Script limit - clarify please

[Kevin Miller]

On 7/8/03 11:07 pm, Ken Ray <kray at sonsothunder.com> wrote:

>> What exactly does all of this mean anyway? I cannot
>> distinguish between rumor and fact:
>> 
>> - Scott promises the MetaCard IDE will always work with the
>> Revolution engine. Is this his 'wish' or is this in writing somewhere.
> 
> This is in writing; Rev has stated that publicly that they will continue
> to allow the MC IDE to continue to work with the new Rev engine.

Yes.  And I'll state it again here in case there is any confusion.

>> - Revolution promises that the Revolution engine will work
>> with the MetaCard IDE. I see no time frame here. My MetaCard
>> engine could be broken with the next update to Windows or
>> OSX...maybe next week?
> 
> No, and there's no need for a time frame... it's the *same engine*, just
> given a new name. When they add features to it for the benefit of Rev
> users, MC users who wish to continue with the MC IDE can just drop in
> the new engine and go.

Right.  So this acquisition means we can, over a period of time, gradually
integrate the various language extensions that Revolution has got, and make
that available to people who are still using MetaCard.  Thus, you can look
forward to database access, text to speech, XML, and all the other stuff
getting integrated neatly into the language.

>> - Scott promises that the MetaCard IDE is 'open source'.
>> Wasn't it always?
> 
> No, it was carefully controlled by Scott; any changes you made were for
> your self and you couldn't make a new version of the MC IDE available
> for people to download. Now as open source, a number of us can work
> together to make changes to the IDE and post those changes for download
> and incorporation.

Right.  I would recommend that everyone switches over to Revolution and
works on providing feedback so we can meet everyone's needs in the Rev IDE,
if possible.  The reason for this is that it allows as much experience and
energy to be directed in the one place.  Folks, that¹s why I'm suggesting
that.  This isn't a conspiracy, we aren't trying to be difficult.
Fragmentation simply isn't a good thing at this early phase in the products
development.  If you switch over and provide feedback, tools and resources
for Rev, Revolution gets better faster, we are more successful, and everyone
gets a better tool as a result of our being able to upgrade it faster - even
people who only use the engine and little of the UI.

That said, again, in case there is any confusion, the MC IDE is open source.
You can use it now, or tomorrow.  We aren't going to break it.

>> - Scott Raney works 'for' Revolution.
>> I doubt that.
> 
> Well, his email address is now "scott at runrev.com". Sounds like he works
> for them to me.

Also true.

>> - Revolution takes orders from Scott.
>> I doubt that too.
> 
> Scott is working with Tuviah at RunRev to increase the capabilities of
> the product. The direction/marketing/etc. of the product is up to Kevin
> and others at RunRev.

The structure is simple: I'm the CEO, Tuviah is the CTO, and Scott is a long
term contractor who isn't going anywhere any time soon.  Nothing has
changed.  This deal has been in the works for a long time.  Tuv has being
doing a high percentage of engine development for us for some time.  The
only difference is that Scott now has *substantially* more time to do
development, as our marketing and technical support *team* are able to
handle those aspects and leave our engineers free to do what they do best.
Scott is a super-programmer, and now he has a lot more time to do just that.

>> There is NO upgrade path for current MetaCard users
>> (current license).
> 
> Also wrong. You can switch over to Rev when it comes time to renew what
> would be your MC license; at the time of renewal, you get Rev instead.
> At that time, you can choose to use the Rev IDE, or continue to use the
> MC IDE... your choice.

Right.

Another important point to note here: existing customers aren't going to be
required to jump through hoops to change over to the new pay per upgrade
model where you have to choose what platform you want, etc.  You will be
able to do that (and if you do you won't be able to come back) but if you
prefer, you can stick with the subscription model in largely unmodified
form.  We will be tougher on allowing people letting their subscriptions
lapse, and the price is going to be slightly adjusted together with the
support options, but other than that, you'll be able to get both MC and Rev
for the one price, and do as you have always done.  The cross-grade is
available from our online store.

>> Scott Raney is on a beach
>> somewhere...never to be heard from again.
> 
> Nope; he's working on the MC/Rev engine, and has posted to the list
> several times.

I can assure you he is very much present.

>> Am I close?
> 
> Sorry, not by a long shot...

Excuse my copying two posts together here:

Richard Gaskin wrote:

> Fortunately none of this seems likely to be necessary:  with a near 100%
> consensus against this move I'd be surprised if the proposal is enacted.

I clearly misjudged just how controversial this proposal was going to be.
There was *never* any question of existing customers being unable to access
an engine that allowed this if they were already used to it.  I thought that
sentiment was clear from my original post.

That said, Richard is reading my like a book - we clearly won't be enacting
it any time soon.  And...if we do enact it in the future, we'll work out
*special arrangements for existing customers* with standalones that are
going to break.  Note that, as indicated from in my original email, we were,
and will continue, to find ways to ensure that existing customers don't lose
out.  You are the people that have supported us from the start, and as we
change the model here and there to take on new markets, you can expect: more
features faster, more support options, and a lot of effort in making our
policies backward compatible.

Folks, I really want to urge everyone to move over to Revolution if at all
possible.  Its much easier if everyone is using and providing feedback on
the same tool, and its the same engine.  If you really don't want to pay the
cross-grade charge (which gets you a renewal running to a year after
whenever your current one does, so you have nothing to lose), contact our
support team at support at runrev.com and tell them how valuable you are and
make a fuss and we'll try to make you happy, as we always do.

That said, if you want to stay with the MC IDE, you can.  We won't be doing
anything to deliberately break the IDE with future version of the engine.

So, I'm going to put the scriptLimits proposal on the backburner for the
moment.  One of the primary reasons for it is that it is something of a
security hole at the engine level.  I'm fundamentally opposed to the Starter
Kit, it has never worked well, our research clearly shows that the 30 day
trial is a much more effective way to go.  We'll come back to the
scriptLimits proposal if any open source IDE starts to get used as a useful
tool that helps *circumvents* people from buying an engine license.  Even
then, existing customers can expect not to be burned.

Finally folks, this has been an incredibly busy time for all of us here at
Runtime.  My ability to keep up with the mailing lists isn't as good as I
would like, it can take me a couple of days before I read them.  Bear with
us, comment to me off list if you don't like something, and everything will
settle down in a little while.  Right now, I'm going to concentrate on
trying to ensure as few surprises for you folk as possible for the next
little while.  Everything is going just fine, you're getting more features,
more resources, the same tool you always loved, and a company that has, can,
does, and always will, listen to what you have to say and accommodate when
it is practical and reasonable to do so.

Kind regards,

Kevin

Kevin Miller <kevin at runrev.com> <http://www.runrev.com/>
Runtime Revolution Limited: Software at the Speed of Thought
Tel: +44 (0) 870 747 1165.  Fax: +44 (0)1639 830 707.