RunRev vs RealBasic (Richard Gaskin)

cdunix at praevius.com cdunix at praevius.com
Thu Dec 30 17:42:52 EST 2004


References: <20041230221640.C7321930123 at mail.runrev.com>
In-Reply-To: <20041230221640.C7321930123 at mail.runrev.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.2
X-Originating-IP: 12.203.234.218

Thanks, Richard, point taken.  I'll begin by telling about myself.  I have
fairly extensive experience with the Windows API, Unix, and the Macintosh
environment.  I am very familiar with tools such as XCODE, GCC, etc.  I have
recently (within the last 3 years) found that RealBasic strikes a very, very
good middle ground with power vs. ease of use; not sacrificing a great deal of
the former.  I can't really complain about their support either.  My only
knowledge of RunRev is what I'm reading from the website and hearing from
testimonials.

I'm sure you're familiar with the saying "all science is magic until discovered"
(or thereabouts), so basically I am curious as to whether most users are novice
developers and are only "impressed" with RunRev because it is something they
can use, or if it really does pack a great deal of power along with flexibility
to do the "complex" things.

I am currently developing software as a contractor for several different
companies and am very interested in anything that can help me do the job faster
without losing much.  Currently, my primary interest would be in developing
data-connected finance and tracking applications.  From my "ignorant" position,
it would appear that RB is much more fit for the robust requirements, but as I
said I don't know that for a fact.

Hope that gives you a little more insight into where I am.

Thanks again,
Michael


> I would happily do my best to help explain why MacWorld UK calls Rev 
> "the Best Rapid Application Development tool on the market" (Dec 04, 
> p55) if you'll kindly tell us a bit more about your interest in Rev.
> 
> A shotgun approach usually just turns into a pissing match, and there's 
> plenty in the archives of both lists and elsewhere to feed appetites for 
> that sort of thing.
> 
> So if you can describe why you're considering Rev we can better address 
> your specific areas of interest.
> 
> Also, when you say you're not interested in "ease of use", does that 
> also rule out productivity?  Greater productivity is probably the 
> strongest argument for 4GLs over lower-level languages.  Osterhaut makes 
> one of the most cogent arguments in favor of 4GLs -- c check out his 
> seminal paper on the topic: <http://home.pacbell.net/ouster/scripting.html>.
> 
> After you've read that please describe why you're considering switching 
> and we'll happly do out best to answer your questions.
> 
> You may also want to check out Rev's web site:  <http://www.runrev.com>, 
> as most of the questions in your post are addressed there.  Your notions 
> about how Rev's pricing compares to RealBASIC's can be clarified there 
> as well, looking beyond the price of admission to total costs for 
> upgrades, support, etc.
> 
> --
>   Richard Gaskin
>   Fourth World Media Corporation
>   __________________________________________________
>   Rev tools and more: http://www.fourthworld.com/rev


----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.



More information about the use-livecode mailing list