Tiger breaks hyperCard?

[Richard Gaskin]

Marty Billingsley wrote:
>>Richard Gaskin <ambassador at fourthworld.com> writes:
>>Ken Norris wrote:
>>
>>>Note: HyperCard is the one-and-only software item I run in Classic
>>>today. I use its Color Tools because, albeit it lacks some features,
>>>it's still has the fastest, most intuitive paint tools, for cranking out
>>>graphical artwork parts, on the planet.
>>
>>How would you characterize the benefits of the HC color tools over Rev's
>>tools?
>
> I'll jump in here, although my beef is more with the regular painting
> tools than the color tools.  We really miss HC's text tool for "painting"
> letters and words.  Why did RunRev eliminate that?

That perspective is based on a philosophical position that may not 
reflect the inventor's intent.

Rather than ask "Why did RunRev eliminate that?", it may better reflect 
the engine's unique history by asking "Why didn't they add that?"

It may seem like just word-mincing, but there's a fundamental difference 
that may help newcomers understand other differences between Rev and HC 
(or any other xTalk implementation):

RunRev was not originally invented to be a HyperCard clone per se. 
While it incorporates much of the same language and object model, it 
extends them in ways that add unique value to Rev, much like every other 
xTalk has its own extensions to differentiate themselves from HC.

So to answer the question "Why didn't Rev implement a paint text tool?", 
my guess would be that they already had fully anti-aliased, 
resolution-independent text in fields.

Under what sort of circumstances would there be a benefit to having 
bitmapped text for which fields could not be used?

If a strong enough case can be made that benefits enough users I'm sure 
RunRev would consider it.

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Managing Editor, revJournal
  _______________________________________________________
  Rev tips, tutorials and more: http://www.revJournal.com