As much as it kills me to say that Eric is right, and it does, I think he's right. A developer in another language isn't gonna pay MORE for something they don't need, and probably wouldn't use.
;) andy -----Original Message----- From: Eric Cobb [mailto:cft...@ecartech.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 8:57 AM To: cf-talk Subject: Re: ColdFusion Builder Released! 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:332100 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
