Moving the MC IDE forward

[Robert Brenstein]

>On Friday, July 11, 2003, at 11:42  AM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
>
>>So putting it just as bluntly, that there is a perception of MC's value is
>>reason enough.  If that perception changes over time the MC engine will
>>whither away naturally.  There should be no need to force change, and doing
>>so would not have the liberating feeling of a choice.
>
>I'm not proposing forcing anyone to switch. That's not even what I'm 
>asking about. I'm specifically curious why people would expend 
>significant effort updating/enhancing the MC environment. If all 
>we're talking about is maintaining compatibility with new engines, 
>then that's a minimal task and I don't see any reason not to.

Well, I for one have just renewed MC licence, so I am "stuck" so do 
speak with MC for another year. Not that I despair. I am happy with 
MC, and I see no need for fork out a few hundred bucks to switch to 
Rev any time soon. I am among those for whom Rev's interface is too 
rich and gets in my way.

Robert