OT Re: REALbasic vs. Revolution

Troy Rollins troy at rpsystems.net
Fri Oct 11 20:32:01 CDT 2002


On 10/11/02 8:26 PM, "Richard Gaskin" <ambassador at fourthworld.com> wrote:

> - What's wrong with the language such that a completely separate API in
> needed for plugins?
> 
> I Rev/MC we can trade groups and other native objects without needing to
> treat them as second-class citizens.

Personally, I think this conversation is spent. But since it seems to
continue, I'll go ahead and ask where the SSL object is. Where the Open GL
object is. Where the sheets object is. The sprite animation object. The PDF
importer. The PDF exporter. The QuickTime capture object. The Firewire
output object. The USB object. Even the throbbing button object (native, not
simulated.)

I could easily go on. If these objects are out their for trading, send'm
over. I take it that a different API isn't needed, and these things can be
whipped up with a little transcript. Sounds like no big deal, right?

I promise not to treat them as second class citizens.  ;)

My point is, until RunRev makes it possible - it ain't possible. Stacks with
some transcript embedded in them may be handy-dandy work savers, but they're
not adding any real new capabilities. I wouldn't even call them plugins
personally. If this (pre-coded stacks) is what you are referring to... no
offense meant... but... big deal. As far as I've seen, there is not one of
them that adds anything real to the environment.

The more this conversation continues, the harder it forces me to look at
what is really missing from the Revolution environment. To be honest, I
liked it better before you guys started defending it. A lot better.

Even the thought that anything that is missing can be made into a freaking
transcript stack is ludicrous, unless RunRev and Metacard add those
functions for you. I think that Rev is good enough that it defends itself as
a fast, simple, development environment with a good degree of power
considering the ease of use. It has some extreme advantages for certain
types of projects. It is a great thing. But, trying to argue that it is the
be-all-end-all environment in every way just makes it, and its users, sound
amateur and small-time. These are not the type of arguments which will
attract 3rd party developers to produce actual plugins for Revolution, which
is what I had hoped would be accomplished. They are the type of arguments
which will keep them away.

By the way, the one guy who started the conversation fled to become a new RB
user a couple of days ago.

I'd suggest dropping the topic before licensed users who have been champions
for the tool abandon it as well. I sincerely doubt that you are winning any
converts on the RB list. Both Kevin Miller, and Scott Raney have adequately
made appropriate comments there. Fanning the flames is doing Revolution no
favors.

Revolution is great. But it is version 1, and has quite a ways to grow. 3rd
party developers working to create actual plugins would go a long way toward
that. Please don't imply that we don't need them. We do. By the hundreds.
Like RB has.

-- 
Troy
RPSystems, Ltd.
www.rpsystems.net




More information about the use-livecode mailing list