OT Re: REALbasic vs. Revolution
chipp at chipp.com
Sun Oct 13 15:20:01 EDT 2002
> >One thing I do admire about Windows, is the lack of a 'holy
> ordained look'
> >(just my opinion).
> I'm beginning to develop an appreciation for that myself, Chipp. But
> I see almost as much concern for a better XP look & feel as for
> improved OSX l&f on this list.
Good point Rob, I would suggest there is a difference between an Apple 'holy
ordained look' and a Windows one -- for the following reasons:
Apple has basically two completely different interface 'looks' : pre OSX and
post OSX whereas Windows has more of a 'variations on a theme' type
interface looks. In fact, in WinXP you can even choose the Win98 'classic
Apple Reviewers and Users(?) seem much more critical of interface variations
(except those by Apple ie the I-look suite) than Windows Reviewers and
Users. In fact, as a reader of many PC rags, I don't remember seeing a
program slammed specifically because of a lack of standard interface issues.
I think a case may be made that Mac users are more 'graphically sensitive'
on the whole. The Mac has historically been the platform of preference for
designers (though I think some of this is changing with the lack of Apple
processor performance and higher cost). This would create more 'interface -
aware' users and reviewers.
I still think RR needs to conform to some more standard look & feel on XP,
but I submit: as these multi OS GUI environments evolve, it will be more and
more difficult for Scott and Kevin to 'keep pace' assuming one wants to
create a single app with a consistent 'look and feel' on each platform. IMO,
this is why programs like Lightwave, Alias, Avid et al create their 'own'
gui -- and other programs like Photoshop, Flash, etc. are 'standardizing' on
More information about the use-livecode