Stykz

[Richmond Mathewson]

Richard Gaskin wrote:
> Richmond Mathewson wrote:
>> although it is not overtly stated one look at the interface
>> is a dead give-away that it has been made with
>> Runtime Revolution.
>
> The scope and functionality of Ken's program is very impressive, but 
> if just looking at it makes it clear what development tool it was made 
> with that's quite a harsh indictment for the tool.

Oddly enough my remark was not really intended as an indictment; more 
like praise.

The 'commands' palette IS a Runtime Revolution palette; to which I would 
say:-

* As I, personally, write software for the Primary school brigade I tend 
to spend quite some time disguising the origins of
    my standalones in keeping with the candy-coloured, Crayola-crayon 
school of Kindergarten aesthetics . . .

  [of course many people, who don't have such a socking-great 
self-conceit might have had an attack of acute self-doubt about
    these aesthetics a long time ago  :)  ]

   Not everyone's "bag" I know; the important part of the above is 
"disguising the origins"; if you want to, you can, if you are
   OK with the 'plain vanilla' of the supplied buttons, stay with them.

The toolBar looks as though it has wandered over from some incarnation 
of Metacard.

* Neither of these points is really important unless the manufacturer 
has an urge to "cover his/her tracks".
>
> Ideally, any development tool would produce wares which are so 
> reflective of conventions of the OSes it runs on that it would be 
> indistinguishable from products made with, say, xCode or MS Visual 
> Studio.
Really?  If that were so why would one bother to use Runtime Revolution?
> FileMaker, HyperCard, and some other tools took such radical liberties 
> with OS conventions that it was usually easy to spot things made with 
> them; the developer had little control over many of the design 
> elements that were forced on them.
Yeah, yeah ... OS conventions . . . 3 cheers for Kai Kraus!

Runtime Revolution allows the developer a tremendous amount of control 
over the design elements (err, just compare it with
Visual Basic ); whether the developer decides to "go all wierd and 
artistic", stick with the "plain vanilla", or something in between
is his/her decision; and that is what I love about Runtime Revolution - 
that it allows the developer almost complete artistic
control.
> I like to believe Rev has gone beyond such old-world limitations, but 
> perhaps it still has some weaknesses which should get some attention:
>
> What specific elements suggest "Rev" to you when you look at the 
> screenshots?
>
> -- 
>  Richard Gaskin
>  Fourth World
>  Revolution training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
>  Webzine for Rev developers: http://www.revjournal.com
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>