> Why introduce confusion and exacerbate a perception of
flightiness only to assist a branding effort which accounts
for a scenario that never happened?
It may be the case that Adobe, Macromedia, Netscape, Apple,
Asymetrix, and other companies with strong market research
departments are not entirely wrong on this.
If you'd like to send me the case studies used internally at these companies
to support your argument, it would go a long way in convincing one way or
the other.
As I said earlier, I don't see the change so significant really in
either direction. I presume this was discussed heavily and the
decision was not made lightly, although there are pros and cons for
either. The only thing that makes me somewhat uncomfortable, on the
second thought, is calling a programming language "revolution". Kinda
odd, considering that it is a common word. May be a compromise could
be to retain the name but don't call it be name in the marketing
materials, simply referring to the scripting language OF Revolution.
I find this more clear than "English-like Revolution is the easiest
scripting language available".
Robert
_______________________________________________
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
