World: r3wp

I would love we write is without caps.  its much less aggressive... 
maybe a big part of the tiresome nature of the name and even its 
association to COBOL and others is just because of that.

Rebol then? I tend to use R2 and R3 in conversation with people who 
know we are talking about Rebol...

CIO which can't read REBOL instead of COBOL is not CIO, but an idiot 
:-) Young ppl,  potentially new users, even hardly know, what the 
COBOL is ...

Of course the name might matter, but I would like us to not think 
it will cure our marketing problems?

I consider it to be a weakness of decisive capability, if your product 
changes name, because you've found something better. What does that 
not tell you about the language, if you change the name?

no one said it will *fix* marketing.  Its just something that feels 
like a splinter once you start using it.

I can only say - give us R3 beta release, full featured, give us 
Host source released after 4 years of promisses. Gives us new website, 
give us GUI, give us web-browser plugin, give us Docs, give us seminars, 
consultancy, PR activity.  And then maybe think of the rename scheme 
...

Rebol is already MUCH better.... look how the connotation to COBOL 
disapears instantly!

probably the most appropriate name would be "bind" but then Carl 
becomes Sauron  ;-)

I think I will not take part in this discussion this time. There 
was already something like 80 posts to naming VID/View or REBOL in 
the past, with no particular result. Unless someone shows me that 
we know what the strategic plan is, I regard it being a pointless 
discussion ...

you take it too seriously... ;-)  and AFAICT  dropping all caps seems 
to be the common ground that always wins... empirically that's probably 
the solution.

rEBOL

http://www.rebol.net/cgi-bin/r3blog.r?view=0148#comments

If you want something new, try to not think REBOL related at all 
...

I think that VIVID or inVision make for some nicer names. The trouble, 
with all possible names, is particular domains being taken already. 
You can't be easily innovative domain-name wise nowadays. We tried 
some constructed names, e.g. FireSide for browser-plugin (Fire - 
as in firefox, firebird, Side - coming from side), but even some 
such combinations are taken ...

... hence I would stay with REBOL/Rebol - it is imo a good name ...

me too

me three.  :)  I  like this name.

Slow R3 developer's time explained on Twitter - "Grapes harvested, 
winemaking begins again. Cabernet and Merlot fermentation started. 
It marks the years... and stores them in the bottle." .... hopefully 
Carl bring few bottles to DevCon :-)

Does that mean he is back behind the keyboard or not for a few more 
weeks????

dunno ... Carl is less active for more than 2 weeks. Maybe even more 
- Axing alias was typical trick of Carl, to post some less important 
blog and keep us busy :-)

That dirty  bastard...why do we keep him around at all?

We should call Bill Gates to take over the development of REBOL 4, 
no? :-)

yep... it would cost 1 billion, take twice as long as R3 to develop, 
do half of what R1does coded in javascript, and support for COBOL 
modules.


this is a direct reflection of what resulted in Bill implicating 
himself actively in vista's development process  :-)

I don't think Gates talked to programmers about how they should code 
Vista, or you think otherwise? :-)

Somehow there would also be a dog with glasses somewhere in the user 
interface.

it is said he played an "active" role in vista's development.  and 
its rumored that most of the catastrophy behind vista is directly 
related to the high-level decisions he made back and forth on everything. 
 just like it was in the good old days of windows... where every 
version would go back and forth on features, concepts and naming. 
 


obviously he didn't code anything, but decisions passed through his 
desk, and Bill is part of the old "evil" MS school and still thinks 
that way.  windows 7 was a project start from scratch, with a totally 
different mindset, closer to the user's concerns than trying to dominate 
the industry and competition.  it was out much quicker, much better, 
and addresses just about all of what vista did wrong, as most users 
are saying.  its also FASTER than its predecessor (rather than slower). 
 which is really at the opposite spectrum of vista.

Windows 7 is just Vista SP3. Just after the Vista name fiasco, they 
better launched it under a separate name .... ah, now I know, why 
Carl wants to rename REBOL :-)

nope, its rumored that its actually closer to XP than vista internally!

basically, they started where vista started and did everything again, 
using the few parts that did work (like aero and DX10)

and redoing the UAE and actually Adding new concepts to the GUI instead 
of just making it shiny... vista had no single new GUI concept over 
XP a part for that mini app bar on the right (which sucks sooo much 
energy out of your PC that you can actually notice the speed difference 
when its running!).

And the APIs, though they did recode (or at least tweak and recompile) 
all of the code behind the APIs.

Maxim - that is imo nonsense. What about the Aero? This has imo nothing 
in common with XP-like technology? Vista is internally rather different 
imo ...

ah, thought we are in Advocacy group :-)

Good to know about the sidebar - I'll tell my parents (they're the 
only ones I know who run Vista).

yes vista took a decent XP and broke it in every conceivable way.

W7 takes XP and improves it in every conceivable way.

they could not have taken vista and fixed it.  there was nothing 
good to salvage ... expect for aero, which is simply the api running 
over directx.

(and about time too)

directX and a lot of the core windows stuff is VERY well designed... 
its just how its used by the desktop and all the crap they add which 
mucks it up.

There were a *lot* of good new APIs in Vista that were continued 
in 7 - not just Aero. It's the apps/UI that sucked.

continued in 7
 = redone in a binary-compatible way to suck much less.

I am looking forward to making those APIs available to R3 (getting 
back on topic) :)

OK, back to R3 and a bit to Advocacy ... I am a bit disappointed 
by Carl's aproach so far. Maybe I am mistaken and harvesting the 
grapes is the culprit, but I can see our latest requests being ingored 
so far - callbacks, user-types proposal, and probably more - no single 
comment yet ...

... concurrency to add another significant topic of interest ...

Let's see: Grapes, hacks, router problems, private channel communications 
still up, and he already announced after a82 that he was going to 
take some time off to work on the plan for a beta release, soomething 
that involves more than just code.

And all that you are asking abouut are either actively being worked 
on (callbacks), or have already been deferred to later (user types, 
concurrency). I don't get it: What is different, that you would complain 
now?

BrianH: I know Carl, and I know what I am talking about. You'll see 
- it happened several times already in the past. The group discussing 
stuff xy, and RT rushing things into "final stage". And you are wrong 
- there was no single public reaction to either user-types or concurrency, 
and as for callbacks, we can only guess by reading between the line 
of one single Chat msg.

As for me, I am not more than occassional REBOL user in comparison 
by many, but I would really like to see official reaction to beta 
blog. There are some questions raised by many. I hope answers come 
sooner before we see beta stick on R3.

User types and concurrency were deferred, partly because there wasn't 
a consensus on how theye should be implemented - not enough information 
to decide.

As for callbacks, that is what devices were supposed to be for, but 
I expect that something similar to Maxim's proposal, cleaned up, 
will be adopted. Probably adapted to implement devices, but we'll 
have something soon I bet.