Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search

[REBOL] Re: Reference docs for View

From: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 9-Jul-2001 7:44

> 3. Well, they won't say that, merely _think_ : "What do you expect for > fifty bucks ... ???" (/View/Pro) > > /Command being also cheap for a professional tool. Nevertheless, > external library support is included in ALL of the free, open source > scripting languages (well, WHY hasn't the growing ambitious > REBOL community including me opt for Perl or Python --- it is another story, > though...:-)) ) and it is a sneaky marketing politics, making the > self-containing "hermetic" version of REBOL free and the > "system-connectable" one THE product. It would have been more fair > that they include shell access in the public version and release the > "industry-strength" ODBC interface in the commercial version. > It is wise that encryption is included not in the free but in the > payware /Pro versions, but the toy-level sound support as a companion ... ;-)) >
We (especially me, I am famous because of that ;-) screamed loudly some year or more ago that to boost rebol usage we need: - library and (or at least) shell to become part of /Core = free - we need dynamic loadable components (or at least some kind of key unlocking paid components), to allow: a) per component pricing - e.g. you have bought ODBC, but would like to buy native mySQL support b) while we take care of size of Rebol executable and RT seems to be carefull about new additions, we would not probably care of /Sound separate component being of some 500Kb size itself As for current state of Sound being awailable only to /Pro payed version - it is COMPLETLY nonsense, contraproductive, as current sound capabilities are of merely no value to commercial developers, while making external world laugh at us to pay for such things as sound capabilities. I am not saying it to piss RT here, right?! I am saying it because that's how things are - ppl having ironic notes to Rebol - hey, pekr, do you need capability X? Ask Carl, maybe he will produce some /CapabilityX for you. Ah, of course, prepare to pay for it . Very typical notion I am blind to, ask I know Rebol has great value for me - it just makes our (rebol promoters) lives more difficult in external (non-rebol) world ... I am not good at programming, never programmed in C - it's surely my handicap. So I can just speculate, if we still need some Rebol components architecture, API to Rebol kernel, to hook our own components in. We currently have libraries and we could do much with it, I just don't know if without proper knowledge of Rebol internals even thouse skilled enough could bring some usefull components to us.... but of course, I can imagine some kind of API exposed to external component developers, to hook in more closely into Rebol kernel architecture ... One Czech company - Humusoft, became official developer of Matlab components for Mathsoft, maybe Cyphre Ltd. could by future Rebol component developer for Rebol Technologies :-) So, enough :-) Cheers, -pekr-