Business Application Framework
richmondmathewson at gmail.com
Wed Aug 12 23:21:05 CEST 2015
On 12/08/15 23:59, Brahmanathaswami wrote:
> @ Kevin: We are non-profit.. I have an Indy license solely for the iOS
> password protection requirement. Expand my use case to 10,000's of
> students and educators and hobbyists and web site owners who mix it up
> with desktop clients and server side API's like I do...if something is
> over my head, I pay for hours from the brainiacs we all know and love
> (Andre, and soon others) we are talking 100,000 plus potential users
> who would not fall into your "serious business customers" bracket, who
> every day have to decide if they want to use Unity, Blender, PHP,
> Ruby, JS, Python for their solutions. LC stands side by side a
> thriving and dynamically evolving world. We truly are in the middle of
> a digital revolution. Be careful not to suck the wind out of your own
> If I want to put my "stack out there" and get help.. have some others
> work on it, pro bono.. .or I might pay them for 10-15 hours of work.
> Someone is inspired... to help... (Jacqueline helped me recently with
> a little puzzle module improvements.)
> @Bill Does this make me and those like us... "single developer for
> whom GIT is not important" ? hardly... every day recently I thinking
> about this RVS thing and might resurrect Magic Carpet.
> @ Kevin wrote: "Some features may filter down to open source.. but for
> the present we are focused on our serious business customers."
> " It is far more than simply adding ³GitHub" to LiveCode. It brings in
> advanced concepts such as object-orientation, a model-view controller
> architecture and hooks into data sync and other heavyweight features.
> It is not for everyone. If you are an individual building an
> application then you might want to evaluate whether its worth the
> extra effort, level of complexity and abstractions associated with
> using it."
> IMHO: (sorry for the tough talk... we are all friends here... I love
> you all in Edinburgh! think of this as positive brainstorming... all
> team players on the same team.)
> a) All your fund raising campaigns, were promises, We can sit all day
> and do triage on the roadmap, which features where promised, and to
> who and who was helping to support future development of what... etc.
> (I think you have been doing great!) but the whole spirit of where you
> were going -- your leadership message to the community was a huge
> promise to us. Which now you say that "well some features may be
> beyond you... so we are going to charge for those." or, as some might
> take it "you might be a dummy so you really don't need those things
> in your community or Indy world." I humbly suggest this is not the
> message you want to send to the world.
> b) Agreed, there may certainly be some things beyond, me, but not
> beyond others in my "category" half production
> manager/half-executive/half educator/half coder e.g. I have an indy
> license, can't I hire David Bovill or Monte to help with some module
> for my 100% free-never-see-a-penny in revenue app that I am making?
> Yep I have a small budget for that but "Oh Gee, no collaborative
> framework, ouch.. .and I can't use all that other cool stuff (object
> oriented, MVC... whatever) that I thought we were all helping to pay
> for development of...."
> c) suggestion: "Some features may filter down to open source" Don't
> wait.... parse out today, now! Parse out what all those users who
> moment, would expect and want that you now propose to put behind a
> paywall. Do I need cloud services? no... skip that one... do we all
> need a collaborative framework "duh!" How will you *ever* achieve your
> goal of have LC be one of the top ten languages with that that? go
> down that list today. Move features over to the open source column today.
> d) @ Lyn Teyla: Ditto what Lyn said... she (he?) pretty well defined
> c) above.
> e) #@ Andrew: lighten up dude! LC still gets the job done. Give Kevin
> credit for steering the ship as well as he has... it's not an easy job!
> On a positive note: At the end of the day I will still be using
> LiveCode.. in the past three weeks I'm building my first mobile app. I
> must finish a complete working prototype by September 15. (rarely do I
> have that kind of deadline) I know for a fact that had I done this in
> any other language... or even hired someone competent in any other
> language... that we would still be at "phase one" and not anywhere
> near close to how far I have come in less than 30 man hours......
*Brahmanathaswami* has basically said what I have said, although,
admittedly, in a slightly more tactful way.
There are other voices out there who are reading this thread at the
moment, but are saying nothing or very little.
This debate is important (whichever way your opinions swings!),
especially if you care about LiveCode; in terms of its Open Source arm,
it Commercial arm, and its survival.
I don't think LiveCode will thrive if it continues to present itself to
the world in the way it is just now.
The more people who state their opinion, the more healthy and
pluralistic the debate will become, and the more likely that LiveCode
will sit up and take notice *seriously*: something I believe it should
have done a very long time ago.
More information about the use-livecode