At 3:00 PM +0300 9/13/01, Douglas Wagner wrote:
>You said, "REALbasic's environment does less, and is therefore simpler,
>just as a golf cart is simpler than a passenger car".
>In the absence of facts, and with respect, we only have your word for that.
>I'd love to read a serious comparison written, perhaps, by the one who
>understand Rev's potential, namely, the Rev project leader.
Briefly:
-- Revolution's dev environment lets you change code _as the project is running_.
This is something very few environments manage.
-- Revolution's environment is written in Revolution. You can script it, write
plug-ins in it, and modify it, all using the exact same language and knowledge you
already have.
-- Revolution's environment stores profiles, allowing you to easily switch between
languages, designs, and target platforms.
-- Revolution's environment can have more than one project open at a time.
>And, in response to my comparison of versions, you said, "...the version
>number alone means little. Given that Revolution has a significant head
>start in many areas (and lags behind in some others), it's going to be very
>interesting".
>
>Once again, I'm sure there are many of us who would like a few hard facts.
>One must wonder, Geoff, why the Rev staff leave you to struggle with these
>matters alone.
First, it's not a struggle :-) I'm reasonably familiar with REALbasic. I imagine if I
hadn't stepped forward, someone else would have. A detailed comparison between the two
environments would exceed the scope of a reasonable email, but again briefly:
Revolution abstracts many complex tasks and platform issues that REALbasic does not.
REALbasic offers database connectivity that Revolution does not. Revolution has far
better text handling capabilities, and a more flexible object model. REALbasic has 3D
graphics and threads.
Another main difference is the philosophy of the companies. Spend any time on the
mailing lists for the two products, and two things will become clear: many
Revolution/MetaCard users wish the companies were MORE aggressive in adding new
features/capabilities; and many REALbasic users wish the company were LESS aggressive
in adding new features/capabilities. :-) Nowhere is this more clear than OS X support.
I've been pressing Rev for it ever since RB announced it, but they resisted in order
to get it right. On the other hand, some people on the RB list are saying that now,
with 3.5.1, RB is finally coming close to releasing an OS X product that works...
>I said:
>>If Rev cost the same as REALBasic I'd buy it and use it along with
>>REALBasic. However, the price is much too high merely to see what can be
>>done. The 10 line limit is a serious obstacle and not a wise way to limit
>>the evaluation copy. I believe the RR marketing weasels need to be reigned
>>in.
>
>You replied that, "This is an unfair characterization. The only thing
>available for free from REALbasic is the demo, which runs only for a
>limited time...".
>And further that, "In contrast, Revolution's starter kit is free for
>unlimited use..."
>
>Yes. However, although the Rev "Starter" version is free, it has a serious
>limitation. Let's not get into more contests but rather recognize and
>acknowledge the 10 line script limit prevents serious, i.e.,. Complex
>evaluation. And a thorough evaluation is, of course, the only sort that
>matters in the long run. One must conclude that although the Rev pricing
>policy seems better in fact it isn't.
Of course it has a serious limitation. Otherwise, why pay for the full version?
Nevertheless, it is not limited _functionally_, as the REALbasic demo is. Others can
speak more intelligently about this, but there are developers right now using nothing
more than the starter kit to do complex development.
>Consider, there are many people who download the "free" version and never
>upgrade, those RR refers to as "hobbyists". Those people represent lost
>revenue. Then there are those who download to evaluate and give up because
>of the scripting limitation. That's a more serious loss of revenue. If RR's
>competitors are "Director" or "iShell", they why is RR offering a free
>version to hobbyists and a crippled version to professionals? Rather, one
>would expect a free, time limited evaluation copy followed by a full price
>professional version.
This is a business decision, not an argument on the merits of the two products. Rev
has decided to be generous in offering a free version without strings. If it costs
them sales, that's their choice. I don't see how that qualifies as a "crippled"
version that is offered to professionals.
>Clearly Rev is a serious product. (Precisely how serious remains to be
>seen). Nevertheless, good work has been done so it's worth paying for. The
>question is how much. I note many letters to this list mention figures at
>or below $100. Apparently that makes sense to someone who evaluates for
>personal use and later buys, for personal use. But it makes sense also to
>someone who plans to do a thorough evaluation and given a favorable result
>will buy a Professional license eventually. The latter user is more likely
>to come to see the merits of the software if he can do significant work
>with it. In either case, revenue is generated.
Again, you're arguing the business sense of Revolution's policy, not the technical
merit. It's just a guess, but I think one of the reasons $100 seems reasonable to many
is that there is a large number of HyperCard users experimenting with Revolution --
HyperCard retails for $99. So let's start from there. I'll be conservative and say
that Revolution has twice the feature set that HyperCard does. That's $99 x 2 = $200
(rounding). Revolution does it on three platforms (not counting that Unix is really
over ten platforms) so that's $200 x 3 = $600. Add in the fact that Revolution is
under active development, versus the fact that HyperCard is dead, and I think that
brings us to the neighborhood of $1000.
>As matters stand, Rev doesn't seem to be getting the attention you feel it
>deserves. The apparent lack of traffic on this list must mean something. Of
>course this could be merely the hobbyists list and the real discussion goes
>on elsewhere...
Heck, I'm just answering the questions that are asked.
regards,
gc
