Sheer, Utter Joy (Archived LiveCode downloads)

[richmond62]

Downloads up to 9.6.2 of all versions:
-

sheerJoy.jpg (206.09 KiB) Viewed 6732 times

-
https://web.archive.org/web/20210515012 ... /livecode/

[richmond62]

Not completely joyful:
-

Screen Shot 2022-03-24 at 1.08.18 PM.png (57.86 KiB) Viewed 6729 times

-
Although:
-

Screen Shot 2022-03-24 at 1.10.59 PM.png (15.31 KiB) Viewed 6729 times

-

Screen Shot 2022-03-24 at 1.11.25 PM.png (225.43 KiB) Viewed 6728 times

-
All COMMUNITY downloads have been removed.

[OpenXTalkPaul]

Mac Community IDE versions: https://archive.org/download/live-code- ... taller-mac

Windows 32bit & 64bit Community IDE versions: https://archive.org/download/live-code- ... ws-x86-x64 or here https://archive.org/download/live-code- ... 10-windows

Linux 32bit Community IDE versions: https://archive.org/download/live-code- ... -linux-x32
Linux 64bit Community IDE versions: https://archive.org/download/live-code- ... -linux-x64

Raspbian Pi ARM Builds (there was only ever a few Pi ARM builds, despite advertising Pi compatibility lasting much longer): https://archive.org/download/livecode_202109

Server Versions:
Linux Server versions: https://archive.org/download/live-code- ... l-versions
Mac Server versions: https://archive.org/download/livecode_20210906_1814
Windows Server versions: https://archive.org/download/livecode_20210906


Funny Video Here:
https://archive.org/details/LivecodeByR ... 2013-02-08

[OpenXTalkPaul]

Not completely joyful:
-
Screen Shot 2022-03-24 at 1.08.18 PM.png
-
Although:
-
Screen Shot 2022-03-24 at 1.10.59 PM.png
-
Screen Shot 2022-03-24 at 1.11.25 PM.png
-
All COMMUNITY downloads have been removed.

Besides those Archive.org links that I posted earlier, I was also able to download from some of those "WayBack Machine" snapshots, but had to get the link right because it was a little weird getting to the actual .dmg file link.

I've renamed and moved this topic to a new "xTalk Downloads" forum section.
I will use this section for any OXT distributions (Stickied), but it can be used for any other download links as long they're xTalk or OpenXTalk development related posts (any non-xTalk-related things should go in the Off-Topic Forum.

[richmond62]

Funny Video Here:

The 'funniest' bit was when KM said, "to as many people as possible."

and it is only 'funny' in that now it is nothing of the sort largely due to a decision by KM.

If LC REALLY believed that they would have found some way to keep the Open Source version going,
and I am quite sure the reason their revenue stream did not grow was entirely down to their
awful marketing.

Most of the LC staff members featured in that film no longer work for LC: I wonder why.

I feel extremely sad for those passionate educators featured in that film . . .

And this is NOT a 'funny' video at all, but it is a bloody sad one.

[richmond62]

SERF:

('Serfing' ever so slightly off-topic)

https://web.archive.org/web/20000822032 ... com/~serf/

[OpenXTalkPaul]

Funny Video Here:

The 'funniest' bit was when KM said, "to as many people as possible."

and it is only 'funny' in that now it is nothing of the sort largely due to a decision by KM.

If LC REALLY believed that they would have found some way to keep the Open Source version going,
and I am quite sure the reason their revenue stream did not grow was entirely down to their
awful marketing.

Most of the LC staff members featured in that film no longer work for LC: I wonder why.

I feel extremely sad for those passionate educators featured in that film . . .

And this is NOT a 'funny' video at all, but it is a bloody sad one.

Didn't mean to get you fired up, I think I meant "funny" as in strange to watch in the present day, almost a decade later.

Here's the direct link to the bin-hqx file download, last capture in 2007, but I think the 6th beta from 1999 was the last build of Serf:
https://web.archive.org/web/20040208065 ... a6.sit.hqx
I still have yet to try it, and oddly enough it turns out I did have a copy of it in my archives (I have a vast archive, I just kept transferring up to larger storage medium, I can burn BluRay Data Disc now days). I must have downloaded it back then (probably from a Hotline or KDX Server) but I don't remember ever giving it a spin.

[richmond62]

Didn't mean to get you fired up

Well, I am, and I have made it pretty clear why all over the place . . .

Especially when I see how the European governments make totally crappy decisions
on which programming languages 10-12 should learn without any thought to the
children and ease of learning.

[overclockedmind]

I e-mailed them when this whole thing about dropping open source started, and asked about a possible discount for a person with a disability (me.) They offered me whatever the lowest version is (Student?) but oh, if I wanted to start to publish things, then I'd have to pony up for a commercial license.

This would be why they're going straight down the toilet; that attitude right there. I'll bet they accepted patches from the open source community every chance they got, and quite a lot of their core (the browser and the encryption, right?) IS open source.

They shouldn't be shocked when they've bitten the hand that feeds (in the form of fixes.)

Regards,
Joshua

[OpenXTalkPaul]

and quite a lot of their core (the browser and the encryption, right?) IS open source.

Yes that's true, they wrapped Chromium (browse-widget on Win and Linux, I believe they're now switching all platforms to WebKit instead since Google has dropped their support for Chromium), and recently wrapped PDFium (which split out from Chromium), a bunch of others too, such as LibExPat (which does XML stuff). But they've only ever incorporated things that were much more permissive license than GPLv3. that way it wouldn't be a problem for their dual-license (closed-source commercial) strategy, and so that they could easily drop the FOSS version it seems (I vaguely recall someone in the community noticing that and speculating that they would or could long before they did)
A nice thing about OXT is that we don't have the limitation of needing to use more permissive (Apache, MIT, etc.) licensed libraries. We can use just about any FOSS libraries (as long as it's GPLv3 compatible) because there is no closed-source commercial version of OXT and never will be.

[overclockedmind]

and quite a lot of their core (the browser and the encryption, right?) IS open source.

Yes that's true, they wrapped Chromium (browse-widget on Win and Linux, I believe they're now switching all platforms to WebKit instead since Google has dropped their support for Chromium), and recently wrapped PDFium (which split out from Chromium), a bunch of others too, such as LibExPat (which does XML stuff). But they've only ever incorporated things that were much more permissive license than GPLv3. that way it wouldn't be a problem for their dual-license (closed-source commercial) strategy, and so that they could easily drop the FOSS version it seems (I vaguely recall someone in the community noticing that and speculating that they would or could long before they did)
A nice thing about OXT is that we don't have the limitation of needing to use more permissive (Apache, MIT, etc.) licensed libraries. We can use just about any FOSS libraries (as long as it's GPLv3 compatible) because there is no closed-source commercial version of OXT and never will be.

That whole thing, right there... puts a smile on my face. Good job, and thank you, even though I know you were just stating facts.

[richmond62]

I am quite sure that the people at LiveCode central are becoming aware of what they have lost by stopping their open source branch, and I feel that the law of diminishing returns, as well as their refusal to engage in serious, constructive marketting, will make things increasingly uncomfortable for them.

[overclockedmind]

I am quite sure that the people at LiveCode central are becoming aware of what they have lost by stopping their open source branch, and I feel that the law of diminishing returns, as well as their refusal to engage in serious, constructive marketting, will make things increasingly uncomfortable for them.

There's certainly got to be a feeling of loss in their direction from any of their customers paying attention; they said with corporate action, "we don't care about you AT ALL, unless you're giving us your money."

[richmond62]

I am sure there is a feeling of loss from many of their customers.

But I wonder how many of the LiveCode 'team' are so thick-skinned or
insensitive that they feel no loss.

[tperry2x]

I personally feel quite hurt by Livecode's adandonement of the Open Source community.
It feels like sheer and utter greed on their part, and smacks of a lack of understanding about where the next good ideas for their software may come from.
I had once bought their license (I actually had it as a birthday present, because I couldn't afford nor justify the outlay). What did I find the advantages were? Frankly, not much. There wasn't any additional support offered. No groundbreaking features I couldn't live without that the Community Edition used to provide. Long story short, I didn't renew the subscription as there was no incentive to do so.

Why LC couldn't just keep their source as open, viewable on GitHub / GitLab (wherever), then changes could be tracked and it would allow for full transparency. They wouldn't have to 'support' anything as, if anything, any issues or bugs would have been caught by the Open Source Community.

Of course, their loss could be OpenXTalk's gain. I don't blame their developers and customers from abandoning them in droves, however it is a shame if those same developers turn to Python (yes, Python has it's place), but how many of them know that OpenXTalk exists? - If the ex-LC devs picked up the reigns and all focussed their efforts on OpenXTalk, such as recompiling the engines, and rolling out support for pretty much anything with a screen - well, as a deployment target I mean, then it could quickly become the tool of choice, with the ease of use that OpenXTalk has.

I'd personally like to see builds that are minuscule in size and ram requirements - when making a standalone, the final standalones can be 8~16MB in size, and this is the case for a single stack with a single GUI window. I know that all dependencies are included inside the binary, app, or exe (as applicable), but could this be smaller I wonder?

[overclockedmind]

Does anyone have enough history with them to know what version would build to Mac OS 9?

[richmond62]

Do you mean:

Where can I find a version of LiveCode that will work on Mac OS 9?

If the answer is 'YES' to that I can help you.

[overclockedmind]

Do you mean:

Where can I find a version of LiveCode that will work on Mac OS 9?

If the answer is 'YES' to that I can help you.

Actually, I suppose that I had better ask both of those questions.
1) The one that you just asked, and
2) how about a Linux version that "will export to" Mac OS 9?

The difference is that I'm on Linux primarily, but I would like to get some stuff to OS 9. Maybe, stuff it's missing. (I have another idea, on another thread, that you'll see pop up here shortly, ignore that for now.)

[richmond62]

When I get back from Germany (next week), I'll give a proper answer to both . . .

[overclockedmind]

When I get back from Germany (next week), I'll give a proper answer to both . . .

Freaking awesome! Thank you.