What Does Work Cost? (was RE: Call for comments: Rev as a Second Language)

Brian Yennie briany at qldlearning.com
Tue Jan 27 20:11:17 EST 2009


Unfortunately businesses just don't work like this. RunRev probably  
doesn't have someone at the pay grade you desire ("a rudimentary  
knowledge of RunRev") with a spare hour of time a la carte to bill  
for. And no matter what the client says, they don't (and shouldn't) do  
work and just deliver it "as-is" with no expectation of follow-up time.

It's also not RunRev's job to give you an hour-by-hour breakdown  
justifying a (still) relatively small job like this. Considering your  
attitude about the change ("if it were that different then the stack  
[in] question was probably badly written"), I think Rev's approach was  
a wise one.

Sorry, but this is par for the course and while it's certainly your  
prerogative to decline based on price, you are completely out of line  
flaming RunRev over this in a public forum. Your experience is  
understandable; however, I believe your perspective and judgement are  
a bit off.

> The problem was in a Password protected stack in the IDE. If the  
> stack in question had not been protected then I'd have changed it  
> myself and posted it to anyone that wanted it. All that needed to  
> happen was for someone at RunRev that had just the basic skill to  
> unlock the stack, look at the code in question and apply maybe 5 or  
> 6 lines of code at most, re-protect the stack and send it to me. I'd  
> have done the rest. It didn't need a system's engineer just someone  
> with a rudimentary knowledge of RunRev could have done this.
> Of course without seeing the code in question, it's hard to know for  
> sure, but honestly if it were so very different to the way I had  
> envisaged it, then it would have been good to have been told this,  
> then I'd at least be able to justify the decision.
> At the same time, if it were that different then the stack is  
> question was probably badly written, but I really can't see that it  
> could be that bad.

More information about the Use-livecode mailing list