|
How someone earning 170$ monthly and writing simple programs for fun, not for sale can afford full version of VS? And why must he use free command line compilers?
I think that only software companies and other people, who make money on writing software should pay for development tools. There should be non-commercial versions for all, who would like write free software or just write for fun.
|
|
|
|
|
And why do you think people should work for you? For fun, not for sale?
lazy isn't my middle name.. its my first.. people just keep calling me Mel cause that's what they put on my drivers license. - Mel Feik
|
|
|
|
|
Why not free for individuals to learn? Free development tools for learning purposes would greatly benefit companies who are hiring for a particular product, such as VS.NET. There are trial editions, (such as http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/productinfo/trial/default.asp), but having an edition with all the bells and whistles would be a great learning experience for all those involved. Individuals learning the product, companies hiring individuals with experience without the extra costs of training, etc. I believe it is a win/win situation to have free development tools for individuals.
Just my thoughts,
Keenan
|
|
|
|
|
Please, there are only a handfull of free software out there thats worth having, at leaste if you compare to the "professional" software that cost money. You want free development tools >> go get them there everywhere! If ya
want like VS to be free, that what you see today, would prbably be it for the future. No more inivation "period".
|
|
|
|
|
I agree totally in respect to the quality of the product you get. But in addition, remember that the monies from VS is used to finance the next version of the compiler, MSDN website, DevDays. If MS decide to give VS away for free, they would be hit with an anti-trust lawsuit from Borland. The only discounting that MS does right now to my knowledge are for the "academic" versions. But they are doing that for the sole purpose of educating the next generation of programmers (ie. future sales). I should point out that in one instance up here in Canada, I believe MS donated both hardware/software (VS) to the University of Waterloo. In return a course was offered to teach C#. The end result of the donation was a flood of negative responses saying MS was up to their "tricks" again. Hypocritically speaking, no such uproar is ever heard when Sun donates hardware to universities. Even though the business reasoning is the same.
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous wrote:
If MS decide to give VS away for free, they would be hit with an anti-trust lawsuit from Borland.
I don't agree, since Borland does have Personal editions of IDE's
LPCTSTR Dutch = TEXT("Double Dutch ");
|
|
|
|
|
Damn trolls...
Shog9
------
The Army's on Ecstasy, so they say -
I read all about it in USA Today.
They stepped up urine testing to make it go away,
'cause it's hard to kill the enemy on ol' MDMA...- Oysterhead
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, where is Trollslayer when you need her?
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
|
|
|
|
|
A handful is still a handful. Development tools [read IDEs] do a lot to boost productivity, of that there's no doubt.
As for actually developing software, it may take a bit more time, but you can still do it on the commmand line, to write your own IDEs, or extend ones that already exist. The .NET Framework SDK is free, with compilers (including C++.) Couple that with the Platform SDK, you've got yourself a nice place to start innovating
So no IDE? No cool tool? Don't like the one you bought or downloaded? Write your own. You may come up with something that jacks the system!
What's forgotten is that when it comes down to it, we're still editing text files, just under a different metaphor. gcc is a great compiler, and so is cl . In the end, the IDEs still invoke them (or variants thereof along with linkers) on our behalf to generate the "long string of ones and zeros" [Niel Stephenson] that we know and love as software, and occasionally, the brilliant operating system.
Humans are a very innovative species, and the inventiveness of the free spirit cannot be dismissed.
|
|
|
|
|
If we're talking about SDK tools (and docs, samples, etc), then I think they should be free. These things include compilers, linkers, (dis)assemblers, debuggers, etc. Most tools of these nature generally are free.
If we're talking about Integrated Development Environments (IDEs), then no. Companies put a lot of work into IDEs spending a ton of money on research and development costs, not to mention all the man-hours, headaches, and bottles of asprin. With that said, it is another consumable product. Such development goes into other commercial software, right?
As far as pricing goes though, that's another matter!
"Well, I wouldn't say I've been missing it, Bob." - Peter Gibbons
|
|
|
|
|
Compilers should be free? No! The "standard" version of the X lanuage compiler could be free, but should the optimizing one be free too? Debuggers should be free? NO WAY JOSE! Debuggers are EXTREMELY hard to write, and if you can live with something looking like gdb -- I can't. A debugger, integrated in the IDE should not be free. A kernel-mode debugger should not be free -- I'll give you SoftIce for example -- the only debugger supporting BOTH kernel-mode and user-mode debugging - should NuMega drop one of their COOLEST products? Or make it open-source? I don't think they're planning that... However, I like free tools too. But you know that free stuff is more expensive than the cheap stuff, which is more expensive than the expensive stuff
Cheers!
|
|
|
|
|
You make a valid point about debuggers. As far as compilers, the cheap (quality-wise) ones should be free (enough to get the job done, for example). There are plenty of good, free compilers out there, though. GCC (*nix and Cygwin) is one, for example. The .NET Framework SDK also comes with the compilers, though we know there's some other motives involved there, the same with Java.
"Well, I wouldn't say I've been missing it, Bob." - Peter Gibbons
|
|
|
|
|
Yes. I think that software in poor countries should be cheaper than in USA or EU.
Ñ There is only one MP Ð
|
|
|
|
|
I actually agree although it probably wouldn't effect me much.
It would make sense if software houses used a CCPI in their sale price calcs.
Some of the 3rd world movements towards Linux should be quite alarming for the Windows industry.
Regardz
Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
You are the intrepid one, always willing to leap into the fray! A serious character flaw, I might add, but entertaining.
Said by Roger Wright about me.
|
|
|
|
|
This is true, but unfortunately people in rich countries would find a way to abuse this system
Deploying a web application without understanding security is roughly equivalent to driving a car without seatbelts - down a slippery road, over a monstrous chasm, with no brakes, and the throttle jammed on full. Hacking Exposed - Web Applications. Joel Scambray & Mike Shema
|
|
|
|
|
Currently there are software licenses that are only valid in the US, so there can be the same for other regions.
|
|
|
|
|
You could also put students (school age and college) and (public) schools under the "poor people" category.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah! Cheap soft for poor students in poor countries.
Ñ There is only one MP Ð
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, even students in "rich" countries are generally poor. In my student dasys, whenever I could, I would remote log in to servers and do my work on them rather than buy the tools for my own machine...
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
|
|
|
|
|
Maciej Pirog wrote:
Cheap soft for poor students in poor countries.
I'm a poor student in a "rich" [kinda compared to some] country [i.e. Republic of Ireland] and I find it hard enought to put myself through college never mind having to buy software as well. 29 hours a week in colelge, 20 in work [to pay my way throught college], another 20 hours a week on college work outside of college and the rest doing personal projects and stuff.. barely even have time to be a drunken Irish Man anymore!!! ... I can barely afford to live [well. I can... but not like I'l like to!!! ] never mind buy software!!!
Regards,
Brian Dela
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, same was I when went to university... But wait when you'll start to work full-time (without paychecks to college)
But actually I never need any software when I was studing. All I wanted I had either at work or at university, I even had no good computer at home that time (beginning of 90th), all i had is Sinclair ZX Spectrum with some "cool" games on it .
Philip Patrick
Web-site: www.stpworks.com
"Two beer or not two beer?" Shakesbeer
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, while reading your profile I found out that you are from Kilkenny. The funniest thing that I was reading and drinking a beer called "Kilkenny's beer"
Philip Patrick
Web-site: www.stpworks.com
"Two beer or not two beer?" Shakesbeer
|
|
|
|
|
Philip Patrick wrote:
The funniest thing that I was reading and drinking a beer called "Kilkenny's beer"
Yep... It's made in this beautiful county of mine and in the Guinness brewery in St. James Gate in Dublin as well. It's a very nice Irish stout
Regards,
Brian Dela
|
|
|
|
|
It is a question of the price to offer the product. If wages and rents are cnot so high so the product should be cheaper.
Or they use older and used products: cheaper.
I am convinced that open source i a real oppotunity for poorer people to get IT working.
Or they use illegal copies.
|
|
|
|
|
Many companies already offer educational prices for their software, albeit not free, it is still greatly reduced. I feel if I am programming at home, for FUN (yes I really do that ) and not for profit, then I cannot justify the high price of a full development suite. However, if I obtain a student version, I am more likely to become more efficient and familiar with the tools so thus I can push for the full version @ work. (which is usually how it goes for me if I can convince everyone we really, really need it... )
Nitron
_________________________________________--
message sent on 100% recycled electrons.
|
|
|
|