Please Test Revolution 2.9 Beta!
wjm at wjm.org
Tue Mar 4 13:22:34 EST 2008
Those are intriguing theories but they don't pan out when we look at the
data (survey from the summer)... most of the people who are using 2.6.1 and
previous are NOT users of Linux, Mac Classic, or CGI. The people who are
using the 2.6.1 engine for CGI generally have kept current with the latest
versions of Revolution for desktop use, as they are highly invested,
advanced users. (And there will be a 2.9 edition of the CGI engine, more
optimized for that purpose than ever.)
Yes, the Mac Classic support is not as "top-notch" as the other platforms,
but at least it is there. You can build standalones for all platforms in one
click now without switching versions, saving as legacy, etc. ... it's a
compromise, but we suspect it will be a welcome addition for anyone who is
targeting that platform. Again, this was a question we were able to put to
rest with the survey... Mac Classic support showed up fairly low on the list
of "nice to haves" and therefore enabled us to focus on aspects of the
product which will have a much bigger impact.
There's no "blaming" of hold-outs... just trying to ensure they have very
compelling reasons to upgrade.
Mark Wieder wrote...
>> reason to use any other version of the software. (We know there a few
>> hold outs who have stuck with Revolution 2.6.1 or, bafflingly, even older
> ...maybe because that's the last version that was released for linux,
> Don't blame the "hold-outs" here - the stack format change introduced with
> version 2.7 has kept cgi users at the 2.6.1 level as well as the linux
> desktop users who have been clamoring for an up-to-date version for way
> too long now. And developers who for one reason or another need to support
> the Mac Classic environment also haven't been able to upgrade.
> I should also point out, before anyone gets too excited about this, that
> the "top-notch support" for Mac Classic in 2.9 is indeed the 2.6.1 engine,
> not anything more modern than that. It's nice to see Classic back in the
> fold again, but it does come with some heavy-duty caveats.
More information about the Use-livecode