Recent Development on the Use-List

[Thomas McGrath III]

I don't want to further this part of the thread too much. I don't  
agree with these assumptions.


On Dec 11, 2005, at 7:38 AM, Mathewson wrote:

> 1. A question about who RR is meant for: does it have
> pretensions to be a "universal faith", or is it some little
> "gnostic sect" for an elite?
It really is not up to me or you who/what RR is meant for. That is  
the companies business. It is/was not up to me who/what Photoshop was  
designed for. I am a professional Graphics designer/developer and GUI  
designer, I am not a Photographer. Photoshop is targeted at  
Photographers it seems more than Graphic designers IMO. But I still  
love PS and use it in every project I do. They can target whomever  
they choose. It is not my call.
> 2. Is the "liturgy" to be conducted in Plain English or
> "Sanskrit / Latin / Old Church Slavonic" ?
I think this is referring to Transcript??? Again, This is not my/your  
call. If the company decides this or that gets added then great but  
all I can do is recommend something. (This is why I pay for an  
Enterprise License and subscribe to the 'Improve-Revolution' list)
>
> 3. Is there a need for a "person of vision" to radically
> rethink and repackage RR to prevent mass migration
> elsewhere and reinvigorate people's faith in the validity
> of RR right now?
Like Steve jobs, there are some who love him and some who hate him. I  
don't think RR needs to be rethought or repackaged at all (It is  
because of what Revolution is now that I payed good money for it, and  
not what some other people not associated with the company think it  
should be.)
I must have missed something, Is there a MASS MIGRATION happening???  
I thought just the opposite was happening. I thought RR had doubled  
its user base??? I think RR is completely Valid right now, as is,  
straight out of the box.
>
> 4. Do the churches (GUI) look a bit shabby in comparison
> with the mosques, temples and so forth that litter the
> landscape?
I was always taught that it was not what was outside that counts but  
rather what was inside that mattered. I do think the outside does  
matter as a first impression though and cleaning the GUI up certainly  
will help. But why compare RR with other programs in other fields???  
Why not hold it up to its own standards??? I think it can hold up  
just fine and as long as the company keeps doing the wonderful  
improvements that it has been doing it will soon look even greater.
>
> One of my criticisms of RR (the company) is that, apart
> from the fact that we know their headquarters are in the
> New Town in Edinburgh, we know very little about them
> personally. There is also a feeling that the faceless folk
> at RR don't have a strong leader who LISTENS AND RESPONDS
> TO THE DEVOTEES OF THE FAITH.
REALLY, I always had the impression that RR listens very well, they  
always have someone on the list poking their head in here and telling  
us about upcoming events and improvements. They also post solutions  
and ideas here. I never met - saw - heard of any one at Macromedia on  
the MD lists. I never heard of anyone from Adobe on the Photoshop  
lists, etc. etc. But I see someone from RR at least once month here  
on the list AND they listen!!!!! They take what the user base says  
here and the incorporate that into the upgrades.

My thoughts are mine so please don't take offense.

Thanks
Tom McGrath