Moving the MC IDE forward

[Simon lord]

Agreed.  I tried to give Rev an honest chance this weekend and got 
totally frustrated with all the palettes.  I was genuinely happy to see 
support for MySQL and other items I need but the interface simply 
turned me off and I had to use MC in the end.  It's not that I didn't 
understand the palette options and offerings, it's just that I don't 
want/need to know about these things while developing.  It's *too* 
helpful, kinda like a car salesman.

Maybe Kevin will add a pref dialog that allows us to decide what 
palettes and menus we want to see in our work environment.  That would 
help considerably and I don't see it as being that difficult to provide.


On Monday, July 21, 2003, at 09:10 AM, Robert Brenstein wrote:

>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> metacard mailing list
> metacard at lists.runrev.com
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
>
>
Sincerely,
Simon