> Personal Subscriptions are per-user. So, this subscription is valid for one user
So if it's $100 per year and it's a programming language, at 366 days I can't even use what I already wrote? I'd advocate for the JetBrains licensing model: it remains licensed to the user indefinitely but just with no updates. Otherwise for a programming language that's extortion not a licensing fee
> it remains licensed to the user indefinitely but just with no updates
That is how the purchasing model currently works. Once you have downloaded the executable, you are free to use it forever even after your subscription ends.
But, I can see where there might be confusion. So, I'll be sure to re-word that page and make it more clear.
I just saw the Hello World example on the website, and the video.
It seems like your program is really capable, but I'm finding the UI extremely overwhelming.
I find myself comparing this to MIT's Scratch, and I know your tool is much more capable, but the user experience makes Scratch so intuitive.
Everything reads like a short sentence, and I can just dive in without understanding what I'm doing.
Any chance this can turn into something like "building legos"?
Blocks can be built exactly like Scratch. And, then, maybe you can map their input/output streams as a way to connect blocks (ideally inferred on the run).
And people can re-use blocks that others have built.
I know this is supposed to be a programming language, not a toy. But, selfishly, I want the UX to feel like it's a toy, so simple to discover it on my own. I can imagine prototyping stuff with it, especially if there's a library of stuff that I can use or contribute to while doing so...
I was wondering if the UI might give users some trouble. I had decided to write my own GUI library for this application instead of using an existing one. But now, I think retooling the GUI with an existing GUI library is in order.
> Any chance this can turn into something like "building legos"?
I'm not sure what you mean by "building legos"? Right now, users can create and reuse procedures. Sub-procedures, on the other hand, are tied to a specific procedure. I think this tool can work fine as is for prototyping.
But without a better UI, users may be choosing not use the app at all. So, I'll focus on a UI redesign.
> Personal Subscriptions are per-user. So, this subscription is valid for one user
So if it's $100 per year and it's a programming language, at 366 days I can't even use what I already wrote? I'd advocate for the JetBrains licensing model: it remains licensed to the user indefinitely but just with no updates. Otherwise for a programming language that's extortion not a licensing fee
> it remains licensed to the user indefinitely but just with no updates
That is how the purchasing model currently works. Once you have downloaded the executable, you are free to use it forever even after your subscription ends.
But, I can see where there might be confusion. So, I'll be sure to re-word that page and make it more clear.
I just saw the Hello World example on the website, and the video.
It seems like your program is really capable, but I'm finding the UI extremely overwhelming.
I find myself comparing this to MIT's Scratch, and I know your tool is much more capable, but the user experience makes Scratch so intuitive.
Everything reads like a short sentence, and I can just dive in without understanding what I'm doing.
Any chance this can turn into something like "building legos"?
Blocks can be built exactly like Scratch. And, then, maybe you can map their input/output streams as a way to connect blocks (ideally inferred on the run).
And people can re-use blocks that others have built.
I know this is supposed to be a programming language, not a toy. But, selfishly, I want the UX to feel like it's a toy, so simple to discover it on my own. I can imagine prototyping stuff with it, especially if there's a library of stuff that I can use or contribute to while doing so...
Thanks for the feedback.
I was wondering if the UI might give users some trouble. I had decided to write my own GUI library for this application instead of using an existing one. But now, I think retooling the GUI with an existing GUI library is in order.
> Any chance this can turn into something like "building legos"?
I'm not sure what you mean by "building legos"? Right now, users can create and reuse procedures. Sub-procedures, on the other hand, are tied to a specific procedure. I think this tool can work fine as is for prototyping.
But without a better UI, users may be choosing not use the app at all. So, I'll focus on a UI redesign.
The legos was referring to user experience, sorry about the vagueness.
I'd love to try this again with a simpler UI. If there's a place I can follow for updates, LMK.