Hi,
Have been off the list for a while as I am still using 2.5.x. I am a
hobbyist only and feel that Rev pricing is pretty competitive. To the
question is $200 a lot - interesting question, I work in a very different
field of engineering and not software, for a very large company and know
tha
Richard Gaskin wrote:
> A search for "subscription" came up empty on both pages.
Try searching for "upgrade".
> Section 5-d of the Terms is about RevOnline; I can't figure out how the
> description of that optional free service could be construed to mean that the
> Rev product itself will someh
Ok, I've been as vocal as everyone else on this list about Rev
pricing, particularly the fact that it has always seemed a bit quirky
to me.
That being said, over time I've come to realize that Rev is well
worth what I've paid for it--based on what it DOES for me. If the
upgrade cost real
> Thank you, but I am not referring to the nearest analog for
> price and features, but how the price of the upgrade compares
> to the original product
>
> REALbasic Standard is $99, and the Upgrade is $50.
> REALbasic Professional is $500, and the Upgrade is $250.
> - In both cases, the upg
Right, I'm going to start a petition to get RunRev to increase the
purchase price. :)
Best,
Mark
On 5 Aug 2006, at 07:21, dreamscapesoftware.com - List wrote:
REALbasic Standard is $99, and the Upgrade is $50.
REALbasic Professional is $500, and the Upgrade is $250.
- In both cases, the upg
dreamscapesoftware.com wrote:
> Richard Gaskin wrote:
> > ... nor can I find anything on RunRev's site
> > describing a subscription-based licensing model.
...
>
> The Revolution Terms (note section 5-d)
> http://support.runrev.com/section/terms.php
>
> The Revolution Studio Purchase Page (note t
I didn't realize that owning Revolution Studio meant that I am a
hobbist.
Honestly, I would have assumed that anyone who was really disturbed by
paying $200/year for a development environment must by a hobbyist. I'm
not saying you've been stripped of your right to question the relative
releas
Oh, well then nevermind =).
:) No, I'm not saying that.
___
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/listin
Brian Yennie wrote:
> I agree with some of your points previously, but are you really saying that
> you can take a couple of local night school classes and suddenly become so
> proficient in C++ or Basic that you have no need for Revolution? C++ takes
> years of experience, and will never give y
Lynn Fredricks wrote:
> The nearest competitor in terms of price/value is probably REALbasic,
> however 12 months of upgrades of REALbasic Professional Edition is $250, not
> $199. Revolution Studio creates applications for multiple platforms so its
> nearest analog to REALbasic is Pro, not Standar
Richard Gaskin wrote:
> dreamscapesoftware.com write:
>
> > Garrett Hylltun wrote:
> >> I've already expressed my dislike of the pricing structure.
> >> But expressing it here on the mailing list does nothing but
> >> cause unwanted and unneeded dissension among everyone on
> >> the list and in the
I agree with some of your points previously, but are you really saying
that you can take a couple of local night school classes and suddenly
become so proficient in C++ or Basic that you have no need for
Revolution? C++ takes years of experience, and will never give you the
kind of RAD developm
Bill Marriott wrote:
> Since Feb there has been 2.7, 2.7.1, and 2.7.2. While I have seen
> improvements in the trial versions I still have not seen the kind of
> stability I enjoyed in 2.6.1. They can't even install and uninstall
> properly.
I agree, there's been some nice and well needed bug fixe
> > I've already expressed my dislike of the pricing structure.
> But expressing it here on the mailing list does nothing but
> cause unwanted and unneeded dissension among everyone on the
> list and in the end, won't change Runtime's pricing structure anyway.
>
> Where else would be a good pl
Gaskin Wrote:
>For noise-making I suppose the list provides a certain satisfaction, but
for results have you considered >writing to RunRev directly?
Yes I have...
This was the response:
"Linux 2.7 will follow, it is a little delayed but is planned to appear in a
few weeks time."
This response i
dreamscapesoftware.com write:
> Garrett Hylltun wrote:
>> I've already expressed my dislike of the pricing structure.
>> But expressing it here on the mailing list does nothing but
>> cause unwanted and unneeded dissension among everyone on
>> the list and in the end, won't change Runtime's prici
>B.Marriot wrote
>I don't like the pricing plan, either, to be honest. There's no guarantee
that they will actually *do* anything >that matters to me in the year
following the subscription. I really don't believe in paying for bug fixes.
>To me, I prefer the simple model that if you're fixing a bu
My 1-year license for Studio 2.6.1 updates ran out something like a week
before 2.7 was first released, back in February. In all that previous year I
don't think I received (nor was there available) a single "update" for my
money.
Then I said -- oh, this is an interesting update, antialiased gr
1. I am not saying that I want to get Revolution for free.
2. I am not saying that the people at RunRev are bad people.
3. I am not saying that any of you are bad people.
What am I saying? For what you actually get in updates, the Renewal Cost is
too high and should be dropped slightly. Th
Garrett Hylltun wrote:
> I've already expressed my dislike of the pricing structure. But expressing
> it here on the mailing list does nothing but cause unwanted and unneeded
> dissension among everyone on the list and in the end, won't change Runtime's
> pricing structure anyway.
Where else w
I think the pricing is appropriate for a professional product. It's
also the only way a little company can survive and still continue
development. The features that's coming in the future (I can't talk
about it - NDA) will make it all worthwhile.
If you don't make money with the product and ar
Dear Rev's Fellows,
If you consider that the real world is never "perfect", Rev can't be
perfect but it's our luck to be able to use it, even evry day ...
Rev is developped by a very talentious RunRev team ;
As a general purpose development tool, Rev let us develop all kinds
of destop's an
Yes, for some of us on tight budgets it is indeed too costly. Therefore I
will keep updating once per year unless it drops to $99. Then I think I will
get more for the same price :-)
All the best!
Viktoras
---Original Message---
From: dreamscapesoftware.com - List
Date: 08/04/06
I have to agree with you. I'm very happy with rev but there are too many
bugs and feature requests that needs to be taken care of before I upgrade.
And where is Linux and unix?
> If anyone else agree's that the upgrade cost is too high, let me know and
speak up.
__
On Aug 4, 2006, at 12:32 AM, dreamscapesoftware.com - List wrote:
Does anyone else cringe at the thought of dropping down $199 or
more for a few new
[snip]
license once. Do I really need to pay Rev $199 for the "reLaunch"
command?!!! Give me a break.
If anyone else agree's that the up
25 matches
Mail list logo
