> "In my experience, software reviewers are writers, not developers, > and their reviews are rarely done in a depth that would qualify them > to proclaim any real knowledge or understanding of the product they > review."
Sorry, Rob, I have to disagree here.... the person who wrote the review is Keith Martin, and he has been using SuperCard and HyperCard for years (he is very active on the SuperCard list). So he doesn't qualify for the "writer-only" issue of which you speak. If anything, he may be a bit SuperCard-biased, although other than a couple of mentions of SuperCard, he doesn't seem to be acting in a biased way. > Now a 4-page spread with lots of juicy pix of a prog. in > development would have said a lot more than MacUser's > rather stuffy text. If RR is, as MacUser claims, > programming for the non-geeky; as we all know it is > (honestly, I'm not geeky) then it should have been backed > up with images of drag-and-drop and object programming. > Reading the article I felt rather sad because it > singularly failed to give an impression of the passion one > could rapidly feel when 'fooling around' with RR. How often do you get to see a "4-page spread with lots of juicy pix" for ANY program? Don't get me wrong; I agree it would have been better to show more, but Keith did cover most of the bases, and the only "negatives" he gave in his article were related to menus (which he attributed to the cross-platform nature of Rev - which is true) and the pricing structure. In my opinion, it was a GLOWING review... look at the final two paragraphs of the article - a place where reviewers tend to get mealy-mouthed and say things like "if it had ___ it would be great" or "you judge for yourself", but instead says: ------------- Revolution 2.0.1 delivers everything its name promises. It is a broad-ranging and potent tool which, with a little practice, puts enormous power into the hands of the user. Before Revolution, the world of cross-platform software production was restricted to specialists versed in arcane programming languages, but now it is limited purely by the user's imagination. ------------- Does this sound like a "no-mice" review to you? I give MacUser UK the same number of mice it gave Rev: 4.5. Ken Ray Sons of Thunder Software Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web Site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/ > From: Rob Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 07:29:01 -0700 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: 4 and a bit mice...... > >> MacUser has no passion, no balls, and, frankly, would not >> make me interested in RR at all! >> >> So no mice at all to MacUser for their article. >> >> Come on, fight me, disagree with me, feedback ........ >> intellectual ferment. > > No argument here, Richmond... > > but I would extend the statement to Macworld as well and software > reviewers as a group. > > On 31 May I posted [Dan's Post re RunRev's HyperCard Roots], > > > -- > > Rob Cozens > CCW, Serendipity Software Company > http://www.oenolog.com/who.htm > > "And I, which was two fooles, do so grow three; > Who are a little wise, the best fooles bee." > > from "The Triple Foole" by John Donne (1572-1631) > _______________________________________________ > use-revolution mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
