Lets make a deal!!!!!!!!!!

Dave dave at looktowindward.com
Fri Nov 17 04:28:09 CST 2006


On 17 Nov 2006, at 08:35, Bernard Devlin wrote:

> Dave said
>
> > I think that there is a lot of silly, sometimes personal crap on
> > this list on the odd occasion and I reckon it boils down to this:
> >
> > Someone relates some (usually fairly truthful) bad news about
> > RunRev and then someone else tries to make it "all right" by
> > relating all the good things about RunRev (that you invariably
> > already know) or berates your apparent apathy in investigating
> > problems
> >  [....]
> > Well lets all just make a deal?????
> >
> > No one rain on the parade and no one stop the rain from
> > falling!!!!!!!!
>
> Obviously this in the context of the running dispute between you  
> and me.

Slightly, it was mostly based an earlier flame-fest which was started  
in the "Quality #1 issue" thread I think.

> I have followed this list almost every day for the past 4 years.   
> Because I was not working with Rev every day, if people put up  
> claims in the past (positive or negative), I would not challenge  
> them.  As I am working with Rev every day now, if someone is going  
> to make claims that it Rev is fundamentally buggy and that the  
> company is in danger of going out of business because of this,

There are a lot of bugs in the RunRev Engine, the IDE and the  
documentation that have not been fixed in over three years and some  
of them are very low level and therefore fundamental to the system.

> I'm not going to let it go unchallenged.

Does it make you feel better?
>
> What you're asking for is an end to discussion.

I don't mind a discussion but lets keep it to the subject at hand and  
not resort to mud-slinging and low beahaviour.

> You are asking to be able to make exagerrated claims (positive or  
> negative), and for these claims to go unchallenged.

I don't make exagerrated claims. I don't care if they are challenged  
or not.

> I got involved in a debate with you precisely because you seem to  
> have little hesitancy in making sweeping or false allegations  
> (these are all from 10th Nov):
>
> "There is definitely a problem with "silly" bugs and lack of a  
> clear way of finding answers to problems"

>
> "it takes a long time (more than necessary) to become a RunRev  
> 'expert'."
>
> "more support effort is put into developing/fixing the Engine than  
> the IDE."
>
> "something needs to be done to address the backlog of bugs and make  
> the IDE much more stable"

> "I really hope that some bugs get fixed soon and the IDE is over  
> hauled."

All the above is true, and, it seems that RunRev think that way too  
since they are now making a bug-fix release. Hooray!

> "RunRev will stop growing and eventually die."

This is out of context, I think what I said was that if they didn't  
fix some of the old bugs and address the support pricing issue it  
would stop growing and eventually die, and I believe this to be true.  
However, no one can say 100% what will happen, so it's really not  
worth arguing about/discussing it.

> I didn't berate you for your apathy nor indulge in "personal crap".

If you say so.

>   I challenged your claims, because they seem to be exaggerated and/ 
> or false.  When you actually listed one of the bugs that is a  
> fundamental problem for you I tried to help you find out more about  
> what is going on in that situation so that we could work together  
> as a group to try to get that bug fixed.

Everything that can be done as a 3rd party developer has been done on  
this bug, unless you can think of something else, but from your posts  
it doesn't seem like you can think of anything either. Apart from the  
reasons I mentioned in another post, I also wanted to see if it had  
been addressed in 2.7.x, it seems it hasn't. Given that this problem  
is fundamental to the whole system and given that it can take a very  
long time to track down and isolate, it would seem reasonable that at  
the very least the documentation be changed to include some kind of  
warning about the use of "me" and the sharedText property in fields.  
This could easily have been done in any of the releases since March,

> But it seems that you are more interested in complaining about bugs  
> and running down Runrev than you are in solving them and promoting  
> Rev.

The point is that there are LOADS of bugs that have been logged for a  
LONG TIME without being fixed. Over and over we get a new release  
with all the same bugs present plus a lot of new problems. I just  
feel that there should be a bug-fix release, which is now going to  
happen. I could either do nothing or voice an opinion here.

I've sold 4 (I think) RunRev Licenses in the past three years, If  
that's not "promoting Rev" then I don't know what is!  I've come  
close to selling 4 or 5 more, but unfortunately the bugs I mentioned  
above (along with other factors I have already mentioned) prevented  
these sales.

> Having been challenged,

Sorry I didn't realize I'd been challenged! Must have missed that bit!

> you're now asking that no-one rain on your your parade.   That's  
> not a reasonable thing to ask for.

I really don't give a flying hoot! It's your parade that is getting  
rained on, in my parade it's already pouring but you seem insistent  
that I get an umbrella in order that I don't get any more wet,  
however, I'd rather stay wet for now and try to get something done so  
the roof is not so leaky and therefore stay dry and cosy!

All the Best
Dave




More information about the use-livecode mailing list