> ... In
> fact one of the most vociferous arguers does charge for his software.
I think the vociferous arguer must be someone else, but it occurs to
me that the history of Muse finances might interest other developers.
Muse was the source of some very bitter feelings between my wife
and me. She said that I shouldn't charge for it because it wasn't a
proper professional program produced by a proper company.
I'm afraid I am weak enough that that made it important to charge
for it and show that other people thought that it was worth while.
I swore that she would never get a penny out of it, but she has in
fact had more out of it than I have. (yeah, ego trip, etc.)
I bought another computer so that I could get enough time on it to
actually develop it, and declared that it was *mine* and others should
keep to the other one. The invoice was perused with disapproval.
Muse paid for the computer and it makes some money, enough
for pocket money, but I'd really hate to have to pay the groceries
with it. I got the compiler very cheap via a friend in Microsoft,
otherwise that would indeed be a big hit.
Actually I use an even cheaper old release (Visual C++ version 4.2)
which I bought through the company purchase scheme while I
worked for Microsoft. It seems to produce much smaller object
code. I think the extra is basically MFC stuff that Muse doesn't use.
The ABC support was introduced when the drummer in our band
pointed it out to me. Initially Muse had no ABC support.
Recently I wanted to make Muse free and this time that same wife
didn't want me to - because it was making money! I was persuaded
to rope in my daughter to deal with as much of the day-to-day running
of things as possible and let her use the money. She's a student, so
she is always short of money. So that's where I'm at.
Maybe it'll be free some day - but not today.
Laurie
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
