Revolution and the Web, feedback wanted, Part 1 of 3

[J. Landman Gay]

Mikey wrote:
> Jacque,
> 
>> I'll agree with the first comparison, but have to disagree with the
>> second. MetaCard and Revolution are identical in every respect except
>> for the stacks that represent how the user interacts with the engine.
> Now I'm confused.  I thought MetaCard didn't have all the gui niceties
> that RR does,

That's right.

> and was more of a text engine.  So since I apparently
> have no idea how we got where we are, can you expand a bit more on
> what MetaCard was?  Was this just a simple case of RR saying "Hey,
> this is great, but we can make it better"?

Pretty much, I think.

Do you mean "test" engine? MC has sort of become that in a way. Since 
its IDE is so much simpler than Rev's, most bugs that are reproducible 
in MC are usually engine bugs, though not all.

MetaCard was the original product until Runtime took over. Now it is 
just another alternate IDE, though as you mention, the GUI is less 
elaborate. But everything that can be done in Rev can also be done in MC 
because the engine is the same, and in some cases, the GUI is similar as 
well. They are more alike than different. I use both, all the time, for 
different things.

-- 
Jacqueline Landman Gay         |     jacque at hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software           |     http://www.hyperactivesw.com