Very good points indeed. MM does need to worry about their bottom line if they want to stay active in this industry. However, Allaire set a very strong groundwork for a close relationship with its developers. I think MM has undervalued this relationship, as last years devCon was a prime example. DevCon seemed like one long week of sales pitches for all of MMs products. (A much different atmosphere from the previous Allaire conference in DC.)
The fact is that homesite/studio is an extremely strong product. It is apt to handle the majority of tasks that all web developers handle day to day. If it's not cost-effective for MM to have Delphi programmers, then they should release the rights. They should just sell it; or open-source it. If anything it will be a sign that MM values their customers. I also think that if homesite/studio disappeared or got shelved by MM. Another product would emerge to take its place, because the need is strong. Btw. Everyone I know who are avid Studio users, also own copies of dreamweaver. So I don't think the competing products argument is really precise in this scenario. Studio IS NOT a WYSIWIG. Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -----Original Message----- From: Hal Helms [mailto:hal.helms@;teamallaire.com] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 9:06 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Developer Edition wish was Re: Pro v Enterprise? It's fine to disagree with Dave or anyone, but attacking someone's motives is over the line. Unless, of course, your sister is Miss Cleo, in which case all bets are off. As to the issue involved, I'm a one-man shop and I have to agree with Dave on this. At some point if Macromedia doesn't make some money, there won't be a company to complain about. I think their decision to make the eval version convert to a developer's version was a great one. Sure, we all want everything for free, but didn't we just go through a dot bomb experience in which we (hopefully) rediscovered the value of profit? Hal Helms "Java for CF Programmers" class immediately after Macromedia DevCon. Info at www.halhelms.com -----Original Message----- From: Greg Bullough [mailto:gwb@;outofchaos.com] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 3:48 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Developer Edition wish was Re: Pro v Enterprise? At 01:08 PM 10/17/02 -0400, Dave Watts wrote: >I'm kind of surprised by this request. I don't work for Macromedia, Yes, but we will admit, won't we, that Fig Leaf has historically had rather a 'special' relationship with Allaire/Macromedia... >so I can't answer on their behalf. However, this seems to be well >beyond the purview of the Developers Edition, which is really designed >for a single developer's use. Is it, now? Should it be? The question is, does Macromedia want to facilitate development using their software, which sells license after license, or continue to raise the 'cost of entry' to the point where they push shops that are smaller than the 'establlishment' (like Figleaf) off to the very viable, less costly, alternatives, such as PHP and JSP? > If you want to do shared development, you're supposed to purchase the >appropriate license. With CF 5, if I recall correctly, what we now call >the "Developers Edition" was then called the "Single-User Edition". Once true. However, CF has sort of moved beyond that. When I first started CF, and went to a Fast Track to Cold Fusion class )taught by a Fig Leaf employee), one of the jolly things about CF was you could develop a fairly complex site on your laptop. On a pretty feeble laptop at that. I know. I did. Somewhere 'long about 4.5, sites got heavier and so did CF and Studio, and it got harder to do that. >This kind of limitation isn't that uncommon, when it comes to >development tools. You tend to get very little for free - you either >have to purchase "seats", or buy limited-functionality versions, for >development use. If you need to use the "real thing", you tend to have >to purchase the "real thing". Being a bit disingenuous aren't we? Fig Leaf, after all, is a Premier Partner, and gets free NFR copies... >This is part of the typical cost of development. Buying a single $5k >server license that allows you unlimited development against it is >pretty cheap, Single? Single? Let's see, we have sites on 4.5, 5.0, NT, and Linux. We have a shared production server on each platform. And a development server on each. Not sure how Dave gets 'single' out of that... >compared to a lot of other products out there. Well, not really. If you're developing for ASP, the application server comes with the OS (the one on which most copies of CF run). You DO pay money for Microsoft's IDE if you use it, but so then do you for the one that goes with CF. (.NET seems to be another story, but it isn't clear that that is going to fly.) Now, I know Fig Leaf would rather not have to compete against those pesky 1- to 6-man shops, but let's argue the interests of the continued proliferation of the platform, not the interests of certain Premier Partners who may be, shall we say, a bit 'closer' to the former Allaire than most of us mere mortals. Greg ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
