richmondmathewson at gmail.com
Mon Mar 20 17:31:35 EDT 2017
On 3/20/17 10:56 pm, Alejandro Tejada via use-livecode wrote:
> on Mon Mar 20 2017, William A. Prothero, Jr wrote:
>> Something that might draw in New users who want a ready made solution
I think that "a ready made solution" is a bit low down the pecking
is not, and has never been, a pusher of ready made solutions; what it
has been, and I believe it should
remain, is an object-based solution with a programming language and IDE
all rolled into one that
allows one to get going relatively quickly without the headache of a
steep learning curve.
>> are template stacks for various kinds of apps. Users would get a head
>> on an app, then customize it for their own purposes. Perhaps this already
>> as I haven't perused the site for awhile. I do know that the short course
>> making iOS apps, offered a year ago, badly needed proof reading by
>> who didn't create the materials. I got discouraged at the time I had to
>> and have up.
>> I know there is a lot out there. Can a new user find it?
> More than templates, many new users (notice, I don't call them new
> are looking for a one click solution. They are looking for something like
> a Software Appliance, an appliance similar (in principle) to a microwave
> a kitchen blender or a can opener. Just one click is enough to know if it
> I blame smartphones for the prevalence of this state of mind in new users...
> While Macintosh (and Commodore, previously) catered to provide tools
> for creatives (text, Images and music), the generation that is growing
> with a smartphone and a tablet in their hands act more like consumers,
> than as creators. Then...
> How do you deal with this new demographic reality?
You can either "be a complete pr*stitute" and produce a totally
'moronic' point-and-click thing:
but then you are not catering for creatives/creators, you are catering
for people who think that they
are being original by glueing pictures out of magazines into a scrapbook
--- tedious personal story ---
When I was at school I had a 'friend' who used to memorise Monty Python
sketches, recite them
and then expect applause . . . no input at all.
--- end of that ---
So, templates do as templates do: templates are a way to go, but
templates are never one-click-solutions.
There are already what we might term "PowerPoint knock-offs" all over
the place, and they're no better
than those tired old types one sees knocking around the Valparaiso docks
on a Saturday night: LiveCode
should NOT go that way.
[ Statement of personal interest: I've never been to Valparaiso and have
no business interests there. ]
In the Heigh-Day of HyperCard HyperCard offered templates and
suggestions as to how one might
leverage those templates to achieve what one wanted: I don't see
anything wrong with LiveCode doing
the same thing.
However I wonder if the LiveCode people aren't guilty of a spot of
snobbery, being scared of being tarred
with the "not a real programming language" brush. I wonder if they are
not a bit insecure in this respect
and are compensating by taking LiveCode in a direction where it will
leave "unreal coders" who value
LiveCode for what it has inherited from HyperCard and has improved in
that same way of dealing with things.
We should all be aware of the differences between LiveCode and languages
such as C++ and C#. Most of us
if we wanted to work with languages with C++ and C# wouldn't be working
with LiveCode. Any attempts
to make LiveCode more like the C++ brigade and less like what HyperCard
was and LiveCode is will
probably result in many people who favour LiveCode being what it IS
either dropping it or starting to look
around for comparable alternatives.
If C++ and C# are "real programming languages" then LiveCode is NOT one,
and that should be seen as a strength and not a weakness because it is
filling a different niche to C++ and C#: and it should not try to
expand to occupy the niche occupied by the C++ school of programming
SCRATCH is not a "real programming language" but that doesn't seem to
stop its use spreading like wildfire
in the niche it has been designed for: to the extent that the "blockly'
coding thingies are all over the place
strapped onto the front of all sorts of other programming efforts.
> Providing software as a service...
> I believe that LiveCode should provide software as service
No: LiveCode should not provide SOFTWARE, but it should continue
providing TOOLS (as in bricks, not
sand, cow-dung and straw to make your own bricks) "for new users to
become the developers of their own app."
> and open
> a path for new users to become the developers of their own apps,
> if they feel the inclination to do so.
"if they feel the inclination to do so." Well, err, obviously . . . .
> Difficult? Yes... Impossible? Not for professional developers.
At that point you are just setting up a programming shop where customers
to do everything for them: I'm sure that LiveCode would be happy to
develop your next big thing for you:
but if you think they're going to do that with a green icon slapped on
the front you are very much mistaken,
and LiveCode should only ever consider going down that path if they are
prepared to spend an awful lot of
development time on bespoke packages and charge accordingly.
More information about the use-livecode