[REBOL] Re: Follow Up: What's Up Rebol?
From: jmalv:h:otmail at: 7-Mar-2002 20:00
I recently bought Rebol/command and it was quite a big expenditure taking
into account it's only one platform (and I am an independent developer). The
reality is I needed it for two other platforms (BSD and Win32) but I thought
buying it for these other platforms and paying $350 is too much so I am
using Python on these platforms and Rebol/command only on Linux. As a result
my use of Rebol/command is very limited.
I have posted two messages today to see whether there are other
Rebol/command developers that are interested in similar projects to the ones
I am interested but I am worried I will not get any replies.
I agree there is a catch-22 between revenues and adoption. Although I like
Command I am worried that IŽll be one of the very few using it and that is a
problem for adoption.
I think RT should consider getting a program for the early adopters, which
are the developers that will help RT drive long term success (remember
Crossing the Chasm, Inside the Tornado, etc.). This should involve paying
some small amount per year and getting in return access to e.g. cross
platform Command and some premium support. Maybe on top of this it would be
much easier to get another program for system integrators /enterprise
developers instead of Rebol/IOS/link developer program. M$FT has done this
really well with MSDN. Why not copy the good marketing ideas ?
BTW, I like what RT is doing with the language (e.g. no GNU license). I am
willing to pay for premium platform software (e.g. command) that has an edge
but if there is no good developer marketing it will be really hard for us to
bet more time and money on Rebol. GNU is great but it doesnŽt mean everybody
has to follow that option.
I think Carl had mentioned in an interview that the licensing could change
in the future and that the language is too new. I agree with that, RT is
doing the work (except maybe developer marketing) and there is no need to
use GNU to improve the language (adoption is not an argument b/c anybody can
I think committed developers like many on this list are the ones that drive
core adoption and finally widespread adoption for RT technologies. Pls take
care of us !
>From: "Jason Cunliffe" <[jason--cunliffe--verizon--net]>
>Subject: [REBOL] Re: Follow Up: What's Up Rebol?
>Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 13:01:40 -0500
> > Now this might interfere with RT Inc. current busines plan and attempts
>get revenues but how many people are actually buying and using /Pro &
>/Command when they can get the same or more functionality & libraries
> > These languages are all available for NO FEE and are entrenched in both
>the client and server sides.
>Yes I agree. This is very important point. Even a recent trivial example
>reveals the problem:
>I just added a link on my admin web page to run a Linux shell script to
>update my server log reports. I had to do it in PHP, as I only have
>REBOL/Command for win32:
>If I want to keep using REBOL on this site [and I do], I imagine I'll be
>doing lots of hybrid programming with Python and PHP to overcome REBOL's
>default system/shell limitations. But its messy and annoying.
>Or did I miss something ??
>I cannot really convince [not-for-profit] site owners to spend a $350 for
>something we don't functionally need. As a developer, I would be in a
>stronger position if I paid the /Command $350 price once, but were then
>to take the preferred tool with me across platform and project.
>At least if REBOL/Command offered inclusive cross-platform support for one
>price, it would been consistent with write-once run-eveywhere philosophy.
>RT follows Macromedia strategy where developers must buy Mac and Win32
>copies at full price everytime. Most only use the second copy for testing,
>and have been railing [unsuccessfully] for years against MM to offer
>If not willing to offer single cross-platform proce how about a radical
>discount for the additional platform copies.
>I think RT is in a terrible bind here..
>How to generate income without discouraging or obstructing developers?
>Decent income comes probably not from selling a handful of developer kits
>but from selling applications made with it. There's *many* more people
>willing to buy cool, useful easy-to-run easy-to-install applications for
>$19.95, $49.95 than innovative off-the-radar languages. I guess that's the
>thinking behind IOS but somehow it does not hit me that way.
>The catch-22 is that people buying applications really don't care what they
>were written with as long as they work well. Except when the applications
>features openScripting with 'xyz' language.
>To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to
>[rebol-request--rebol--com] with "unsubscribe" in the
>subject, without the quotes.
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com