DOWNLOADING REV 4.0.0

[Richmond]

On 11/16/2010 09:34 PM, Peter Haworth wrote:
>
> On Nov 16, 2010, at 11:05 AM, Richmond wrote:
>
>> On 11/16/2010 08:04 PM, Peter Haworth wrote:
>>> I love how unconnected discussions come together!  I just downloaded 
>>> stackrunner and it seems to solve all my issues regarding standalone 
>>> startup banners/using test files versus live files.  I point it to 
>>> my application .rev file and it runs it as if it were a standalone, 
>>> opening the live application database instead of the test one, but 
>>> with no banner of any sort.  The only downside is that the OSX 
>>> menubar item for the aplication says StackRunner instead of my 
>>> application's name.
>>>
>>> So while I'm a happy camper,
>>
>> really? I am afraid that at present I feel that RunRev are camping 
>> things up a bit; so who is camper
>> than whom can be the next direction this discussion takes.
>
> Sounds like we need to establish a scale of camp-ness

That reminds me of one of my favourite bits in the Bible; where Jezebel 
"does" her boyfriend
with a tent peg.

>>
>>> this seems to completely circumvent Revoution's plan to strongly 
>>> discourage commercial distribution of LiveCode Personal applications 
>>> via the startup banner or am I missing something?
>>
>> Frankly, distributing a stack with a stackrunner as a commercial 
>> package doesn't look that good;
>> especially as anybody who can get their paws (sweaty or otherwise) on 
>> a copy of RR/LC can merrily
>> start mucking around with your stack.
>
> Agree with that.  That's one of the reasons I've never liked using a 
> secondary stack file as a solution to the problem of not being able to 
> store data in a standalone.

I much prefer to store data in some sort of text file, even at the risk 
of it becoming orphaned.

Naughty types can build themselves a version of Metacard and see what 
happens when they
build standalones with that; although experience has taught me that it 
is almost more trouble
than it is worth.

I am sticking with RR 4.0 until I can actually make some money with my 
Devawriter so that I can
buy something with a bit more "oomph" than the $99 version; or RunRev 
have changed their
marketing model as they seem to on an annual basis.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Despite the "Kind regards" [semantically empty if ever it was] it should 
be clear by now that
RunRev are more interested in the whales and the sharks than bottom 
feeders and crustaceans
like myself. The claims to 'care' about the small men and women who use 
RR/LC on an everyday
basis do sound increasingly hollow; the removal of RevMedia meant much 
much more than all the
subsequent protestations. Now if RunRev see their target as the 
"biggies" why don't they just say
so? rather than saying one thing that is rather different from what 
their marketing model says.
It is this thing that annoys me.