dave at looktowindward.com
Fri Nov 10 04:40:41 CST 2006
You have a lot of points I agree with and have voiced these concerns
in the past, both in Private to RunRev and on this list.
The fact that it turned into a rant and abuse was thrown was
unfortunate, but perhaps understandable.
There is definitely a problem with "silly" bugs and lack of a clear
way of finding answers to problems within the Rev environment - in
short it takes a long time (more than necessary) to become a RunRev
"expert". I think it's really sad that this is the case, and, the new
way of selling support or updates compounds that problem and makes it
harder to sell (in my experience).
It may help to realize that there is a big distinction made (both at
RunRev and with seasoned RunRev developers that have come to the
environment via HyperCard/MetaCard) between the IDE and the Engine.
This means that more support effort is put into developing/fixing the
Engine than the IDE. The problem with this is that new customers do
not see this distinction until further along the RunRev route and
treat it as one big package. In my opinion RunRev should concentrate
on one "Bug-Fix" release and fix as many old bugs as possible without
adding too many (if any) new features. I really think the IDE needs a
big overhaul, since this is the first thing a new user sees.
I would be willing to do this work for a lot less than market rate
but I just cannot afford to do it for free, or better still why
doesn't RunRev just license one of the existing 3rd party IDE and
make that the one they ship when you buy a RunRev license?
All I know is I agree that something needs to be done to address the
backlog of bugs and make the IDE much more stable, I also think that
if this is not done, then RunRev will stop growing and eventually die.
Anyway, I really hope that some bugs get fixed soon and the IDE is
over hauled. The sad reality is that in the last 2 months I could
have sold 2 studio licenses (That's 2 licenses + 1 extra platform,
Mac and Windows (4 total)), however the policy of charging for
updates and the fact that 2.7.x is really buggy stopped the sales. I
would also have purchased one Mac License for 2.7.4 for myself, so
that's a total of 5 licenses lost.
However in the meantime I still *love* developing in RunRev and would
love it to grow.
All the Best
On 7 Nov 2006, at 15:42, Luis wrote:
> I was going to post this in a reply, but thought it might be better
> on its own.
> If I perceive a failing in an environment, I will state it, whether
> or not I decide to utilise that environment in my projects.
> There will come a point, if that environment has not evolved into
> what I reckon it should (call this bug fixes, features, take your
> pick) I will drop it. This is my personal opinion, no better or
> worse than anyone else's.
> The fact that others have become more vocal is perhaps an indicator
> of frustration, realising they are not alone, want to inject some
> life back into their favourite dev environment, whatever.
> I wonder if the current issues with delayed bug fixes is indicating
> some sort of developer drop out, resulting in lower sales,
> therefore lower Rev resources.
> Definitely a Tuesday.
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
More information about the use-livecode