First impression of Revolution IDE

[J. Landman Gay]

Richard Gaskin wrote:


> Rev-based IDEs address an ultra-tiny market that's already fragmented as 
> it is.  I still can't get much work done in Rev, and I hear most of my 
> clients curse as they use it, but if there's only three or four of us 
> still using MC it does rather raise questions about the effort.
> 

I think more people than you suspect still use it. But since we don't 
need to expend much effort, it doesn't hurt to keep it going.  As far as 
I can see, the MC IDE will go away when there are no longer any people 
willing to maintain it. We don't need to make any decisions.

For the record, I still use MC for virtually all layout and design, 
because it is much faster and easier than in Rev. After the stack is 
built and scripted, I generally move to Rev for testing, tweaking, and 
standalone building. Best of both worlds.

I feel that MC has a much easier and useful control browser, property 
inspector, and set of keyboard shortcuts. This makes MC preferable for 
layout and building tasks; Rev slows me down too much. I think Rev's 
message box and standalone builder are superior to MC's, so I move over 
there for testing and building standalones. I prefer Rev's handler list 
at the left of the script editor over MC's popdown menu, but I hate how 
it stores text styles, so it's a toss-up there.

For me, they both have strong points and weaknesses, and I've figured 
out how to use each to my advantage so that I get the best of both.

-- 
Jacqueline Landman Gay         |     jacque at hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software           |     http://www.hyperactivesw.com