Page 2 and 3 of the article provide a feature-by-feature list, and the number of areas in which Revolution beats RealBasic is suprising. It makes you stop and rethink Rev and realise that you have probably been underestimating it and underrating it in your head, at least it did with me.
The final paragraphs/summary read:
The range of projects that are suitable to development in a high-level tool is expanding as the tools become more powerful. Both REALbasic and Revolution are able to tackle a wide variety of projects, and there is significant overlap in their feature set. The example application is typical of this: although the resulting code and applications are very different, they both meet the requirements.
However, REALbasic and Revolution are not identical. If a particular project or type of project is planned, then this should be taken into account when judging between the two. If a planned project absolutely requires a feature that only one environment has, and no add-on is available, then obviously that will be the deciding factor.
For the majority of projects, however, both REALbasic and Revolution will be able to meet the design requirements. In these cases, the decision between the environments will come down to the quality of the resulting applications and the relative strengths of the environments themselves: ease of use and developer efficiency. On these criteria, Revolution is the clear choice.