Plea to sell Dan's book widely

[Alex Tweedly]

At 23:47 06/08/2004 -0400, Troy Rollins wrote:


>On Aug 6, 2004, at 5:54 PM, Alex Tweedly wrote:
>
>>I did find the Mac-orientation of Revolution a bit off-putting at first. 
>>Hypercard (and Applescript, and QT and ...) are mentioned so often, and 
>>so much discussion includes Mac mentions, that I did wonder initially 
>>just how "cross-platform" Rev would be - or whether it was really 80% a 
>>Mac application, with a token ability to run on other platforms. The 
>>apparent focus on Mac/Apple (conferences, Macworld announcements, etc.) 
>>could easily "scare" Windows (or Unix/Linux) users. I think it would be a 
>>good idea for some "balancing" if possible.

>
>I think that this isn't an issue of Windows versus Mac, but one of Windows 
>developers versus Mac developers. One of Rev's greatest strengths and 
>marketable features is its inherently multi-platform nature. A feature 
>that Windows developers generally don't give a whit about. Windows 
>developers (typically) are not Mac savvy, and don't even consider 
>developing anything for Mac. In fact, your initial reaction would be 
>typical, I think. Why mess up an IDE and scripting language with all that 
>Mac oriented rubbish? What's with this plain English programming?

Troy - you present a very persuasive argument for why Mac developers are a 
better (or easier) target for Rev. than Windows developers. I'm worried 
that  the Mac universe isn't big enough for a small portion of it to 
sustain Revolution - whereas a (much smaller) portion of the Windows users 
/ developers would be.

And to be honest I'm not so much worried about what a Windows developer / 
user thinks of the details (such as "plain English") as that they don't get 
that far. Look at the main page on www.runrev.com - Windows is mentioned 
once - a single word (admittedly in a prominent place).
About a fifth of the screen is taken up by a row of  icons of Mac awards, 
and another fifth of the screen is a Max OSX screenshot.
Simply changing the screenshot to W-XP would help.
Adding a quote (or logo/award) from a PC or Linux mag or site would help 
even more.

>Mac developers, on the other hand, know well that they generally *must* 
>develop for Windows in order for their products to be seriously marketable 
>to the general public. Virtually all Mac developers that I know 
>(Hypercarders excepted) develop multi-platform, and look for 
>multi-platform tools to develop with. Windows users are not specifically 
>looking for multi-platform tools, they are looking for the tools with the 
>most advanced Windows features they can find.

True - though there may be an opening with the extra press given to 
Unix/Linux to convince more Windows developers to consider other platforms.

>  There is an argument to be had that Rev is somewhat limited in advanced 
> Windows features because of its well-balanced multi-platform feature set.

Presumably, the same argument applies:
"There is an argument to be had that Rev is somewhat limited in advanced 
Macintosh features because of its well-balanced multi-platform feature set."

Would you agree with that ? Which Mac features are missing ? Are they 
missing because of the multi-platform nature ?

>Marketing Revolution to Mac developers is easy. Marketing it to Windows 
>developers (other than a certain segment) is swimming against the tide. It 
>can be done, but it is certainly a harder road to travel. There is a lot 
>more "education" to do, in order to get Windows developers to recognize 
>the value... if in fact, it does have value to them over their current tools.
>
>>
>>[ Occasionally, I still think there's too much Mac focus - but I'll keep 
>>that argument for another day when my skin is feeling thicker :- ]
>
>Ah, OK. Standing-by.  ;-)

No, I'm not going to be tempted into that topic until I'm ready for it....

-- Alex.