Charlie Griefer wrote:
"Bundling it with FlashBuilder may be their way of trying to increase the
uptake of the language as a whole and thus ultimately sell more server
licenses.  By doing this, they're potentially introducing CF to PHP
developers, Java developers, etc."

I have to say that I don't agree with that last statement.  FlashBuilder 
4 (Standard Edition) with CFBuilder costs $299, and FlashBuilder 4 
(Standard Edition) without CFBuilder costs $249.  So for an existing 
PHP/Flex developer who has no use for CF, do you think they're going to 
pay $299 to get an extra IDE for a language they don't use, or spend $50 
less and just get the IDE they need? 

thanks,

eric cobb
ecar technologies, llc
http://www.cfgears.com



Charlie Griefer wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Mary Jo Sminkey 
> <mary...@cfwebstore.com>wrote:
>
>   
>>> The cost has to do with Adobe being a publicly traded company needing to
>>> generate revenue and hopefully post a profit.  The cost would therefore
>>>       
>> more
>>     
>>> likely be based on the amount of effort (time/money) involved in
>>>       
>> developing
>>     
>>> (research, planning, developing, testing, marketing) the product.
>>>       
>> A lot of us hoped they would see that selling it a lower price point would
>> help to increase the uptake of the language as a whole and thus ultimately
>> sell more server licenses. For a large company like Adobe, profit is what
>> the company makes as a whole, not what one product alone brings in.
>> Microsoft learned this a long time ago and has used free and low-priced
>> items to increase their revenue in other areas, and it's certainly a large
>> reason for their success.
>>
>>     
>
> Bundling it with FlashBuilder may be their way of trying to increase the
> uptake of the language as a whole and thus ultimately sell more server
> licenses.  By doing this, they're potentially introducing CF to PHP
> developers, Java developers, etc.  Everyone who uses Flex but doesn't use CF
> on the server side.
>
> I'm not exactly sure that selling it at a lower price point would have the
> same effect.  It'd appeal to those of us who currently use ColdFusion...
> we'd conceivably be able to buy the product for $199 instead of $299.  Ok...
> but I don't see where that would necessarily increase the uptake of the
> language as a whole.
>
>   
>> I also think their move to bundle CFBuilder with FlashBuilder -is-
>>     
>>> encouraging developers.  It's encouraging me to make the foray into Flex,
>>> which is something that I've wanted to do for a while now.
>>>       
>> Not if the price discourages me from even buying the product in the first
>> place.
>>
>>     
>
> But you're already a ColdFusion developer.  If I wanted to buy FlexBuilder 3
> last year, I'd have paid $299 (i think... it was certainly in that
> neighborhood).  So we know that Flex developers are willing to pay that
> amount.  They're going to pay the same thing this year, and get ColdFusion
> Builder.  Adobe is pretty much giving it away to the Flex community in hopes
> of doing what you say... increase the uptake of the language as a whole.
>
> We CF folk.. we pay a little bit more than the $199 we hoped it would be,
> and get FlashBuilder.  So not only is Adobe conceivably introducing CF to
> other developers, but it's conceivably introducing Flex/FlashBuilder to us.
>
> I'm sorry that people think $300 is too expensive.  I know that "expensive"
> is a subjective term, and while some people can whip out their credit cards
> and order a copy without a second thought, some of us will have to save up
> for it.  But as has been pointed out... if you use the product for a year
> (and it really shouldn't even take a year), how much time are you going to
> save... how much more productive could you possibly be?
>
> Maybe the answer is, "not enough".  In which case... there are alternatives
> (CFEclipse and others).  For me, I think it'd be enough (I'm currently using
> TextMate on Mac as my IDE... so I don't really have a horse in this race, so
> to speak).  I've used the beta of CFBuilder tho, and I can see where it'd
> save me time.  I run multiple CF8 and CF9 instances on my dev machine.
>  Generally one at a time... not having to jump out of the IDE, into
> terminal, stop one service, start the next, back to the IDE... instead I can
> just open up the servers pane in CFBuilder, stop one service, start the
> other.  Code insight, extensible via writing extensions in CF (-not-
> Java)... I think I'd make my $300 back in under a year, and probably end the
> year being up a few bucks.
>
> I get that it's not going to be for everybody.  It's not going to work for
> everybody.  I just wish folks could be more pragmatic about it and say,
> "yeah, it doesn't work for me... but I can see where they're going with it".
>
> Charlie
>
>
>   


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know 
on the House of Fusion mailing lists
Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:332099
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm

Reply via email to