the strength of a development tool more clearly than anything else: - Examples of professional-quality apps deployed with it - The size and scope of its third-party aftermarket On the former, the runrev.com site has gotten much better about this but there's still a lot that can be done to show off what this community has been doing with Rev. On the latter, RevSelect offers a lot of great stuff of enough breadth that it really helps newcomers understand the scope of the Rev world. Where would Visual BASIC be without Crystal Reports? Having CR available along with thousands of other add-ons has been good for both those add-on vendors and for VB. The same is true for the Rev add-on tools. Unlike Andre I don't buy many, but when I do they've been big time/money savers: I got Malte's ChartsEngine shortly after it was released and I got Curry's libDoc for importing Word and OpenOffice docs into Rev fields, and both of them cost so little compared to the time it would have taken me to write them myself. The ROI for those tools has been HUGE here. I think it's natural and healthy for a viable dev tool to attract third-party toolmakers. In fact, it would look very bad for Rev if it didn't have such tools, common as such things are in nearly every other IDE community. About Rev FOSS projects: Having participated in what may be the longest-running FOSS project in the Rev community, the MetaCard IDE (released under the MIT license in 2003), I've had high hopes for FOSS tools in the Rev community. But the fact is that MC's been a relatively simple project, since it started out in a finished form and has a mandate of minimal change to preserve its original flavor. For most other FOSS projects code needs to be written from scratch and code is expensive, requiring the one commodity that's most limited and precious on Earth: time. Anything other than the most trivial FOSS projects are a rich man's game, requiring that one has done well enough with commercial work to subsidize the uncompensated time needed to give away code. Sometimes there are well-funded orgs willing to pay for such things, as one of my clients does and as IBM has done with the millions it pours into Linux. Such investments aren't just random feel-good but sound business, part of commoditizing your compliments as Joel Spolsky explains here: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/StrategyLetterV.html For for most FOSS projects, it's just developers scratching an itch, and sharing their solution in the hope that it'll be useful for others. There's certainly no harm in that, and much good can come from it, as with the two FOSS initiatives in progress at the Rev Interoperability Project: - stdLib Inspired by a comment Andre made at the first-ever RevCon in Monterey, stdlib's goal is to provide a library of the most commonly-used handlers and functions that most apps need, things like getting file mod dates, managing preferences, etc. - Input Validation Behavior The goal here is to provide a behavior script you can attach to fields to handle the most common input validation tasks, like verifying that the input is numeric, or contains a valid email address, etc. Both of these projects have been slow-going, because they rely solely on donated time from volunteers. But if they seem interesting to you please consider joining the group and diving in, either contributing code or even just suggestions for things these libraries should include. Completed projects from RIP have included the Edinburgh Core MetaData Initiative (ECMI) headed up by Ken Ray, which provides some helpful guidelines for using custom props for storing commonly-used metadata about components (version, vendor, url, etc.) which has been used in tools like Trevor's DataGrid, some tools by Eric Chatonet, Phil Davis, and others, and the forthcoming update to my devo toolkit. There's even a handy tool palette there named RIPEditor to make it ultra-simple to add and update RIP properties in your tools. Like any FOSS initiative, the stuff that comes out of the group is only as
Re: The State of Rev (Was Re: [ANN] Rodeo IDE preview video)
Andre, Your wrote: I decided to write a piece . . . Clear, cogent and consummate. Four thumbs up Best, William __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 5159 (20100531) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.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
