Plea to sell Dan's book widely

[Judy Perry]

I agree, Dan...

Unfortuantely, for the win market, it seems to be a chicken and the egg
sort of thing: universities will only teach the MS stuff they are given
because (a) it's free (or all but) and (b) 'it's what everybody uses in
industry'.  It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I remember when Code Warrior offered their stuff to my CS department for
FREE ... ZIP... NADA... NICHTS... NUTTIN'... and we didn't take it.
Instead, we paid for Borland and Microsoft stuff.  And still do.  And when
all our students graduate and find themselves in positions where they'll
do the hiring, what do you think they will be looking for?

Rev has accolades from the Mac side of things because, well,  they have
them.  If  you've got it, flaunt it. PC magazine could give them an award
if they so chose... I'd like not to see the case of the list advocating
that the company bite the hand that feeds it.

With the exception of speech on Windows not working, most calls to
'improve' Rev (with the respect of being overly Mac-ish) seem to be along
the lines of 'make it like every Windows and traditional systems
programming language'.

But there already are plenty of those, existing and in the ash heap.

I suspect Dan's right that Rev will never replace Java, C++, anything
.NETish...  but why does that need to be the goal?

Judy

 On Sat, 7 Aug 2004, Dan Shafer wrote:

>
> I reiterate what I said earlier today in this very interesting
> discussion. I do not believe Rev has any serious chance of making
> significant inroads into the professional development community on ANY
> platform, and certainly not on Windows or (moreso?) on *nix. It will
> always be a product aimed at hobbyist and inventive user class
> developers who do not write code for a living but who have real
> problems to solve at work or at home. That's a huge market, bigger, I
> believe, than the programmer market. But it has to be located and
> convinced.
>