LC MISTAKES

[Richard Gaskin]

Nigel Soden wrote:

 >  ...here are some of the comments I got from my esteemed colleagues.
 >
 > 1. How can such a simple language possibly create commercial
 >    applications
 > 2. The language is too simple
 > 3. What the hell is LiveCode, what best practices does it follow.
 > 4. It's not main stream and therefore were are they going to find
 >    developers.
 > 5. (Having explained the history of LiveCode) If Apple dropped there
 >    must be a reason for had it been a useful tool they would have
 >    developed it further.
 > 6. It's not OOPS - (Man I hate that word)	
 >
 > Yip... I should have known the more three letters you have after your
 > name the more stupid one becomes. Why is it that humans think the
 > more complex something is the better it is.

LOL.  Thanks for posting that list.  I've heard many of those myself 
over the years.

#1, 2, and 3 can only be answered by trying it.  As more people come on 
board its reputation will eventually precede it, and that question will 
diminish over time in most circles.

I say "most" because of #6.  There's a long thread on the Ubuntu forums 
right now about functional programming, with more than a little backlash 
against the broken promises of OOP.  Not that OOP isn't useful, but it 
isn't always the best way to solve every problem.

#5 requires that you know something about Apple; their choices are made 
for reasons unique to their unusual place in the world, sometimes known 
only to themselves.

#4 will be taken care of if the FOSS effort is successful, thereby also 
addressing most of the rest as well. :)


 > I have discussed this with a few other independent developers but
 > what really stumbles them is the Stack concept. It's just to
 > alienated from main stream terminology. I must tell you it did
 > stumble me at first and it does require a mind shift.  And yes,
 > the more I use it the more I'm required to rethink the way to
 > resolve a problem.

Yes, LiveCode is definitely a very unusual way of working, but with it 
comes an equally unusual productivity and return-on-investment.

Sadly, this is often the sort of claim that folks are skeptical of - 
until they try it.  Few who give LiveCode an earnest go walk away 
without seeing a role for it in at least some of the work they do.


 > You've heard of Mark Shuttleworth, he's the South African that went
 > into space and brought us Ubuntu, now that is what we need here in
 > SA for LC

Later this month LiveCode will be the subject of my talk at UbuCon, the 
all-day Ubuntu event at the SoCal Linux Expo.  At least a couple people 
from Canonical will be there, and the timing couldn't be better:

Over the last two years Canonical has understood that the path to 
mainstream adoption is largely dependent on bringing more apps to the 
platform, and has launched a good many initiatives to bring more apps on 
board.  This was a key focus of the Ubuntu Developer Summit I attended 
in May, and those efforts within Canonical have only grown since.

So I suspect such a rapid app dev tool as LiveCode will get their attention.

In the meantime, you're it. :)  Keep spreading the good word, and at 
least a few open-minded people will be fortunate enough to hear what 
you're saying.

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World
  LiveCode training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
  Webzine for LiveCode developers: http://www.LiveCodeJournal.com
  Follow me on Twitter:  http://twitter.com/FourthWorldSys