Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Michael Ridland]

How absolutely ridiculous, I'm very disappointing in red gate.




-- Forwarded message --
From: Simple-Talk Special Mailing 
Date: Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:31 AM
Subject: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
To: "rid...@gmail.com" 


An open letter to the .NET community

Red Gate has announced that it will charge $35 for version 7 of .NET
Reflector upon its release in early March. Version 7 will be sold as a
perpetual license, with no time bomb or forced updates.

As many of you know, our original intention was to maintain .NET Reflector
as a free tool. But, after two-and-a-half years of providing it without
charge, we realized that we could not make the free model work. We know that
this will cause pain for some people in the .NET community, and we apologize
for the change in policy.

As a commercial company, we need to charge at least a nominal amount to keep
.NET Reflector up-to-date and relevant. Without revenue coming in, we cannot
dedicate a team of developers to ensure that Reflector remains a valuable
part of .NET developers' toolboxes.

As always, your feedback is important to Red Gate, so please contribute any
thoughts on this subject to our .NET Reflector
forum.<http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewforum.php?f=141?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorForum-20110202>

Sincerely,
Neil Davidson
Co-CEO, Red Gate Software

 Link to more:

   - Read answers to frequently asked questions about Red Gate's .NET
   Reflector 
decision.<http://www.red-Gate.com/products/dotnet-development/reflector/announcement-faq?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorFAQ-20110202>
   - Video interview with Simon Galbraith, Red Gate co-CEO, about the future
   of .NET Reflector. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKnEjiSGZLA>
   - New features in V7 of .NET
Reflector.<http://www.simple-talk.com/community/blogs/clivet/archive/2011/02/01/99118.aspx?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=CliveBlog-20110202>
   - Forum for feedback and
discussion.<http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewforum.php?f=141?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorForum-20110202>
   - Free downloads of .NET
Reflector.<http://reflector.red-gate.com/download.aspx?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorDownload-20110202>

 You have been sent this special mail from Simple Talk because you are a
current .NET Reflector newsletter subscriber. To unsubscribe from the .NET
Reflector newsletter please click
here.<http://www.simple-talk.com/newsletter/user-unsubscribe.aspx?s=250122&l=15&e=rid...@gmail.com&p=7315>Or
write to Simple Talk, Red Gate Software, Newnham House, Cambridge
Business Park, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, United Kingdom.

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Michael Ridland]

Sorry, disappointed not disappointing.



On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Michael Ridland  wrote:

>
> How absolutely ridiculous, I'm very disappointing in red gate.
>
>
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Simple-Talk Special Mailing 
> Date: Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:31 AM
> Subject: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
> To: "rid...@gmail.com" 
>
>
> An open letter to the .NET community
>
> Red Gate has announced that it will charge $35 for version 7 of .NET
> Reflector upon its release in early March. Version 7 will be sold as a
> perpetual license, with no time bomb or forced updates.
>
> As many of you know, our original intention was to maintain .NET Reflector
> as a free tool. But, after two-and-a-half years of providing it without
> charge, we realized that we could not make the free model work. We know that
> this will cause pain for some people in the .NET community, and we apologize
> for the change in policy.
>
> As a commercial company, we need to charge at least a nominal amount to
> keep .NET Reflector up-to-date and relevant. Without revenue coming in, we
> cannot dedicate a team of developers to ensure that Reflector remains a
> valuable part of .NET developers' toolboxes.
>
> As always, your feedback is important to Red Gate, so please contribute any
> thoughts on this subject to our .NET Reflector 
> forum.<http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewforum.php?f=141?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorForum-20110202>
>
> Sincerely,
> Neil Davidson
> Co-CEO, Red Gate Software
>
>  Link to more:
>
>- Read answers to frequently asked questions about Red Gate's .NET
>Reflector 
> decision.<http://www.red-Gate.com/products/dotnet-development/reflector/announcement-faq?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorFAQ-20110202>
>- Video interview with Simon Galbraith, Red Gate co-CEO, about the
>future of .NET Reflector. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKnEjiSGZLA>
>- New features in V7 of .NET 
> Reflector.<http://www.simple-talk.com/community/blogs/clivet/archive/2011/02/01/99118.aspx?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=CliveBlog-20110202>
>- Forum for feedback and 
> discussion.<http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewforum.php?f=141?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorForum-20110202>
>- Free downloads of .NET 
> Reflector.<http://reflector.red-gate.com/download.aspx?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorDownload-20110202>
>
>  You have been sent this special mail from Simple Talk because you are a
> current .NET Reflector newsletter subscriber. To unsubscribe from the .NET
> Reflector newsletter please click 
> here.<http://www.simple-talk.com/newsletter/user-unsubscribe.aspx?s=250122&l=15&e=rid...@gmail.com&p=7315>Or
>  write to Simple Talk, Red Gate Software, Newnham House, Cambridge
> Business Park, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, United Kingdom.
>
>

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Craig van Nieuwkerk]

Very disappointing. I am not sure why they need 'a team of developers' to
maintain it. People would be happy i am sure with the earlier version with
less features and lower (zero) price.

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Michael Ridland  wrote:

>
> How absolutely ridiculous, I'm very disappointing in red gate.
>
>
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Simple-Talk Special Mailing 
> Date: Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:31 AM
> Subject: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
> To: "rid...@gmail.com" 
>
>
> An open letter to the .NET community
>
> Red Gate has announced that it will charge $35 for version 7 of .NET
> Reflector upon its release in early March. Version 7 will be sold as a
> perpetual license, with no time bomb or forced updates.
>
> As many of you know, our original intention was to maintain .NET Reflector
> as a free tool. But, after two-and-a-half years of providing it without
> charge, we realized that we could not make the free model work. We know that
> this will cause pain for some people in the .NET community, and we apologize
> for the change in policy.
>
> As a commercial company, we need to charge at least a nominal amount to
> keep .NET Reflector up-to-date and relevant. Without revenue coming in, we
> cannot dedicate a team of developers to ensure that Reflector remains a
> valuable part of .NET developers' toolboxes.
>
> As always, your feedback is important to Red Gate, so please contribute any
> thoughts on this subject to our .NET Reflector 
> forum.<http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewforum.php?f=141?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorForum-20110202>
>
> Sincerely,
> Neil Davidson
> Co-CEO, Red Gate Software
>
>  Link to more:
>
>- Read answers to frequently asked questions about Red Gate's .NET
>Reflector 
> decision.<http://www.red-Gate.com/products/dotnet-development/reflector/announcement-faq?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorFAQ-20110202>
>- Video interview with Simon Galbraith, Red Gate co-CEO, about the
>future of .NET Reflector. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKnEjiSGZLA>
>- New features in V7 of .NET 
> Reflector.<http://www.simple-talk.com/community/blogs/clivet/archive/2011/02/01/99118.aspx?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=CliveBlog-20110202>
>- Forum for feedback and 
> discussion.<http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewforum.php?f=141?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorForum-20110202>
>- Free downloads of .NET 
> Reflector.<http://reflector.red-gate.com/download.aspx?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorDownload-20110202>
>
>  You have been sent this special mail from Simple Talk because you are a
> current .NET Reflector newsletter subscriber. To unsubscribe from the .NET
> Reflector newsletter please click 
> here.<http://www.simple-talk.com/newsletter/user-unsubscribe.aspx?s=250122&l=15&e=rid...@gmail.com&p=7315>Or
>  write to Simple Talk, Red Gate Software, Newnham House, Cambridge
> Business Park, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, United Kingdom.
>
>
>

RE: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Tony Wright]

Yea, how about they just give it back!

-Original Message-
From: Craig van Nieuwkerk
Sent: Thursday, 3 February 2011 9:23 AM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

Very disappointing. I am not sure why they need 'a team of developers' to
maintain it. People would be happy i am sure with the earlier version with
less features and lower (zero) price.

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Michael Ridland  wrote:

>
> How absolutely ridiculous, I'm very disappointing in red gate.
>
>
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Simple-Talk Special Mailing 
> Date: Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:31 AM
> Subject: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
> To: "rid...@gmail.com" 
>
>
> An open letter to the .NET community
>
> Red Gate has announced that it will charge $35 for version 7 of .NET
> Reflector upon its release in early March. Version 7 will be sold as a
> perpetual license, with no time bomb or forced updates.
>
> As many of you know, our original intention was to maintain .NET Reflector
> as a free tool. But, after two-and-a-half years of providing it without
> charge, we realized that we could not make the free model work. We know that
> this will cause pain for some people in the .NET community, and we apologize
> for the change in policy.
>
> As a commercial company, we need to charge at least a nominal amount to
> keep .NET Reflector up-to-date and relevant. Without revenue coming in, we
> cannot dedicate a team of developers to ensure that Reflector remains a
> valuable part of .NET developers' toolboxes.
>
> As always, your feedback is important to Red Gate, so please contribute any
> thoughts on this subject to our .NET Reflector 
> forum.<http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewforum.php?f=141?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorForum-20110202>
>
> Sincerely,
> Neil Davidson
> Co-CEO, Red Gate Software
>
>  Link to more:
>
>- Read answers to frequently asked questions about Red Gate's .NET
>Reflector 
> decision.<http://www.red-Gate.com/products/dotnet-development/reflector/announcement-faq?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorFAQ-20110202>
>- Video interview with Simon Galbraith, Red Gate co-CEO, about the
>future of .NET Reflector. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKnEjiSGZLA>
>- New features in V7 of .NET 
> Reflector.<http://www.simple-talk.com/community/blogs/clivet/archive/2011/02/01/99118.aspx?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=CliveBlog-20110202>
>- Forum for feedback and 
> discussion.<http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewforum.php?f=141?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorForum-20110202>
>- Free downloads of .NET 
> Reflector.<http://reflector.red-gate.com/download.aspx?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorDownload-20110202>
>
>  You have been sent this special mail from Simple Talk because you are a
> current .NET Reflector newsletter subscriber. To unsubscribe from the .NET
> Reflector newsletter please click 
> here.<http://www.simple-talk.com/newsletter/user-unsubscribe.aspx?s=250122&l=15&e=rid...@gmail.com&p=7315>Or
>  write to Simple Talk, Red Gate Software, Newnham House, Cambridge
> Business Park, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, United Kingdom.
>
>
>

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Winston Pang]

I don't understand either, sure the integration into VS is a nice to
have, but I don't give a crap, I just like it the way it is. They
should just give us a nice clean one that's free, and besides most of
the code I bet is probably still from Lutz Roeder anyways.


On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Craig van Nieuwkerk  wrote:
> Very disappointing. I am not sure why they need 'a team of developers' to
> maintain it. People would be happy i am sure with the earlier version with
> less features and lower (zero) price.
>
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Michael Ridland  wrote:
>>
>> How absolutely ridiculous, I'm very disappointing in red gate.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- Forwarded message --
>> From: Simple-Talk Special Mailing 
>> Date: Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:31 AM
>> Subject: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
>> To: "rid...@gmail.com" 
>>
>>
>> An open letter to the .NET community
>>
>> Red Gate has announced that it will charge $35 for version 7 of .NET
>> Reflector upon its release in early March. Version 7 will be sold as a
>> perpetual license, with no time bomb or forced updates.
>>
>> As many of you know, our original intention was to maintain .NET Reflector
>> as a free tool. But, after two-and-a-half years of providing it without
>> charge, we realized that we could not make the free model work. We know that
>> this will cause pain for some people in the .NET community, and we apologize
>> for the change in policy.
>>
>> As a commercial company, we need to charge at least a nominal amount to
>> keep .NET Reflector up-to-date and relevant. Without revenue coming in, we
>> cannot dedicate a team of developers to ensure that Reflector remains a
>> valuable part of .NET developers' toolboxes.
>>
>> As always, your feedback is important to Red Gate, so please contribute
>> any thoughts on this subject to our .NET Reflector forum.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Neil Davidson
>> Co-CEO, Red Gate Software
>>
>> Link to more:
>>
>> Read answers to frequently asked questions about Red Gate's .NET Reflector
>> decision.
>> Video interview with Simon Galbraith, Red Gate co-CEO, about the future of
>> .NET Reflector.
>> New features in V7 of .NET Reflector.
>> Forum for feedback and discussion.
>> Free downloads of .NET Reflector.
>>
>> You have been sent this special mail from Simple Talk because you are a
>> current .NET Reflector newsletter subscriber. To unsubscribe from the .NET
>> Reflector newsletter please click here. Or write to Simple Talk, Red Gate
>> Software, Newnham House, Cambridge Business Park, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, United
>> Kingdom.
>
>

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Noon Silk]

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Michael Ridland  wrote:
>
> How absolutely ridiculous, I'm very disappointing in red gate.

Can hardly blame a company for wanting money. I don't see it as being
that valuable anyway; I've only used it a handful of times. Useful,
but not required by any means. And it's not going away.

I think the attitude of not wanting to pay for software is kind of
anti-productive. Some of the best tools for programming are not free
(others are). And, I mean, it's $35 dollars. I'd guess that almost all
of us are paid at the very least more than that per hour. It's hardly
breaking the bank, if you do want it.

-- 
Noon Silk

http://dnoondt.wordpress.com/  (Noon Silk) | http://www.mirios.com.au:8081 >

Fancy a quantum lunch?
http://www.mirios.com.au:8081/index.php?title=Quantum_Lunch

"Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy — the joy
of being this signature."

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[David Richards]

The first thing thing that came to mind was: The first one is always free.


David

"If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes
 will fall like a house of cards... checkmate!"
 -Zapp Brannigan, Futurama




On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 09:23, Craig van Nieuwkerk  wrote:
> Very disappointing. I am not sure why they need 'a team of developers' to
> maintain it. People would be happy i am sure with the earlier version with
> less features and lower (zero) price.
>
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Michael Ridland  wrote:
>>
>> How absolutely ridiculous, I'm very disappointing in red gate.
>>

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Arjang Assadi]

On 3 February 2011 09:23, Craig van Nieuwkerk  wrote:
> Very disappointing. I am not sure why they need 'a team of developers' to
> maintain it.

Craig,

To paraquote "The Big Lbeowski" : They have two teams of developers
working in shifts 24/7 just so that the reflector doesn't stop
working! :)

Regards

Arjang

RE: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[David Kean]

I agree. This tool is one of the most popular and most used tools in the .NET 
Community. I'll have happily paid this amount 10 times over based on how much 
I've used this tool. Half the CLR team uses this tool - so that's a sign off 
its usefulness. I don't see a problem with paying for something that pays for 
itself in time saved.

You'd be surprised at how much this would actually cost to maintain, while Lutz 
wrote this on his own - there's a reason he sold it.

-Original Message-
From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On 
Behalf Of Noon Silk
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 2:28 PM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Michael Ridland  wrote:
>
> How absolutely ridiculous, I'm very disappointing in red gate.

Can hardly blame a company for wanting money. I don't see it as being that 
valuable anyway; I've only used it a handful of times. Useful, but not required 
by any means. And it's not going away.

I think the attitude of not wanting to pay for software is kind of 
anti-productive. Some of the best tools for programming are not free (others 
are). And, I mean, it's $35 dollars. I'd guess that almost all of us are paid 
at the very least more than that per hour. It's hardly breaking the bank, if 
you do want it.

--
Noon Silk

http://dnoondt.wordpress.com/  (Noon Silk) | http://www.mirios.com.au:8081 >

Fancy a quantum lunch?
http://www.mirios.com.au:8081/index.php?title=Quantum_Lunch

"Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy - the joy of being 
this signature."

RE: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[David Boccabella]

I don't mind paying $35 for it.  The number of times I have been able to go
into other programs ad find out what they are doing has been invaluable.
Esp when one if trying to get  company 1 program talking with  company 2.

Dave



David J. Boccabella
Proprietor
Anubis Systems
Phone: 0433 808 525
Fax: 3200 0085
Email:  davidboccabe...@anubis-systems.com

This e-mail and it's contents is confidential to Anubis Systems.
This e-mail, any attachments, or any part of can not be reproduced
without the express written permission of Anubis Systems


-Original Message-
From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com]
On Behalf Of David Kean
Sent: Thursday, 3 February 2011 9:03 AM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: RE: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

I agree. This tool is one of the most popular and most used tools in the
.NET Community. I'll have happily paid this amount 10 times over based on
how much I've used this tool. Half the CLR team uses this tool - so that's a
sign off its usefulness. I don't see a problem with paying for something
that pays for itself in time saved.

You'd be surprised at how much this would actually cost to maintain, while
Lutz wrote this on his own - there's a reason he sold it.

-Original Message-
From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com]
On Behalf Of Noon Silk
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 2:28 PM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Michael Ridland  wrote:
>
> How absolutely ridiculous, I'm very disappointing in red gate.

Can hardly blame a company for wanting money. I don't see it as being that
valuable anyway; I've only used it a handful of times. Useful, but not
required by any means. And it's not going away.

I think the attitude of not wanting to pay for software is kind of
anti-productive. Some of the best tools for programming are not free (others
are). And, I mean, it's $35 dollars. I'd guess that almost all of us are
paid at the very least more than that per hour. It's hardly breaking the
bank, if you do want it.

--
Noon Silk

http://dnoondt.wordpress.com/  (Noon Silk) | http://www.mirios.com.au:8081 >

Fancy a quantum lunch?
http://www.mirios.com.au:8081/index.php?title=Quantum_Lunch

"Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy - the joy of
being this signature."

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Grant Molloy]

The below email was sent by Lutz in Sep 2008...
It would be interesting to know what was in his "Agreement with Red Gate" !!

After more than eight years of working on .NET Reflector, I have decided it
> is time to move on and explore some new opportunities.

I have reached an agreement to have Red Gate
Software<http://www.red-gate.com/> continue
> the development of .NET Reflector. Red Gate has a lot of experience
> creating development tools for both .NET and SQL Server. They have the
> resources necessary to work on new features, and Reflector fits nicely
> with other .NET tools the company offers.

Red Gate will continue to provide the free community version and is looking
> for your feedback and ideas for future versions.

For news and updates on Reflector, sign up for the .NET Developer’s
> Newsletter <http://reflector.red-gate.com/subscribe.aspx> from Red Gate.
> To find out more about the agreement, see the interview on Simple 
> Talk<http://www.simple-talk.com/the_future_of_reflector>
> .



On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Michael Ridland  wrote:

>
> How absolutely ridiculous, I'm very disappointing in red gate.
>
>
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Simple-Talk Special Mailing 
> Date: Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:31 AM
> Subject: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
> To: "rid...@gmail.com" 
>
>
> An open letter to the .NET community
>
> Red Gate has announced that it will charge $35 for version 7 of .NET
> Reflector upon its release in early March. Version 7 will be sold as a
> perpetual license, with no time bomb or forced updates.
>
> As many of you know, our original intention was to maintain .NET Reflector
> as a free tool. But, after two-and-a-half years of providing it without
> charge, we realized that we could not make the free model work. We know that
> this will cause pain for some people in the .NET community, and we apologize
> for the change in policy.
>
> As a commercial company, we need to charge at least a nominal amount to
> keep .NET Reflector up-to-date and relevant. Without revenue coming in, we
> cannot dedicate a team of developers to ensure that Reflector remains a
> valuable part of .NET developers' toolboxes.
>
> As always, your feedback is important to Red Gate, so please contribute any
> thoughts on this subject to our .NET Reflector 
> forum.<http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewforum.php?f=141?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorForum-20110202>
>
> Sincerely,
> Neil Davidson
> Co-CEO, Red Gate Software
>
>  Link to more:
>
>- Read answers to frequently asked questions about Red Gate's .NET
>Reflector 
> decision.<http://www.red-Gate.com/products/dotnet-development/reflector/announcement-faq?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorFAQ-20110202>
>- Video interview with Simon Galbraith, Red Gate co-CEO, about the
>future of .NET Reflector. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKnEjiSGZLA>
>- New features in V7 of .NET 
> Reflector.<http://www.simple-talk.com/community/blogs/clivet/archive/2011/02/01/99118.aspx?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=CliveBlog-20110202>
>- Forum for feedback and 
> discussion.<http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewforum.php?f=141?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorForum-20110202>
>- Free downloads of .NET 
> Reflector.<http://reflector.red-gate.com/download.aspx?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorDownload-20110202>
>
>  You have been sent this special mail from Simple Talk because you are a
> current .NET Reflector newsletter subscriber. To unsubscribe from the .NET
> Reflector newsletter please click 
> here.<http://www.simple-talk.com/newsletter/user-unsubscribe.aspx?s=250122&l=15&e=rid...@gmail.com&p=7315>Or
>  write to Simple Talk, Red Gate Software, Newnham House, Cambridge
> Business Park, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, United Kingdom.
>
>
>

RE: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[David Kean]

The agreement was 'You pay me lots of money - I'll give you the IP' :)

From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On 
Behalf Of Grant Molloy
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 4:43 PM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

The below email was sent by Lutz in Sep 2008...
It would be interesting to know what was in his "Agreement with Red Gate" !!

After more than eight years of working on .NET Reflector, I have decided it is 
time to move on and explore some new opportunities.
I have reached an agreement to have Red Gate Software<http://www.red-gate.com/> 
continue the development of .NET Reflector. Red Gate has a lot of experience 
creating development tools for both .NET and SQL Server. They have the 
resources necessary to work on new features, and Reflector fits nicely with 
other .NET tools the company offers.
Red Gate will continue to provide the free community version and is looking for 
your feedback and ideas for future versions.
For news and updates on Reflector, sign up for the .NET Developer's 
Newsletter<http://reflector.red-gate.com/subscribe.aspx> from Red Gate. To find 
out more about the agreement, see the interview on Simple 
Talk<http://www.simple-talk.com/the_future_of_reflector>.



On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Michael Ridland 
mailto:rid...@gmail.com>> wrote:

How absolutely ridiculous, I'm very disappointing in red gate.



-- Forwarded message --
From: Simple-Talk Special Mailing 
mailto:newslet...@simple-talk.com>>
Date: Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:31 AM
Subject: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
To: "rid...@gmail.com<mailto:rid...@gmail.com>" 
mailto:rid...@gmail.com>>


An open letter to the .NET community

Red Gate has announced that it will charge $35 for version 7 of .NET Reflector 
upon its release in early March. Version 7 will be sold as a perpetual license, 
with no time bomb or forced updates.

As many of you know, our original intention was to maintain .NET Reflector as a 
free tool. But, after two-and-a-half years of providing it without charge, we 
realized that we could not make the free model work. We know that this will 
cause pain for some people in the .NET community, and we apologize for the 
change in policy.

As a commercial company, we need to charge at least a nominal amount to keep 
.NET Reflector up-to-date and relevant. Without revenue coming in, we cannot 
dedicate a team of developers to ensure that Reflector remains a valuable part 
of .NET developers' toolboxes.

As always, your feedback is important to Red Gate, so please contribute any 
thoughts on this subject to our .NET Reflector 
forum.<http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewforum.php?f=141?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorForum-20110202>

Sincerely,
Neil Davidson
Co-CEO, Red Gate Software

Link to more:

  *   Read answers to frequently asked questions about Red Gate's .NET 
Reflector 
decision.<http://www.red-Gate.com/products/dotnet-development/reflector/announcement-faq?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorFAQ-20110202>
  *   Video interview with Simon Galbraith, Red Gate co-CEO, about the future 
of .NET Reflector.<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKnEjiSGZLA>
  *   New features in V7 of .NET 
Reflector.<http://www.simple-talk.com/community/blogs/clivet/archive/2011/02/01/99118.aspx?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=CliveBlog-20110202>
  *   Forum for feedback and 
discussion.<http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewforum.php?f=141?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorForum-20110202>
  *   Free downloads of .NET 
Reflector.<http://reflector.red-gate.com/download.aspx?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorDownload-20110202>
You have been sent this special mail from Simple Talk because you are a current 
.NET Reflector newsletter subscriber. To unsubscribe from the .NET Reflector 
newsletter please click 
here.<http://www.simple-talk.com/newsletter/user-unsubscribe.aspx?s=250122&l=15&e=rid...@gmail.com&p=7315>
 Or write to Simple Talk, Red Gate Software, Newnham House, Cambridge Business 
Park, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, United Kingdom.

RE: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[James Chapman-Smith]

It even prompted me to write my first blog entry
<http://www.enigmativity.com/blog/2011/02/03/Red+Gate+Will+Be+Charging+35+Fo
r+NET+Reflector.aspx>  in nearly two and a half years about it!

 

http://www.enigmativity.com/blog/2011/02/03/Red+Gate+Will+Be+Charging+35+For
+NET+Reflector.aspx

 

 

From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com]
On Behalf Of Michael Ridland
Sent: Thursday, 3 February 2011 08:49
To: ozDotNet
Subject: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

 


How absolutely ridiculous, I'm very disappointing in red gate. 




-- Forwarded message --
From: Simple-Talk Special Mailing 
Date: Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:31 AM
Subject: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
To: "rid...@gmail.com" 

An open letter to the .NET community 

Red Gate has announced that it will charge $35 for version 7 of .NET
Reflector upon its release in early March. Version 7 will be sold as a
perpetual license, with no time bomb or forced updates. 

As many of you know, our original intention was to maintain .NET Reflector
as a free tool. But, after two-and-a-half years of providing it without
charge, we realized that we could not make the free model work. We know that
this will cause pain for some people in the .NET community, and we apologize
for the change in policy. 

As a commercial company, we need to charge at least a nominal amount to keep
.NET Reflector up-to-date and relevant. Without revenue coming in, we cannot
dedicate a team of developers to ensure that Reflector remains a valuable
part of .NET developers' toolboxes. 

As always, your feedback is important to Red Gate, so please contribute any
thoughts on this subject to our
<http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewforum.php?f=141?utm_source=simplet
alk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorForum-20110202>
.NET Reflector forum. 

Sincerely,
Neil Davidson
Co-CEO, Red Gate Software

Link to more: 

*
<http://www.red-Gate.com/products/dotnet-development/reflector/announcement-
faq?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=Reflec
torFAQ-20110202> Read answers to frequently asked questions about Red Gate's
.NET Reflector decision.
*<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKnEjiSGZLA> Video interview with
Simon Galbraith, Red Gate co-CEO, about the future of .NET Reflector.
*
<http://www.simple-talk.com/community/blogs/clivet/archive/2011/02/01/99118.
aspx?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=Clive
Blog-20110202> New features in V7 of .NET Reflector.
*
<http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewforum.php?f=141?utm_source=simplet
alk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorForum-20110202>
Forum for feedback and discussion.
*
<http://reflector.red-gate.com/download.aspx?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_mediu
m=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorDownload-20110202> Free
downloads of .NET Reflector.

You have been sent this special mail from Simple Talk because you are a
current .NET Reflector newsletter subscriber. To unsubscribe from the .NET
Reflector newsletter please
<http://www.simple-talk.com/newsletter/user-unsubscribe.aspx?s=250122&l=15&e
=rid...@gmail.com&p=7315> click here. Or write to Simple Talk, Red Gate
Software, Newnham House, Cambridge Business Park, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, United
Kingdom.

 

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Tony McGee]

While it's a shame the free version won't be available anymore I'm not 
disappointed at Red Gate. I'm only disappointed in the sense of 
entitlement coming from some members of the .NET community on this.


We've had the free ride for such a long time so it's easy to forget 
someone's time and effort to maintain Reflector isn't free.
The new price seems very reasonable for the benefit the tool provides to 
a lot of developers.
It's a great tool, so if it provides $35 worth of value why not just buy 
it!?



On 3/02/2011 4:41 PM, James Chapman-Smith wrote:


It even prompted me to write my first blog entry 
<http://www.enigmativity.com/blog/2011/02/03/Red+Gate+Will+Be+Charging+35+For+NET+Reflector.aspx> 
in nearly two and a half years about it!


http://www.enigmativity.com/blog/2011/02/03/Red+Gate+Will+Be+Charging+35+For+NET+Reflector.aspx

*From:*ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com 
[mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *Michael Ridland

*Sent:* Thursday, 3 February 2011 08:49
*To:* ozDotNet
*Subject:* Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector


How absolutely ridiculous, I'm very disappointing in red gate.


-- Forwarded message --
From: *Simple-Talk Special Mailing* <mailto:newslet...@simple-talk.com>>

Date: Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:31 AM
Subject: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
To: "rid...@gmail.com <mailto:rid...@gmail.com>" <mailto:rid...@gmail.com>>


An open letter to the .NET community

Red Gate has announced that it will charge $35 for version 7 of .NET 
Reflector upon its release in early March. Version 7 will be sold as a 
perpetual license, with no time bomb or forced updates.


As many of you know, our original intention was to maintain .NET 
Reflector as a free tool. But, after two-and-a-half years of providing 
it without charge, we realized that we could not make the free model 
work. We know that this will cause pain for some people in the .NET 
community, and we apologize for the change in policy.


As a commercial company, we need to charge at least a nominal amount 
to keep .NET Reflector up-to-date and relevant. Without revenue coming 
in, we cannot dedicate a team of developers to ensure that Reflector 
remains a valuable part of .NET developers' toolboxes.


As always, your feedback is important to Red Gate, so please 
contribute any thoughts on this subject to our .NET Reflector forum. 
<http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewforum.php?f=141?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorForum-20110202> 



Sincerely,
Neil Davidson
Co-CEO, Red Gate Software

Link to more:

* Read answers to frequently asked questions about Red Gate's .NET
  Reflector decision.
  
<http://www.red-Gate.com/products/dotnet-development/reflector/announcement-faq?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorFAQ-20110202>
* Video interview with Simon Galbraith, Red Gate co-CEO, about the
  future of .NET Reflector.
  <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKnEjiSGZLA>
* New features in V7 of .NET Reflector.
  
<http://www.simple-talk.com/community/blogs/clivet/archive/2011/02/01/99118.aspx?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=CliveBlog-20110202>
* Forum for feedback and discussion.
  
<http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewforum.php?f=141?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorForum-20110202>
* Free downloads of .NET Reflector.
  
<http://reflector.red-gate.com/download.aspx?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorDownload-20110202>

You have been sent this special mail from Simple Talk because you are 
a current .NET Reflector newsletter subscriber. To unsubscribe from 
the .NET Reflector newsletter please click here. 
<http://www.simple-talk.com/newsletter/user-unsubscribe.aspx?s=250122&l=15&e=rid...@gmail.com&p=7315> 
Or write to Simple Talk, Red Gate Software, Newnham House, Cambridge 
Business Park, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, United Kingdom.

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Joseph Cooney]

Like many things in software development (and life) I think it's all about
managing expectations. By choosing the word they did in their initial
announcement red-gate set the expectation that there would continue to be a
free version of reflector in perpetuity, so some people (I think
understandably) feel a bit put-out when they don't meet that expectation.
Will I buy a copy of reflector when it's released? Sure. Am I happy about
having to keep track of reflector license keys, and not being able to assume
everyone has and uses reflector? Not so much. Do I look forward to having to
carefully scrutinize everything red-gate say in case of future
back-pedaling? No. For example in their most recent communique red-gate said
"Version 7 will be sold as a perpetual license, with no time bomb or forced
updates". How should I take that given their change of heart on the free
version?

Joseph

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Tony McGee  wrote:

>  While it's a shame the free version won't be available anymore I'm not
> disappointed at Red Gate. I'm only disappointed in the sense of entitlement
> coming from some members of the .NET community on this.
>
> We've had the free ride for such a long time so it's easy to forget
> someone's time and effort to maintain Reflector isn't free.
> The new price seems very reasonable for the benefit the tool provides to a
> lot of developers.
> It's a great tool, so if it provides $35 worth of value why not just buy
> it!?
>
>
> On 3/02/2011 4:41 PM, James Chapman-Smith wrote:
>
>  It even prompted me to write my first blog 
> entry<http://www.enigmativity.com/blog/2011/02/03/Red+Gate+Will+Be+Charging+35+For+NET+Reflector.aspx>in
>  nearly two and a half years about it!
>
>
>
>
> http://www.enigmativity.com/blog/2011/02/03/Red+Gate+Will+Be+Charging+35+For+NET+Reflector.aspx
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [
> mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Michael Ridland
> *Sent:* Thursday, 3 February 2011 08:49
> *To:* ozDotNet
> *Subject:* Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
>
>
>
>
> How absolutely ridiculous, I'm very disappointing in red gate.
>
>
>  -- Forwarded message --
> From: *Simple-Talk Special Mailing* 
> Date: Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:31 AM
> Subject: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
> To: "rid...@gmail.com" 
>
> An open letter to the .NET community
>
> Red Gate has announced that it will charge $35 for version 7 of .NET
> Reflector upon its release in early March. Version 7 will be sold as a
> perpetual license, with no time bomb or forced updates.
>
> As many of you know, our original intention was to maintain .NET Reflector
> as a free tool. But, after two-and-a-half years of providing it without
> charge, we realized that we could not make the free model work. We know that
> this will cause pain for some people in the .NET community, and we apologize
> for the change in policy.
>
> As a commercial company, we need to charge at least a nominal amount to
> keep .NET Reflector up-to-date and relevant. Without revenue coming in, we
> cannot dedicate a team of developers to ensure that Reflector remains a
> valuable part of .NET developers' toolboxes.
>
> As always, your feedback is important to Red Gate, so please contribute any
> thoughts on this subject to our .NET Reflector 
> forum.<http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewforum.php?f=141?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorForum-20110202>
>
> Sincerely,
> Neil Davidson
> Co-CEO, Red Gate Software
>
> Link to more:
>
>- Read answers to frequently asked questions about Red Gate's .NET
>Reflector 
> decision.<http://www.red-Gate.com/products/dotnet-development/reflector/announcement-faq?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorFAQ-20110202>
>- Video interview with Simon Galbraith, Red Gate co-CEO, about the
>future of .NET Reflector. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKnEjiSGZLA>
>- New features in V7 of .NET 
> Reflector.<http://www.simple-talk.com/community/blogs/clivet/archive/2011/02/01/99118.aspx?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=CliveBlog-20110202>
>- Forum for feedback and 
> discussion.<http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewforum.php?f=141?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=ReflectorForum-20110202>
>- Free downloads of .NET 
> Reflector.<http://reflector.red-gate.com/download.aspx?utm_source=simpletalk&utm_medium=email-specialmailing&utm_content=Reflect

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Noon Silk]

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Joseph Cooney  wrote:
> Like many things in software development (and life) I think it's all about
> managing expectations. By choosing the word they did in their initial
> announcement red-gate set the expectation that there would continue to be a
> free version of reflector in perpetuity, so some people (I think
> understandably) feel a bit put-out when they don't meet that expectation.
> Will I buy a copy of reflector when it's released? Sure. Am I happy about
> having to keep track of reflector license keys, and not being able to assume
> everyone has and uses reflector? Not so much. Do I look forward to having to
> carefully scrutinize everything red-gate say in case of future
> back-pedaling? No. For example in their most recent communique red-gate said
> "Version 7 will be sold as a perpetual license, with no time bomb or forced
> updates". How should I take that given their change of heart on the free
> version?

Free can become not; perpetual can't stop being so, or else it wasn't
in the first place.


> Joseph
>
> --
>
> w: http://jcooney.net
> t: @josephcooney

-- 
Noon Silk

http://dnoondt.wordpress.com/  (Noon Silk) | http://www.mirios.com.au:8081 >

Fancy a quantum lunch?
http://www.mirios.com.au:8081/index.php?title=Quantum_Lunch

"Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy — the joy
of being this signature."

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[David Richards]

I rarely used Reflector so ultimately, this doesn't bother me too
much.  The real question is whether they leave a free (and obviously
older) version available.  If yes then I don't really have a problem
with this.  They could qualify the name of the paid version with "pro"
or something (since they already have a pro edition). In this case,
they are living up to the "we'll keep it free" statement and simply
offering a new product based on the free version. A subtle yet very
important distinction.

If, on the other hand, they remove all links to the older free version
making it difficult (never quite impossible) to get, I'd consider this
very poor form and would mentally give them a black mark and tend to
avoid their business in future and would volunteer my negative opinion
to others.

Time will tell.

David

"If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes
 will fall like a house of cards... checkmate!"
 -Zapp Brannigan, Futurama







On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 22:48, Noon Silk  wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Joseph Cooney  
> wrote:
>> Like many things in software development (and life) I think it's all about
>> managing expectations. By choosing the word they did in their initial
>> announcement red-gate set the expectation that there would continue to be a
>> free version of reflector in perpetuity, so some people (I think
>> understandably) feel a bit put-out when they don't meet that expectation.
>> Will I buy a copy of reflector when it's released? Sure. Am I happy about
>> having to keep track of reflector license keys, and not being able to assume
>> everyone has and uses reflector? Not so much. Do I look forward to having to
>> carefully scrutinize everything red-gate say in case of future
>> back-pedaling? No. For example in their most recent communique red-gate said
>> "Version 7 will be sold as a perpetual license, with no time bomb or forced
>> updates". How should I take that given their change of heart on the free
>> version?
>
> Free can become not; perpetual can't stop being so, or else it wasn't
> in the first place.
>
>
>> Joseph
>>
>> --
>>
>> w: http://jcooney.net
>> t: @josephcooney
>
> --
> Noon Silk
>
> http://dnoondt.wordpress.com/  (Noon Silk) | http://www.mirios.com.au:8081 >
>
> Fancy a quantum lunch?
> http://www.mirios.com.au:8081/index.php?title=Quantum_Lunch
>
> "Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy — the joy
> of being this signature."
>

RE: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[David Kean]

The free one is timebombed, so yes, there won't be any free version around 
(unless you grab the earlier non-timebombed versions that Lutz released ages 
ago).

-Original Message-
From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On 
Behalf Of David Richards
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 1:11 PM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

I rarely used Reflector so ultimately, this doesn't bother me too much.  The 
real question is whether they leave a free (and obviously
older) version available.  If yes then I don't really have a problem with this. 
 They could qualify the name of the paid version with "pro"
or something (since they already have a pro edition). In this case, they are 
living up to the "we'll keep it free" statement and simply offering a new 
product based on the free version. A subtle yet very important distinction.

If, on the other hand, they remove all links to the older free version making 
it difficult (never quite impossible) to get, I'd consider this very poor form 
and would mentally give them a black mark and tend to avoid their business in 
future and would volunteer my negative opinion to others.

Time will tell.

David

"If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes
 will fall like a house of cards... checkmate!"
 -Zapp Brannigan, Futurama







On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 22:48, Noon Silk  wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Joseph Cooney  
> wrote:
>> Like many things in software development (and life) I think it's all 
>> about managing expectations. By choosing the word they did in their 
>> initial announcement red-gate set the expectation that there would 
>> continue to be a free version of reflector in perpetuity, so some 
>> people (I think
>> understandably) feel a bit put-out when they don't meet that expectation.
>> Will I buy a copy of reflector when it's released? Sure. Am I happy 
>> about having to keep track of reflector license keys, and not being 
>> able to assume everyone has and uses reflector? Not so much. Do I 
>> look forward to having to carefully scrutinize everything red-gate 
>> say in case of future back-pedaling? No. For example in their most 
>> recent communique red-gate said "Version 7 will be sold as a 
>> perpetual license, with no time bomb or forced updates". How should I 
>> take that given their change of heart on the free version?
>
> Free can become not; perpetual can't stop being so, or else it wasn't 
> in the first place.
>
>
>> Joseph
>>
>> --
>>
>> w: http://jcooney.net
>> t: @josephcooney
>
> --
> Noon Silk
>
> http://dnoondt.wordpress.com/  (Noon Silk) | 
> http://www.mirios.com.au:8081 >
>
> Fancy a quantum lunch?
> http://www.mirios.com.au:8081/index.php?title=Quantum_Lunch
>
> "Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy - the joy 
> of being this signature."
>

RE: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[David Boccabella]

I've been watching my mailbox fill up with this.. well essentially whinging.

Its not as if they decided to charge several hundred for a package which can
be pretty handy to have. The fact that they are offering a lifetime
subscription for $35 is pretty good value. And what is $35?, certainly far
less than the development environment that it works in conjunction with.
 
In fact if one cost up the value of your development PC, your Visual Studio
Application, and a couple of reasonable data connections then $35 is hardly
anything.

And I am very sure that there will be hacks and cracks around for it is  the
$35 proves to be too much.

Dave




David J. Boccabella
Proprietor
Anubis Systems
Phone: 0433 808 525
Fax: 3200 0085
Email:  davidboccabe...@anubis-systems.com

This e-mail and it's contents is confidential to Anubis Systems.
This e-mail, any attachments, or any part of can not be reproduced
without the express written permission of Anubis Systems



-Original Message-
From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com]
On Behalf Of David Kean
Sent: Friday, 4 February 2011 7:16 AM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: RE: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

The free one is timebombed, so yes, there won't be any free version around
(unless you grab the earlier non-timebombed versions that Lutz released ages
ago).

-Original Message-
From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com]
On Behalf Of David Richards
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 1:11 PM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

I rarely used Reflector so ultimately, this doesn't bother me too much.  The
real question is whether they leave a free (and obviously
older) version available.  If yes then I don't really have a problem with
this.  They could qualify the name of the paid version with "pro"
or something (since they already have a pro edition). In this case, they are
living up to the "we'll keep it free" statement and simply offering a new
product based on the free version. A subtle yet very important distinction.

If, on the other hand, they remove all links to the older free version
making it difficult (never quite impossible) to get, I'd consider this very
poor form and would mentally give them a black mark and tend to avoid their
business in future and would volunteer my negative opinion to others.

Time will tell.

David

"If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes
 will fall like a house of cards... checkmate!"
 -Zapp Brannigan, Futurama







On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 22:48, Noon Silk  wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Joseph Cooney 
wrote:
>> Like many things in software development (and life) I think it's all 
>> about managing expectations. By choosing the word they did in their 
>> initial announcement red-gate set the expectation that there would 
>> continue to be a free version of reflector in perpetuity, so some 
>> people (I think
>> understandably) feel a bit put-out when they don't meet that expectation.
>> Will I buy a copy of reflector when it's released? Sure. Am I happy 
>> about having to keep track of reflector license keys, and not being 
>> able to assume everyone has and uses reflector? Not so much. Do I 
>> look forward to having to carefully scrutinize everything red-gate 
>> say in case of future back-pedaling? No. For example in their most 
>> recent communique red-gate said "Version 7 will be sold as a 
>> perpetual license, with no time bomb or forced updates". How should I 
>> take that given their change of heart on the free version?
>
> Free can become not; perpetual can't stop being so, or else it wasn't 
> in the first place.
>
>
>> Joseph
>>
>> --
>>
>> w: http://jcooney.net
>> t: @josephcooney
>
> --
> Noon Silk
>
> http://dnoondt.wordpress.com/  (Noon Silk) | 
> http://www.mirios.com.au:8081 >
>
> Fancy a quantum lunch?
> http://www.mirios.com.au:8081/index.php?title=Quantum_Lunch
>
> "Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy - the joy 
> of being this signature."
>

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[David Richards]

David,

To use an old and tired cliche... It's the principle.  I doubt anyone
here consideres $35 much for what it is.  It's more the fact that it
was free, it was taken over by a company that claimed it would be
free... but it's not going to be free.  As I said before, I would have
no problem if they kept the free version available but then said...
"or you could have this shiny new version for just $35".  That would
be acceptable. But that's apparently not what's going to happen.

Ultimately, I dont really care that much, I think I've used it twice
ever.  But I think I'm justified in not liking what's being done.  I'm
sure it's been done with other projects in the past and will continue
to be done in the future by any number of companies.

David

"If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes
 will fall like a house of cards... checkmate!"
 -Zapp Brannigan, Futurama







On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 11:39, David Boccabella
 wrote:
> I've been watching my mailbox fill up with this.. well essentially whinging.
>
> Its not as if they decided to charge several hundred for a package which can
> be pretty handy to have. The fact that they are offering a lifetime
> subscription for $35 is pretty good value. And what is $35?, certainly far
> less than the development environment that it works in conjunction with.
>
> In fact if one cost up the value of your development PC, your Visual Studio
> Application, and a couple of reasonable data connections then $35 is hardly
> anything.
>
> And I am very sure that there will be hacks and cracks around for it is  the
> $35 proves to be too much.
>
> Dave
>

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[David Connors]

On 4 February 2011 11:07, David Richards wrote:

> To use an old and tired cliche... It's the principle.  I doubt anyone
> here consideres $35 much for what it is.  It's more the fact that it
> was free, it was taken over by a company that claimed it would be
> free... but it's not going to be free.  As I said before, I would have
> no problem if they kept the free version available but then said...
> "or you could have this shiny new version for just $35".  That would
> be acceptable. But that's apparently not what's going to happen.
>
> Ultimately, I dont really care that much, I think I've used it twice
> ever.  But I think I'm justified in not liking what's being done.  I'm
> sure it's been done with other projects in the past and will continue
> to be done in the future by any number of companies.


Circumstances can change.

I think this thread is done.

-- 
*David Connors* | da...@codify.com | www.codify.com
Software Engineer
Codify Pty Ltd
Phone: +61 (7) 3210 6268 | Facsimile: +61 (7) 3210 6269 | Mobile: +61 417
189 363
V-Card: https://www.codify.com/cards/davidconnors
Address Info: https://www.codify.com/contact

RE: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Bill McCarthy]

Don't forget that VS Express is FREE. That is, there is a "free" segment of
the developer community, be they students, etc, etc, etc.

Personally I think Red Gate are making a mistake with their customers.  They
do have two versions of Reflector, one they market as Pro and charge $90 odd
for. If the argument is they haven't been able to raise enough revenue, then
they have failed to differentiate the products enough, and/or are asking too
much for the pro version. They maybe more successful and seed far less ill
will if they were to offer the free version as a  basic with no plug-in
ability (perhaps limit it to only IL, VB and C# etc), and then offer the Pro
version with all the other features for a *reduced* price.  

The reality is they are only planning on charging for the currently free
version due to their failure to market/sell their pro version.


|-Original Message-
|From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-
|boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of David Boccabella
|Sent: Friday, 4 February 2011 11:40 AM
|To: 'ozDotNet'
|Subject: RE: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
|
|I've been watching my mailbox fill up with this.. well essentially
whinging.
|
|Its not as if they decided to charge several hundred for a package which
can be
|pretty handy to have. The fact that they are offering a lifetime
subscription for
|$35 is pretty good value. And what is $35?, certainly far less than the
|development environment that it works in conjunction with.
|
|In fact if one cost up the value of your development PC, your Visual Studio
|Application, and a couple of reasonable data connections then $35 is hardly
|anything.
|
|And I am very sure that there will be hacks and cracks around for it is
the
|$35 proves to be too much.
|
|Dave
|
|
|
|*
|***
|David J. Boccabella
|Proprietor
|Anubis Systems
|Phone: 0433 808 525
|Fax: 3200 0085
|Email:  davidboccabe...@anubis-systems.com
|
|This e-mail and it's contents is confidential to Anubis Systems.
|This e-mail, any attachments, or any part of can not be reproduced without
the
|express written permission of Anubis Systems
|*
|***
|
|
|-Original Message-
|From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-
|boun...@ozdotnet.com]
|On Behalf Of David Kean
|Sent: Friday, 4 February 2011 7:16 AM
|To: ozDotNet
|Subject: RE: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
|
|The free one is timebombed, so yes, there won't be any free version around
|(unless you grab the earlier non-timebombed versions that Lutz released
ages
|ago).
|
|-Original Message-
|From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-
|boun...@ozdotnet.com]
|On Behalf Of David Richards
|Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 1:11 PM
|To: ozDotNet
|Subject: Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
|
|I rarely used Reflector so ultimately, this doesn't bother me too much.
The real
|question is whether they leave a free (and obviously
|older) version available.  If yes then I don't really have a problem with
this.
|They could qualify the name of the paid version with "pro"
|or something (since they already have a pro edition). In this case, they
are
|living up to the "we'll keep it free" statement and simply offering a new
product
|based on the free version. A subtle yet very important distinction.
|
|If, on the other hand, they remove all links to the older free version
making it
|difficult (never quite impossible) to get, I'd consider this very poor form
and
|would mentally give them a black mark and tend to avoid their business in
|future and would volunteer my negative opinion to others.
|
|Time will tell.
|
|David
|
|"If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes
| will fall like a house of cards... checkmate!"
| -Zapp Brannigan, Futurama
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 22:48, Noon Silk  wrote:
|> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Joseph Cooney
|> 
|wrote:
|>> Like many things in software development (and life) I think it's all
|>> about managing expectations. By choosing the word they did in their
|>> initial announcement red-gate set the expectation that there would
|>> continue to be a free version of reflector in perpetuity, so some
|>> people (I think
|>> understandably) feel a bit put-out when they don't meet that
expectation.
|>> Will I buy a copy of reflector when it's released? Sure. Am I happy
|>> about having to keep track of reflector license keys, and not being
|>> able to assume everyone has and uses reflector? Not so much. Do I
|>> look forward to having to carefully scrutinize everything red-gate
|>> say in case of future back-pedaling? No. For example in their most
|>> recent communique red-gate said &qu

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[David Richards]

Wow, I feel like I was just told to shut up. I think I'll assume that
wasn't you're intent.  Otherwise you would have gotten such a frowny
face it would have haunted you even more than this thread :)

David

"If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes
 will fall like a house of cards... checkmate!"
 -Zapp Brannigan, Futurama


On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 12:11, David Connors  wrote:
>
> I think this thread is done.
> --

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[David Connors]

On 4 February 2011 12:59, David Richards wrote:

> Wow, I feel like I was just told to shut up. I think I'll assume that
> wasn't you're intent.  Otherwise you would have gotten such a frowny
> face it would have haunted you even more than this thread :)


Sorry David, no - certainly not my intention - though I continue to be
dismayed at this thread.

There is a lot of moral outrage at the price of an app going from $0 to $35.
Like I said, circumstances change.

-- 
*David Connors* | da...@codify.com | www.codify.com
Software Engineer
Codify Pty Ltd
Phone: +61 (7) 3210 6268 | Facsimile: +61 (7) 3210 6269 | Mobile: +61 417
189 363
V-Card: https://www.codify.com/cards/davidconnors
Address Info: https://www.codify.com/contact

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[DotNet Dude]

On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 2:02 PM, David Connors  wrote:
> On 4 February 2011 12:59, David Richards 
> wrote:
>>
>> Wow, I feel like I was just told to shut up. I think I'll assume that
>> wasn't you're intent.  Otherwise you would have gotten such a frowny
>> face it would have haunted you even more than this thread :)
>
> Sorry David, no - certainly not my intention - though I continue to be
> dismayed at this thread.
> There is a lot of moral outrage at the price of an app going from $0 to $35.
> Like I said, circumstances change.
>

just pretend you're paying for 35 crappy iphone apps :p

> --
> David Connors | da...@codify.com | www.codify.com
> Software Engineer
> Codify Pty Ltd
> Phone: +61 (7) 3210 6268 | Facsimile: +61 (7) 3210 6269 | Mobile: +61 417
> 189 363
> V-Card: https://www.codify.com/cards/davidconnors
> Address Info: https://www.codify.com/contact
>
>

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Michael Minutillo]

> just pretend you're paying for 35 crappy iphone apps :p

The number is not the point. They could be charging 35c and the reaction
would (probably) be the same.
The sequence of events looks like this

* Product is free
* Product is "sold" to Company who promise to keep providing a free version
* Company starts releasing new versions. Old versions out on the web go away
* Company introduces "time-bomb" feature to "keep people up to date"
* Now that the only free versions are time bombed, Company (for whatever
reason) decides the free version will cost money

I have a resharper licence. I have a linqpad licence. I don't mind paying
for useful software. I am reluctant to start paying for software that I
have, up until now, used for free. Especially as there are not new features
that I am interested in paying for. "Not free anymore" is not a feature.

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[mike smith]

On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 1:59 PM, David Richards  wrote:

> Wow, I feel like I was just told to shut up. I think I'll assume that
> wasn't you're intent.  Otherwise you would have gotten such a frowny
> face it would have haunted you even more than this thread :)
>
>
It's friday now, a little more latte-tude

(if someone here means ST*U, they will probably say it)

On the subject of developer utilities, anyone got a favourite for resource
editing?  I'm looking at HeavenTools stuff, this one in particular.

http://www.heaventools.com/command-line_resource_editor.htm

We have language resource files that get done by translators and supplied as
dlls.  But these are opaque as far as subversion's concerned - IOW, you cant
diff them to see what's changed.  Even BeyondCompare, my favourite diff
utility doesn't - so I want to decompile the dll back to an RC for this
purpose.



> David
>
> "If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes
>  will fall like a house of cards... checkmate!"
>  -Zapp Brannigan, Futurama
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 12:11, David Connors  wrote:
> >
> > I think this thread is done.
> > --
>



-- 
Meski

"Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll
get it, but it's going to be rough" - Adam Hills

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Mark Hurd]

On 4 February 2011 14:16, Michael Minutillo  wrote:
>> just pretend you're paying for 35 crappy iphone apps :p
> The number is not the point. They could be charging 35c and the reaction
> would (probably) be the same.
> The sequence of events looks like this
> * Product is free
> * Product is "sold" to Company who promise to keep providing a free version
> * Company starts releasing new versions. Old versions out on the web go away
> * Company introduces "time-bomb" feature to "keep people up to date"
Not True: Lutz had this in his versions too.
> * Now that the only free versions are time bombed, Company (for whatever
> reason) decides the free version will cost money
> I have a resharper licence. I have a linqpad licence. I don't mind paying
> for useful software. I am reluctant to start paying for software that I
> have, up until now, used for free. Especially as there are not new features
> that I am interested in paying for. "Not free anymore" is not a feature.

I agree with your sentiment however.

-- 
Regards,
Mark Hurd, B.Sc.(Ma.)(Hons.)

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[tonywr]

Actually, I look at Reflector as a tool that helped advance the cause of dot 
net. Anyone who was 
interested had a chance to delve deeply into the framework to get a true 
understanding of how the 
technology worked. It was effectively an Open System.

Once you put a price on it, the system becomes closed. There are people who may 
have had an 
interest, that may have produced something really fantastic with the knowledge 
they gained, that 
will no longer produce that because they aren't interested in paying a fee for 
something they don't 
know anything about, and aren't familiar with the benefits of using Reflector. 

The fee for use may well be valid, however I believe this argument also stands.

I hope Lutz Roder got the money he deserved and wasn't short-changed by being 
paid as though 
the product was going to be free forever.

T.


On Fri, Feb 4th, 2011 at 4:24 PM, Mark Hurd  wrote:

> On 4 February 2011 14:16, Michael Minutillo 
> wrote:
> >> just pretend you're paying for 35 crappy iphone apps :p
> > The number is not the point. They could be charging 35c and the
> reaction
> > would (probably) be the same.
> > The sequence of events looks like this
> > * Product is free
> > * Product is "sold" to Company who promise to keep providing a free
> version
> > * Company starts releasing new versions. Old versions out on the web go
> away
> > * Company introduces "time-bomb" feature to "keep people up to date"
> Not True: Lutz had this in his versions too.
> > * Now that the only free versions are time bombed, Company (for
> whatever
> > reason) decides the free version will cost money
> > I have a resharper licence. I have a linqpad licence. I don't mind
> paying
> > for useful software. I am reluctant to start paying for software that I
> > have, up until now, used for free. Especially as there are not new
> features
> > that I am interested in paying for. "Not free anymore" is not a
> feature.
> 
> I agree with your sentiment however.
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Mark Hurd, B.Sc.(Ma.)(Hons.)
> 
> 
> 

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Noon Silk]

On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 4:41 PM,   wrote:
> Actually, I look at Reflector as a tool that helped advance the cause of dot 
> net. Anyone who was
> interested had a chance to delve deeply into the framework to get a true 
> understanding of how the
> technology worked. It was effectively an Open System.
>
> Once you put a price on it, the system becomes closed. There are people who 
> may have had an
> interest, that may have produced something really fantastic with the 
> knowledge they gained, that
> will no longer produce that because they aren't interested in paying a fee 
> for something they don't
> know anything about, and aren't familiar with the benefits of using Reflector.
>
> The fee for use may well be valid, however I believe this argument also 
> stands.

Whether or not it stands is irrelevant. There is no god-given Right of
Reflector. If you want free software, then don't complain, *be* what
you want; *write* free software, and see how it progresses. Maybe
complaining here will have some result and RedGate will have a change
of heart. Great, you've saved $35. But for the love of cat-eating
robots, this is about the least important thing to have ever happened
in the history of the world.


> I hope Lutz Roder got the money he deserved and wasn't short-changed by being 
> paid as though
> the product was going to be free forever.
>
> T.

-- 
Noon Silk

http://dnoondt.wordpress.com/  (Noon Silk) | http://www.mirios.com.au:8081 >

Fancy a quantum lunch?
http://www.mirios.com.au:8081/index.php?title=Quantum_Lunch

"Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy — the joy
of being this signature."

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[David Burstin]

On 4 February 2011 16:54, Noon Silk  wrote:

But for the love of cat-eating
> robots, this is about the least important thing to have ever happened
> in the history of the world.


Hear, hear.

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Stephen Price]

Just thought I'd share this...

Red-Gate are providing me with 25 licenses (enough to cover every
member on our meetup group) of Reflector Pro (not the "free" version)
for the Perth Silverlight Designer and Developer Network user group.

I know it doesn't change their about face on the free version thing. I
gave them my view (and what I've read on here) which they thanked me
for. It does show that they support developer communities. Its a shame
they couldn't put the free version out there untimebomed and
unsupported. Make the paid version the Pro one.

thoughts? (sorry if this lights up the fire again... hey, its Friday.)

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:18 AM, Michael Ridland  wrote:
>
> How absolutely ridiculous, I'm very disappointing in red gate.
>
>
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Simple-Talk Special Mailing 
> Date: Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:31 AM
> Subject: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
> To: "rid...@gmail.com" 
>
>
> An open letter to the .NET community
>
> Red Gate has announced that it will charge $35 for version 7 of .NET
> Reflector upon its release in early March. Version 7 will be sold as a
> perpetual license, with no time bomb or forced updates.
>
> As many of you know, our original intention was to maintain .NET Reflector
> as a free tool. But, after two-and-a-half years of providing it without
> charge, we realized that we could not make the free model work. We know that
> this will cause pain for some people in the .NET community, and we apologize
> for the change in policy.
>
> As a commercial company, we need to charge at least a nominal amount to keep
> .NET Reflector up-to-date and relevant. Without revenue coming in, we cannot
> dedicate a team of developers to ensure that Reflector remains a valuable
> part of .NET developers' toolboxes.
>
> As always, your feedback is important to Red Gate, so please contribute any
> thoughts on this subject to our .NET Reflector forum.
>
> Sincerely,
> Neil Davidson
> Co-CEO, Red Gate Software
>
> Link to more:
>
> Read answers to frequently asked questions about Red Gate's .NET Reflector
> decision.
> Video interview with Simon Galbraith, Red Gate co-CEO, about the future of
> .NET Reflector.
> New features in V7 of .NET Reflector.
> Forum for feedback and discussion.
> Free downloads of .NET Reflector.
>
> You have been sent this special mail from Simple Talk because you are a
> current .NET Reflector newsletter subscriber. To unsubscribe from the .NET
> Reflector newsletter please click here. Or write to Simple Talk, Red Gate
> Software, Newnham House, Cambridge Business Park, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, United
> Kingdom.
>

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[David Connors]

On 11 February 2011 09:25, Stephen Price  wrote:

> Just thought I'd share this...
>
> Red-Gate are providing me with 25 licenses (enough to cover every
> member on our meetup group) of Reflector Pro (not the "free" version)
> for the Perth Silverlight Designer and Developer Network user group.
>
> I know it doesn't change their about face on the free version thing. I
> gave them my view (and what I've read on here) which they thanked me
> for. It does show that they support developer communities. Its a shame
> they couldn't put the free version out there untimebomed and
> unsupported. Make the paid version the Pro one.
>
> thoughts? (sorry if this lights up the fire again... hey, its Friday.)
>

UNSUBSCRIBE

-- 
*David Connors* | da...@codify.com | www.codify.com
Software Engineer
Codify Pty Ltd
Phone: +61 (7) 3210 6268 | Facsimile: +61 (7) 3210 6269 | Mobile: +61 417
189 363
V-Card: https://www.codify.com/cards/davidconnors
Address Info: https://www.codify.com/contact

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[mike smith]

On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 10:27 AM, David Connors  wrote:

> On 11 February 2011 09:25, Stephen Price  wrote:
>
>> Just thought I'd share this...
>>
>> Red-Gate are providing me with 25 licenses (enough to cover every
>> member on our meetup group) of Reflector Pro (not the "free" version)
>> for the Perth Silverlight Designer and Developer Network user group.
>>
>> I know it doesn't change their about face on the free version thing. I
>> gave them my view (and what I've read on here) which they thanked me
>> for. It does show that they support developer communities. Its a shame
>> they couldn't put the free version out there untimebomed and
>> unsupported. Make the paid version the Pro one.
>>
>> thoughts? (sorry if this lights up the fire again... hey, its Friday.)
>>
>
> UNSUBSCRIBE
>
>
Hotel California.

:)


-- 
Meski

"Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll
get it, but it's going to be rough" - Adam Hills

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[William Luu]

Looks like fans of the ReSharper tool will get a decompiler as part of the
v6 nightly builds (also as a free stand-alone tool later this year).

See:
http://blogs.jetbrains.com/dotnet/2011/02/resharper-6-bundles-decompiler-free-standalone-tool-to-follow/


On 11 February 2011 10:59, mike smith  wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 10:27 AM, David Connors  wrote:
>
>> On 11 February 2011 09:25, Stephen Price wrote:
>>
>>> Just thought I'd share this...
>>>
>>> Red-Gate are providing me with 25 licenses (enough to cover every
>>> member on our meetup group) of Reflector Pro (not the "free" version)
>>> for the Perth Silverlight Designer and Developer Network user group.
>>>
>>> I know it doesn't change their about face on the free version thing. I
>>> gave them my view (and what I've read on here) which they thanked me
>>> for. It does show that they support developer communities. Its a shame
>>> they couldn't put the free version out there untimebomed and
>>> unsupported. Make the paid version the Pro one.
>>>
>>> thoughts? (sorry if this lights up the fire again... hey, its Friday.)
>>>
>>
>> UNSUBSCRIBE
>>
>>
> Hotel California.
>
> :)
>
>
> --
> Meski
>
> "Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure,
> you'll get it, but it's going to be rough" - Adam Hills
>

RE: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Dylan Tusler]

Well, that's cool. At least I already have a $?00 ReSharper license, so 
that will save me $35. 

(And yes, I do have a ReSharper license.)

Dylan.



From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On 
Behalf Of William Luu
Sent: Friday, 18 February 2011 8:56 AM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

Looks like fans of the ReSharper tool will get a decompiler as part of the v6 
nightly builds (also as a free stand-alone tool later this year).

See: 
http://blogs.jetbrains.com/dotnet/2011/02/resharper-6-bundles-decompiler-free-standalone-tool-to-follow/


On 11 February 2011 10:59, mike smith 
mailto:meski...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 10:27 AM, David Connors 
mailto:da...@codify.com>> wrote:
On 11 February 2011 09:25, Stephen Price 
mailto:step...@littlevoices.com>> wrote:
Just thought I'd share this...

Red-Gate are providing me with 25 licenses (enough to cover every
member on our meetup group) of Reflector Pro (not the "free" version)
for the Perth Silverlight Designer and Developer Network user group.

I know it doesn't change their about face on the free version thing. I
gave them my view (and what I've read on here) which they thanked me
for. It does show that they support developer communities. Its a shame
they couldn't put the free version out there untimebomed and
unsupported. Make the paid version the Pro one.

thoughts? (sorry if this lights up the fire again... hey, its Friday.)

UNSUBSCRIBE


Hotel California.

:)


--
Meski

"Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll 
get it, but it's going to be rough" - Adam Hills


-
To find out more about the Sunshine Coast Regional Council, visit your local 
office at Caloundra, Maroochydore, Nambour or Tewantin or visit us online at 
www.sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au.  If correspondence includes personal information, 
please refer to Council's Privacy Policy at http://www.sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au 
.

This email and any attachments are confidential and only for the use of the 
addressee.  If you have received this email in error you are requested to 
notify the sender by return email or contact council on 1300 00 7272 and are 
prohibited from forwarding, printing, copying or using it in anyway, in whole 
or part. Please note that some council staff utilise Blackberry devices, which 
results in information being transmitted overseas prior to delivery of any 
communication to the device.  In sending an email to Council you are agreeing 
that the content of your email may be transmitted overseas. Any views expressed 
in this email are the author's, except where the email makes it clear 
otherwise. The unauthorised publication of an email and any attachments 
generated for the official functions of council is strictly prohibited. Please 
note that council is subject to the Right to Information Act 2009 (Qld) and 
Information Privacy Act 2009 (Qld).

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[William Luu]

Hey, they're also releasing a free standalone tool too (later in the year)!

Haha. ReSharper is great though!

On 18 February 2011 10:15, Dylan Tusler <
dylan.tus...@sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au> wrote:

>  Well, that's cool. At least I already have a $?00 ReSharper
> license, so that will save me $35. 
>
> (And yes, I do have a ReSharper license.)
>
> Dylan.
>
>
>  --
> *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:
> ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *William Luu
> *Sent:* Friday, 18 February 2011 8:56 AM
> *To:* ozDotNet
> *Subject:* Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
>
> Looks like fans of the ReSharper tool will get a decompiler as part of the
> v6 nightly builds (also as a free stand-alone tool later this year).
>
> See:
> http://blogs.jetbrains.com/dotnet/2011/02/resharper-6-bundles-decompiler-free-standalone-tool-to-follow/
>
>
> On 11 February 2011 10:59, mike smith  wrote:
>
>>  On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 10:27 AM, David Connors wrote:
>>
>>>  On 11 February 2011 09:25, Stephen Price wrote:
>>>
>>>> Just thought I'd share this...
>>>>
>>>> Red-Gate are providing me with 25 licenses (enough to cover every
>>>> member on our meetup group) of Reflector Pro (not the "free" version)
>>>> for the Perth Silverlight Designer and Developer Network user group.
>>>>
>>>> I know it doesn't change their about face on the free version thing. I
>>>> gave them my view (and what I've read on here) which they thanked me
>>>> for. It does show that they support developer communities. Its a shame
>>>> they couldn't put the free version out there untimebomed and
>>>> unsupported. Make the paid version the Pro one.
>>>>
>>>> thoughts? (sorry if this lights up the fire again... hey, its Friday.)
>>>>
>>>
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE
>>>
>>>
>> Hotel California.
>>
>> :)
>>
>>
>> --
>> Meski
>>
>> "Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure,
>> you'll get it, but it's going to be rough" - Adam Hills
>>
>
> [image: Sunshine Coast Council] <http://www.sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au/>
>
> [image: Sunshine Coast Council is on 
> Facebook]<https://www.facebook.com/SunshineCoastCouncil> __
> __
> To find out more about the Sunshine Coast Council, visit your local office
> at Caloundra, Maroochydore, Nambour or Tewantin or visit us online at
> www.sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au. <http://www.sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au/> If
> correspondence includes personal information, please refer to Council's
> Privacy 
> Policy<http://www.sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au/sitePage.cfm?code=disclaimer>
>
> This email and any attachments are confidential and only for the use of the
> addressee. If you have received this email in error you are requested to
> notify the sender by return email or contact council on 1300 00 7272 and are
> prohibited from forwarding, printing, copying or using it in anyway, in
> whole or part. Please note that some council staff utilise Blackberry
> devices, which results in information being transmitted overseas prior to
> delivery of any communication to the device. In sending an email to Council
> you are agreeing that the content of your email may be transmitted overseas.
> Any views expressed in this email are the author's, except where the email
> makes it clear otherwise. The unauthorised publication of an email and any
> attachments generated for the official functions of council is strictly
> prohibited. Please note that council is subject to the Right to Information
> Act 2009 (Qld) and Information Privacy Act 2009 (Qld).
>

Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Michael Ridland]

JetBrains 1 : RedGate 0

:)



On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 10:26 AM, William Luu  wrote:

> Hey, they're also releasing a free standalone tool too (later in the year)!
>
> Haha. ReSharper is great though!
>
> On 18 February 2011 10:15, Dylan Tusler <
> dylan.tus...@sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au> wrote:
>
>>  Well, that's cool. At least I already have a $?00 ReSharper
>> license, so that will save me $35. 
>>
>> (And yes, I do have a ReSharper license.)
>>
>> Dylan.
>>
>>
>>  --
>> *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:
>> ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *William Luu
>> *Sent:* Friday, 18 February 2011 8:56 AM
>> *To:* ozDotNet
>> *Subject:* Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
>>
>> Looks like fans of the ReSharper tool will get a decompiler as part of the
>> v6 nightly builds (also as a free stand-alone tool later this year).
>>
>> See:
>> http://blogs.jetbrains.com/dotnet/2011/02/resharper-6-bundles-decompiler-free-standalone-tool-to-follow/
>>
>>
>> On 11 February 2011 10:59, mike smith  wrote:
>>
>>>  On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 10:27 AM, David Connors wrote:
>>>
>>>>  On 11 February 2011 09:25, Stephen Price wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Just thought I'd share this...
>>>>>
>>>>> Red-Gate are providing me with 25 licenses (enough to cover every
>>>>> member on our meetup group) of Reflector Pro (not the "free" version)
>>>>> for the Perth Silverlight Designer and Developer Network user group.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know it doesn't change their about face on the free version thing. I
>>>>> gave them my view (and what I've read on here) which they thanked me
>>>>> for. It does show that they support developer communities. Its a shame
>>>>> they couldn't put the free version out there untimebomed and
>>>>> unsupported. Make the paid version the Pro one.
>>>>>
>>>>> thoughts? (sorry if this lights up the fire again... hey, its Friday.)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> UNSUBSCRIBE
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Hotel California.
>>>
>>> :)
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Meski
>>>
>>> "Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure,
>>> you'll get it, but it's going to be rough" - Adam Hills
>>>
>>
>> [image: Sunshine Coast Council] <http://www.sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au/>
>>
>> [image: Sunshine Coast Council is on 
>> Facebook]<https://www.facebook.com/SunshineCoastCouncil> __
>> __
>> To find out more about the Sunshine Coast Council, visit your local office
>> at Caloundra, Maroochydore, Nambour or Tewantin or visit us online at
>> www.sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au. <http://www.sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au/> If
>> correspondence includes personal information, please refer to Council's
>> Privacy 
>> Policy<http://www.sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au/sitePage.cfm?code=disclaimer>
>>
>> This email and any attachments are confidential and only for the use of
>> the addressee. If you have received this email in error you are requested to
>> notify the sender by return email or contact council on 1300 00 7272 and are
>> prohibited from forwarding, printing, copying or using it in anyway, in
>> whole or part. Please note that some council staff utilise Blackberry
>> devices, which results in information being transmitted overseas prior to
>> delivery of any communication to the device. In sending an email to Council
>> you are agreeing that the content of your email may be transmitted overseas.
>> Any views expressed in this email are the author's, except where the email
>> makes it clear otherwise. The unauthorised publication of an email and any
>> attachments generated for the official functions of council is strictly
>> prohibited. Please note that council is subject to the Right to Information
>> Act 2009 (Qld) and Information Privacy Act 2009 (Qld).
>>
>
>

Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Glen Harvy]

  
  
What's .Net Reflector?

On 3/02/2011 9:18 AM, Michael Ridland wrote:

  How absolutely ridiculous, I'm very disappointing in red gate. 
  
  
  
  
  -- Forwarded message --
From: Simple-Talk Special Mailing
<newslet...@simple-talk.com>
Date: Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:31 AM
        Subject: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
To: "rid...@gmail.com"
<rid...@gmail.com>


 An open
letter to the .NET community 
  
  Red Gate
has announced that it will charge $35 for version 7 of .NET
Reflector upon its release in early March. Version 7 will be
sold as a perpetual license, with no time bomb or forced
updates. 

As many of you know, our original intention was to maintain
.NET Reflector as a free tool. But, after two-and-a-half
years of providing it without charge, we realized that we
could not make the free model work. We know that this will
cause pain for some people in the .NET community, and we
apologize for the change in policy. 

As a commercial company, we need to charge at least a
nominal amount to keep .NET Reflector up-to-date and
relevant. Without revenue coming in, we cannot dedicate a
team of developers to ensure that Reflector remains a
valuable part of .NET developers' toolboxes. 

As always, your feedback is important to Red Gate, so please
contribute any thoughts on this subject to our .NET Reflector forum. 

Sincerely,
Neil Davidson
Co-CEO, Red Gate Software
  
   Link to
more:

  Read answers to frequently asked
  questions about Red Gate's .NET Reflector decision.
  Video interview with Simon Galbraith,
  Red Gate co-CEO, about the future of .NET Reflector.
  New features in V7 of .NET Reflector.
  Forum for feedback and discussion.
  Free downloads of .NET Reflector.

   You
have been sent this special mail from Simple Talk because
you are a current .NET Reflector newsletter subscriber. To
unsubscribe from the .NET Reflector newsletter please click here. Or write to Simple Talk,
Red Gate Software, Newnham House, Cambridge Business Park,
Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, United Kingdom.
  
  

  

Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Arjang Assadi]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=.net+reflector

On 3 February 2011 10:48, Glen Harvy  wrote:
> What's .Net Reflector?
>
> On 3/02/2011 9:18 AM, Michael Ridland wrote:
>
> How absolutely ridiculous, I'm very disappointing in red gate.
>
>
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Simple-Talk Special Mailing 
> Date: Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:31 AM
> Subject: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
> To: "rid...@gmail.com" 
>
>
> An open letter to the .NET community
>
> Red Gate has announced that it will charge $35 for version 7 of .NET
> Reflector upon its release in early March. Version 7 will be sold as a
> perpetual license, with no time bomb or forced updates.
>
> As many of you know, our original intention was to maintain .NET Reflector
> as a free tool. But, after two-and-a-half years of providing it without
> charge, we realized that we could not make the free model work. We know that
> this will cause pain for some people in the .NET community, and we apologize
> for the change in policy.
>
> As a commercial company, we need to charge at least a nominal amount to keep
> .NET Reflector up-to-date and relevant. Without revenue coming in, we cannot
> dedicate a team of developers to ensure that Reflector remains a valuable
> part of .NET developers' toolboxes.
>
> As always, your feedback is important to Red Gate, so please contribute any
> thoughts on this subject to our .NET Reflector forum.
>
> Sincerely,
> Neil Davidson
> Co-CEO, Red Gate Software
>
> Link to more: You have been sent this special mail from Simple Talk because
> you are a current .NET Reflector newsletter subscriber. To unsubscribe from
> the .NET Reflector newsletter please click here. Or write to Simple Talk,
> Red Gate Software, Newnham House, Cambridge Business Park, Cambridge, CB4
> 0WZ, United Kingdom.
>
> Read answers to frequently asked questions about Red Gate's .NET Reflector
> decision.
> Video interview with Simon Galbraith, Red Gate co-CEO, about the future of
> .NET Reflector.
> New features in V7 of .NET Reflector.
> Forum for feedback and discussion.
> Free downloads of .NET Reflector.
>

Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Arjang Assadi]

On 3 February 2011 10:48, Glen Harvy  wrote:
> What's .Net Reflector?

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc300497.aspx

Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Joseph Cooney]

I'm going back to anakrino. Who's with me?

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Arjang Assadi wrote:

> On 3 February 2011 10:48, Glen Harvy  wrote:
> > What's .Net Reflector?
>
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc300497.aspx
>



-- 

w: http://jcooney.net
t: @josephcooney

Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[David Connors]

On 3 February 2011 10:19, Joseph Cooney  wrote:

> I'm going back to anakrino. Who's with me?


35 smakers too rich for your blood joco?

-- 
*David Connors* | da...@codify.com | www.codify.com
Software Engineer
Codify Pty Ltd
Phone: +61 (7) 3210 6268 | Facsimile: +61 (7) 3210 6269 | Mobile: +61 417
189 363
V-Card: https://www.codify.com/cards/davidconnors
Address Info: https://www.codify.com/contact

Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Noon Silk]

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Joseph Cooney  wrote:
> I'm going back to anakrino. Who's with me?

I don't understand; what do you people actually use Reflector for all
the time? I've had to use it twice:

 1) No documentation and hidden functionality regarding the format of
MSMQ correlation Id, so I had to look at the source and find what it
was
 2) For some short period I felt like re-implementing some common
control that was sealed, so I looked at the functionality, but then
realised there was a better way to do what I wanted

I don't legitimately understand how decompiling is so required. What
are people doing? (Aside from David Kean and the CLR team; though I
admit to being somewhat surprised by that, I would've thought there
would be a different internal strategy there ...)


> --
>
> w: http://jcooney.net
> t: @josephcooney

-- 
Noon Silk

http://dnoondt.wordpress.com/  (Noon Silk) | http://www.mirios.com.au:8081 >

Fancy a quantum lunch?
http://www.mirios.com.au:8081/index.php?title=Quantum_Lunch

"Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy — the joy
of being this signature."

Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[mike smith]

Seems too little.  $350 would be a more reasonable price.


On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:20 AM, David Connors  wrote:

> On 3 February 2011 10:19, Joseph Cooney  wrote:
>
>> I'm going back to anakrino. Who's with me?
>
>
> 35 smakers too rich for your blood joco?
>
> --
> *David Connors* | da...@codify.com | www.codify.com
> Software Engineer
> Codify Pty Ltd
> Phone: +61 (7) 3210 6268 | Facsimile: +61 (7) 3210 6269 | Mobile: +61 417
> 189 363
> V-Card: https://www.codify.com/cards/davidconnors
> Address Info: https://www.codify.com/contact
>
>


-- 
Meski

"Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll
get it, but it's going to be rough" - Adam Hills

Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Michael Ridland]

They really should have known better, Reflector is something most .net
developers have grown up with and I would assume most feel like it's a
community project and not something that can be sold.


On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:26 AM, mike smith  wrote:

> Seems too little.  $350 would be a more reasonable price.
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:20 AM, David Connors  wrote:
>
>> On 3 February 2011 10:19, Joseph Cooney  wrote:
>>
>>> I'm going back to anakrino. Who's with me?
>>
>>
>> 35 smakers too rich for your blood joco?
>>
>> --
>> *David Connors* | da...@codify.com | www.codify.com
>> Software Engineer
>> Codify Pty Ltd
>> Phone: +61 (7) 3210 6268 | Facsimile: +61 (7) 3210 6269 | Mobile: +61 417
>> 189 363
>> V-Card: https://www.codify.com/cards/davidconnors
>> Address Info: https://www.codify.com/contact
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Meski
>
> "Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure,
> you'll get it, but it's going to be rough" - Adam Hills
>

RE: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[David Kean]

Lol. This is the exact reason why you shouldn’t work on apps for developers; 
we’re all too cheap to pay for something that we think we could write 
ourselves;.

From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On 
Behalf Of David Connors
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 4:21 PM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

On 3 February 2011 10:19, Joseph Cooney 
mailto:joseph.coo...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I'm going back to anakrino. Who's with me?

35 smakers too rich for your blood joco?

--
David Connors | da...@codify.com<mailto:da...@codify.com> | 
www.codify.com<http://www.codify.com>
Software Engineer
Codify Pty Ltd
Phone: +61 (7) 3210 6268 | Facsimile: +61 (7) 3210 6269 | Mobile: +61 417 189 
363
V-Card: https://www.codify.com/cards/davidconnors
Address Info: https://www.codify.com/contact

Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Noon Silk]

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:30 AM, David Kean  wrote:
> Lol. This is the exact reason why you shouldn’t work on apps for developers;
> we’re all too cheap to pay for something that we think we could write
> ourselves;.

This isn't generally true. I think it's only younger people who think
this way. Either way, it typically results in a new tool, which may at
somepoint become useful :)

-- 
Noon Silk

http://dnoondt.wordpress.com/  (Noon Silk) | http://www.mirios.com.au:8081 >

Fancy a quantum lunch?
http://www.mirios.com.au:8081/index.php?title=Quantum_Lunch

"Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy — the joy
of being this signature."

Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Joseph Cooney]

I'll probably buy a copy. I'm just disappointed that the quality of the app
seems to have gone down under Red-Gate's stewardship. That and it never
feels good to fall for the bait-and-switch. I guess they needed a way to
recoup all the money the paid to Lutz Roeder in the first place.

Joseph

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:20 AM, David Connors  wrote:

> On 3 February 2011 10:19, Joseph Cooney  wrote:
>
>> I'm going back to anakrino. Who's with me?
>
>
> 35 smakers too rich for your blood joco?
>
> --
> *David Connors* | da...@codify.com | www.codify.com
> Software Engineer
> Codify Pty Ltd
> Phone: +61 (7) 3210 6268 | Facsimile: +61 (7) 3210 6269 | Mobile: +61 417
> 189 363
> V-Card: https://www.codify.com/cards/davidconnors
> Address Info: https://www.codify.com/contact
>
>


-- 

w: http://jcooney.net
t: @josephcooney

RE: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Mitch Denny]

I probably use it once a week serious, casually once a day. I use it when I 
want to understand the relationship between classes in the framework from a 
call path perspective more than anything. It's also great for understanding the 
relationship between various assemblies which isn't readily available in the 
framework documentation.

Regards
Mitch Denny
Readify | Chief Technology Officer
Suite 408 Life.Lab Building | 198 Harbour Esplanade | Docklands | VIC 3008 | 
Australia 
M: +61 414 610 141 | E: mitch.de...@readify.net | W: www.readify.net

The content of this e-mail, including any attachments is a confidential 
communication between Readify Pty Ltd and the intended addressee and is for the 
sole use of that intended addressee. If you are not the intended addressee, any 
use, interference with, disclosure or copying of this material is unauthorized 
and prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please contact the 
sender immediately and then delete the message and any attachment(s).


-Original Message-
From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On 
Behalf Of Noon Silk
Sent: Thursday, 3 February 2011 11:27 AM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Joseph Cooney  wrote:
> I'm going back to anakrino. Who's with me?

I don't understand; what do you people actually use Reflector for all the time? 
I've had to use it twice:

 1) No documentation and hidden functionality regarding the format of MSMQ 
correlation Id, so I had to look at the source and find what it was
 2) For some short period I felt like re-implementing some common control that 
was sealed, so I looked at the functionality, but then realised there was a 
better way to do what I wanted

I don't legitimately understand how decompiling is so required. What are people 
doing? (Aside from David Kean and the CLR team; though I admit to being 
somewhat surprised by that, I would've thought there would be a different 
internal strategy there ...)


> --
>
> w: http://jcooney.net
> t: @josephcooney

--
Noon Silk

http://dnoondt.wordpress.com/  (Noon Silk) | http://www.mirios.com.au:8081 >

Fancy a quantum lunch?
http://www.mirios.com.au:8081/index.php?title=Quantum_Lunch

"Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy - the joy of being 
this signature."

Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Noon Silk]

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Mitch Denny  wrote:
> I probably use it once a week serious, casually once a day. I use it when I 
> want to understand the relationship between classes in the
> framework from a call path perspective more than anything. It's also great 
> for understanding the relationship between various assemblies
> which isn't readily available in the framework documentation.

Okay, I accept that. I just don't see how it affects my day-to-day
work; but perhaps that is just significantly different from
yours/others.

Fair enough.


> Regards
> Mitch Denny
> Readify | Chief Technology Officer
> Suite 408 Life.Lab Building | 198 Harbour Esplanade | Docklands | VIC 3008 | 
> Australia
> M: +61 414 610 141 | E: mitch.de...@readify.net | W: www.readify.net

-- 
Noon Silk

http://dnoondt.wordpress.com/  (Noon Silk) | http://www.mirios.com.au:8081 >

Fancy a quantum lunch?
http://www.mirios.com.au:8081/index.php?title=Quantum_Lunch

"Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy — the joy
of being this signature."

Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Arjang Assadi]

Same as Silky said, what is used for?

On 3 February 2011 11:26, Noon Silk  wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Joseph Cooney  
> wrote:
>> I'm going back to anakrino. Who's with me?
>
> I don't understand; what do you people actually use Reflector for all
> the time? I've had to use it twice:
>
>  1) No documentation and hidden functionality regarding the format of
> MSMQ correlation Id, so I had to look at the source and find what it
> was
>  2) For some short period I felt like re-implementing some common
> control that was sealed, so I looked at the functionality, but then
> realised there was a better way to do what I wanted
>
> I don't legitimately understand how decompiling is so required. What
> are people doing? (Aside from David Kean and the CLR team; though I
> admit to being somewhat surprised by that, I would've thought there
> would be a different internal strategy there ...)
>
>
>> --
>>
>> w: http://jcooney.net
>> t: @josephcooney
>
> --
> Noon Silk
>
> http://dnoondt.wordpress.com/  (Noon Silk) | http://www.mirios.com.au:8081 >
>
> Fancy a quantum lunch?
> http://www.mirios.com.au:8081/index.php?title=Quantum_Lunch
>
> "Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy — the joy
> of being this signature."
>

RE: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[David Kean]

I find it easier to use Reflector than looking at the source - I don't have to 
work out different coding styles or spacing. Hell, I have access to all the 
source code that ships out of DevDiv and Windows (with a very good instant 
internal search) , but I still use Reflector every-day to look at our own 
source code. It's also a very easy way to see what dependencies types and 
members have (which given what I've been working on this past year [1], is very 
important).

[1] 
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/bclteam/archive/2011/01/19/announcing-portable-library-tools-ctp-justin-van-patten.aspx
 (Excuse the plug )


-Original Message-
From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On 
Behalf Of Arjang Assadi
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 4:53 PM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

Same as Silky said, what is used for?

On 3 February 2011 11:26, Noon Silk  wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Joseph Cooney  
> wrote:
>> I'm going back to anakrino. Who's with me?
>
> I don't understand; what do you people actually use Reflector for all 
> the time? I've had to use it twice:
>
>  1) No documentation and hidden functionality regarding the format of 
> MSMQ correlation Id, so I had to look at the source and find what it 
> was
>  2) For some short period I felt like re-implementing some common 
> control that was sealed, so I looked at the functionality, but then 
> realised there was a better way to do what I wanted
>
> I don't legitimately understand how decompiling is so required. What 
> are people doing? (Aside from David Kean and the CLR team; though I 
> admit to being somewhat surprised by that, I would've thought there 
> would be a different internal strategy there ...)
>
>
>> --
>>
>> w: http://jcooney.net
>> t: @josephcooney
>
> --
> Noon Silk
>
> http://dnoondt.wordpress.com/  (Noon Silk) | 
> http://www.mirios.com.au:8081 >
>
> Fancy a quantum lunch?
> http://www.mirios.com.au:8081/index.php?title=Quantum_Lunch
>
> "Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy - the joy 
> of being this signature."
>

Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Mark Hurd]

On 3 February 2011 11:22, Arjang Assadi  wrote:
> Same as Silky said, what is used for?

Well I just used it to determine what I would need to do to change the
time zone in .NET only, rather than changing the computer's time zone.

And seeing as this is a 2.0 project I'm fairly happy with the results
(only two private fields updated). I.e. I don't expect any future
service packs to completely change the time zone handling.

As such I'll probably pay for a new .NET Reflector, but only when the
free one gets VB.NET ByRef arguments right.

-- 
Regards,
Mark Hurd, B.Sc.(Ma.)(Hons.)

RE: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[David Kean]

I'm hoping that you did that by calling only public API and not taking a 
dependency on anything private...

-Original Message-
From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On 
Behalf Of Mark Hurd
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 5:14 PM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

On 3 February 2011 11:22, Arjang Assadi  wrote:
> Same as Silky said, what is used for?

Well I just used it to determine what I would need to do to change the time 
zone in .NET only, rather than changing the computer's time zone.

And seeing as this is a 2.0 project I'm fairly happy with the results (only two 
private fields updated). I.e. I don't expect any future service packs to 
completely change the time zone handling.

As such I'll probably pay for a new .NET Reflector, but only when the free one 
gets VB.NET ByRef arguments right.

--
Regards,
Mark Hurd, B.Sc.(Ma.)(Hons.)

Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Ben Laan]

I have it open right now trying to work out why System.Drawing.Image.Save is
failing with an argument null exception on "encoder" parameter that I didn't
pass as an argument Turns out that its redirecting to an overload that
calculates the encoder based on the ImageFormat... Unfortunately, GDI+
doesn't appaear to have an encoder for EMF.. (AFAIK) (any one know how to
save an EMF to an image?)

Don't know how else I could find that out without Reflector. I *will*
definitely be buying this one (with the boss' money too, if at all
possible)..


On 3 February 2011 11:43, Mark Hurd  wrote:

> On 3 February 2011 11:22, Arjang Assadi  wrote:
> > Same as Silky said, what is used for?
>
> Well I just used it to determine what I would need to do to change the
> time zone in .NET only, rather than changing the computer's time zone.
>
> And seeing as this is a 2.0 project I'm fairly happy with the results
> (only two private fields updated). I.e. I don't expect any future
> service packs to completely change the time zone handling.
>
> As such I'll probably pay for a new .NET Reflector, but only when the
> free one gets VB.NET ByRef arguments right.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Mark Hurd, B.Sc.(Ma.)(Hons.)
>



-- 
http://www.laanfamily.com/

http://www.laanfamily.com/Code.aspx

Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Noon Silk]

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Ben Laan  wrote:
> I have it open right now trying to work out why System.Drawing.Image.Save is
> failing with an argument null exception on "encoder" parameter that I didn't
> pass as an argument Turns out that its redirecting to an overload that
> calculates the encoder based on the ImageFormat... Unfortunately, GDI+
> doesn't appaear to have an encoder for EMF.. (AFAIK) (any one know how to
> save an EMF to an image?)

I've not used this myself, but it appears documented under "Remarks",
unless you've already seen that:
 


> Don't know how else I could find that out without Reflector. I *will*
> definitely be buying this one (with the boss' money too, if at all
> possible)..

> --
> http://www.laanfamily.com/
> 
> http://www.laanfamily.com/Code.aspx
> 

-- 
Noon Silk

http://dnoondt.wordpress.com/  (Noon Silk) | http://www.mirios.com.au:8081 >

Fancy a quantum lunch?
http://www.mirios.com.au:8081/index.php?title=Quantum_Lunch

"Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy — the joy
of being this signature."

Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Noon Silk]

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 12:13 PM, David Kean  wrote:
> I find it easier to use Reflector than looking at the source - I don't have 
> to work out different coding styles or
> spacing. Hell, I have access to all the source code that ships out of DevDiv 
> and Windows (with a very good
> instant internal search) , but I still use Reflector every-day to look at our 
> own source code. It's also a very
> easy way to see what dependencies types and members have (which given what 
> I've been working on this
> past year [1], is very important).

I do find it hard to accept that this is the most idealised way of
working. Surely it implies that there is something that could be done
to improve that? And surely most of the things are well-known and
existing? There must be a better solution there. It seems quite
bizarre. I'm intrigued by that.


> [1] 
> http://blogs.msdn.com/b/bclteam/archive/2011/01/19/announcing-portable-library-tools-ctp-justin-van-patten.aspx
>  (Excuse the plug )

-- 
Noon Silk

http://dnoondt.wordpress.com/  (Noon Silk) | http://www.mirios.com.au:8081 >

Fancy a quantum lunch?
http://www.mirios.com.au:8081/index.php?title=Quantum_Lunch

"Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy — the joy
of being this signature."

Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Mark Hurd]

No, as I said I had to update two private fields. Do you expect the
time zone stuff in .NET 2.0(3.5) to be updated in any service packs?

In any case it is better than any of the public API solutions I could
find that require you to use either UTC or your computer's local time
zone. I know DateTimeOffset can be used for other time zones but the
XmlSerialization of those is too much work.

IF a service pack breaks the two private fields I'm updating we'll
review the situation.

Of course you could be asking for legal (licensing) reasons and that's
a whole 'nother story, cause I believe we're not allowed to reflect
the framework, as that would be a form of reverse engineering which is
expressly disallowed. I believe the out here is local laws allow it
when using it to work in with existing systems, like some client's
request to work with their time zone.

On 3 February 2011 11:48, David Kean  wrote:
> I'm hoping that you did that by calling only public API and not taking a 
> dependency on anything private...
>
> -Original Message-
> From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On 
> Behalf Of Mark Hurd
> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 5:14 PM
> To: ozDotNet
> Subject: Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
>
> On 3 February 2011 11:22, Arjang Assadi  wrote:
>> Same as Silky said, what is used for?
>
> Well I just used it to determine what I would need to do to change the time 
> zone in .NET only, rather than changing the computer's time zone.
>
> And seeing as this is a 2.0 project I'm fairly happy with the results (only 
> two private fields updated). I.e. I don't expect any future service packs to 
> completely change the time zone handling.
>
> As such I'll probably pay for a new .NET Reflector, but only when the free 
> one gets VB.NET ByRef arguments right.

(BTW I don't like mixing top and bottom posting, but I don't have time
to fix David's post within mine at the moment.)

-- 
Regards,
Mark Hurd, B.Sc.(Ma.)(Hons.)

RE: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[David Kean]

*DO NOT* rely on private implementation details of .NET, we are free to change 
these in any release (be it hotfix, security update, GDR, service pack or full 
release). When I'm working on these types, be it fixing a bug or adding 
features, I don't want to have to (and I don't) worry about what customers I'm 
going to break by changing things that we never documented or guaranteed. You 
should also be aware that we don't ship the exactly same changes on all 
platforms, for example, Windows 7 shipped with a version of .NET 2.0/3.5 that 
is not available on any other platform, I know we made changes to private 
implementations on that platform that broke some customers, so who says that 
you application won't break on other or future OS versions?

Let's figure out a way of doing this without needing to rely on updating 
private fields. What exactly are you trying to do?  What are you hitting that 
requires you to update the CurrentTimeZone? 

-Original Message-
From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On 
Behalf Of Mark Hurd
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 6:09 PM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

No, as I said I had to update two private fields. Do you expect the time zone 
stuff in .NET 2.0(3.5) to be updated in any service packs?

In any case it is better than any of the public API solutions I could find that 
require you to use either UTC or your computer's local time zone. I know 
DateTimeOffset can be used for other time zones but the XmlSerialization of 
those is too much work.

IF a service pack breaks the two private fields I'm updating we'll review the 
situation.

Of course you could be asking for legal (licensing) reasons and that's a whole 
'nother story, cause I believe we're not allowed to reflect the framework, as 
that would be a form of reverse engineering which is expressly disallowed. I 
believe the out here is local laws allow it when using it to work in with 
existing systems, like some client's request to work with their time zone.

On 3 February 2011 11:48, David Kean  wrote:
> I'm hoping that you did that by calling only public API and not taking a 
> dependency on anything private...
>
> -Original Message-
> From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com 
> [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Mark Hurd
> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 5:14 PM
> To: ozDotNet
> Subject: Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
>
> On 3 February 2011 11:22, Arjang Assadi  wrote:
>> Same as Silky said, what is used for?
>
> Well I just used it to determine what I would need to do to change the time 
> zone in .NET only, rather than changing the computer's time zone.
>
> And seeing as this is a 2.0 project I'm fairly happy with the results (only 
> two private fields updated). I.e. I don't expect any future service packs to 
> completely change the time zone handling.
>
> As such I'll probably pay for a new .NET Reflector, but only when the free 
> one gets VB.NET ByRef arguments right.

(BTW I don't like mixing top and bottom posting, but I don't have time to fix 
David's post within mine at the moment.)

--
Regards,
Mark Hurd, B.Sc.(Ma.)(Hons.)

Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Scott Barnes]

Viva-revolution-Cooney style.

If your holding a goldfish Joesph and a blond girl says "me" and thats
it.. then you are destined for greatness in Anakrino :)

---
Regards,
Scott Barnes
http://www.riagenic.com



On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Joseph Cooney  wrote:
> I'm going back to anakrino. Who's with me?
>
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Arjang Assadi 
> wrote:
>>
>> On 3 February 2011 10:48, Glen Harvy  wrote:
>> > What's .Net Reflector?
>>
>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc300497.aspx
>
>
>
> --
>
> w: http://jcooney.net
> t: @josephcooney
>

Resource Editors, was Re: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector

[Noon Silk]

On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 2:50 PM, mike smith  wrote:

[...]

> On the subject of developer utilities, anyone got a favourite for resource
> editing?  I'm looking at HeavenTools stuff, this one in particular.
> http://www.heaventools.com/command-line_resource_editor.htm
> We have language resource files that get done by translators and supplied as
> dlls.  But these are opaque as far as subversion's concerned - IOW, you cant
> diff them to see what's changed.  Even BeyondCompare, my favourite diff
> utility doesn't - so I want to decompile the dll back to an RC for this
> purpose.

I just edit the resx.foo's myself in VS. I'd be interested to know as
well, as it works "fine enough" for me, but I think at the very least
it would be appropriate to add some post-build (perhaps buildserver)
tasks such that it checks to see that all resources have values in the
provided languages. Anyone doing that?


> --
> Meski
>
> "Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll
> get it, but it's going to be rough" - Adam Hills

-- 
Noon Silk

http://dnoondt.wordpress.com/  (Noon Silk) | http://www.mirios.com.au:8081 >

Fancy a quantum lunch?
http://www.mirios.com.au:8081/index.php?title=Quantum_Lunch

"Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy — the joy
of being this signature."

Re: Non-standard time zone handling (was Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector)

[Mark Hurd]

OK we're in a situation similar to the StackOverflow question:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2939188

We have an existing code base that used UTC throughout and just relied
on the standard XmlSerialization of DateTime.

Then the client noticed their existing clients ignore the UTC of the
Xml and assume it is local time, so we needed to switch to their local
time, not our server's. (We're not in the position to say their
clients are in the wrong.)

It seems the "correct" and supported solution is to refactor all our
DateTimes to DateTimeOffsets and write our own XmlSerialization
classes because the default doesn't cut it.

It was easier to get the server time zone to be the client's local
time, then the standard XmlSerialization produces the right results
with non-UTC DateTimes.

But we didn't want to change our server's time zone to that of the client.

However, .NET's time zone is stored in only two places, both of which
only allow resetting to "unset" and setting to the computer's current
time zone.

I just produced code to setup a time zone that is not the computer's
current time zone and place that in the two places.

As I said I don't use any other private APIs, just simply allow a
"ReadOnly" property, with a "set" internal to the get, to receive a
value the internal set can't provide itself without us momentarily
setting the O/S time zone to the time zone we want to use.

And this is a "web service" (a web site expecting and emitting Xml,
but not using SOAP or any other standard) so it is a single install.
(We will be moving it to a Win2008 server from a Win2003, but we're
expecting to stay with .NET 3.5(2.0).)

-- 
Regards,
Mark Hurd, B.Sc.(Ma.)(Hons.)

On 3 February 2011 14:51, David Kean  wrote:
> *DO NOT* rely on private implementation details of .NET, we are free to 
> change these in any release (be it hotfix, security update, GDR, service pack 
> or full release). When I'm working on these types, be it fixing a bug or 
> adding features, I don't want to have to (and I don't) worry about what 
> customers I'm going to break by changing things that we never documented or 
> guaranteed. You should also be aware that we don't ship the exactly same 
> changes on all platforms, for example, Windows 7 shipped with a version of 
> .NET 2.0/3.5 that is not available on any other platform, I know we made 
> changes to private implementations on that platform that broke some 
> customers, so who says that you application won't break on other or future OS 
> versions?
>
> Let's figure out a way of doing this without needing to rely on updating 
> private fields. What exactly are you trying to do?  What are you hitting that 
> requires you to update the CurrentTimeZone?
>
> -Original Message-----
> From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On 
> Behalf Of Mark Hurd
> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 6:09 PM
> To: ozDotNet
> Subject: Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
>
> No, as I said I had to update two private fields. Do you expect the time zone 
> stuff in .NET 2.0(3.5) to be updated in any service packs?
>
> In any case it is better than any of the public API solutions I could find 
> that require you to use either UTC or your computer's local time zone. I know 
> DateTimeOffset can be used for other time zones but the XmlSerialization of 
> those is too much work.
>
> IF a service pack breaks the two private fields I'm updating we'll review the 
> situation.
>
> Of course you could be asking for legal (licensing) reasons and that's a 
> whole 'nother story, cause I believe we're not allowed to reflect the 
> framework, as that would be a form of reverse engineering which is expressly 
> disallowed. I believe the out here is local laws allow it when using it to 
> work in with existing systems, like some client's request to work with their 
> time zone.
>
> On 3 February 2011 11:48, David Kean  wrote:
>> I'm hoping that you did that by calling only public API and not taking a 
>> dependency on anything private...
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com
>> [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Mark Hurd
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 5:14 PM
>> To: ozDotNet
>> Subject: Re: Fwd: Red Gate will be charging $35 for .NET Reflector
>>
>> On 3 February 2011 11:22, Arjang Assadi  wrote:
>>> Same as Silky said, what is used for?
>>
>> Well I just used it to determine what I would need to do to change the time 
>> zone in .NET only, rather than changing the computer's time zone.