REALbasic vs. Revolution
troy at rpsystems.net
Thu Oct 10 15:13:01 EDT 2002
On 10/10/02 3:37 PM, "Richard Gaskin" <ambassador at fourthworld.com> wrote:
>> Right. Well, lessee... RB can certainly do those things. It can also make
>> applications that look and act like users expect them to.
> Asde from throbbing default buttons and dialog sheets on OS X (neither of
> which have ever been mentioned by my customers), what specific things might
> users expect that can't be supported in Rev?
Richard, I am a big fan of Rev, and have attempted be be very fair on both
lists. In most cases, I prefer Rev over RB. But the bottom line is - on OSX
(or for that matter any OS supported by RB) RB applications look and feel
more "native" than Rev apps do. In virtually every way. Rev feels "pseudo
native." Now, this does not always get in the way, but at times it does.
Sometimes throbbing default buttons and dialog sheets really do matter. The
shareware market for instance is particularly aware of these things.
There are a vast number of other things that can't currently be supported in
Rev. I've been with Rev since one of the early betas, and have very high
hopes for it, but RB has some advantages which it will take a while to catch
up with. Notably the 3rd party plugin support - something which can not be
I'm trying not to get too defensive, since I have always been a Rev
supporter - but to assume that one must choose one or the other tool... I
for one can't do that right now. Until 2.0 comes out, and we start to see
some serious plugins, not little stack based stuff, but real plugins like
video capture, OpenGL 3D, true animation with collision detection, and more,
I think that Rev can't yet be the "one environment does it all" tool.
I love Rev too, but not to the exclusion of other tools.
More information about the use-livecode