> > there are developers right now using nothing more than the
>starter kit to do
>> complex development.
>
>Good for them. However, there is a second group of users, probably working
>for companies who will buy the license if they decide they like the product.
>For these people, the RB Demo restrictions don't matter; they're evaluating
>the product, it doesn't bother them in the slightest to get splash screens
>and expiring apps. The RB Demo does its job - allowing these people to
>decide whether to buy - just fine. The Rev/MC starter kit is deeply
>inadequate for this group, because they want to find out what they will be
>able to do when they (or their employers) have purchased a license. They
>won't even consider not buying a license if they're going to use the
>product, because the cost of the license is less important than the time it
>will save them. Trying to work around the starter kit limitations is a
>waste of their time (and frustrating). It makes it hard for them to
>evaluate the product - some may not bother.
>
>I think it's wonderful that Rev/MC support those users in the first group.
>But I think sales may be lost by the failure to support the second group.
>
I believe that at least MetaCard offers 30-day money-back so people
who are serious about giving it a shot can take that path.
Anyway, at the present time, neither MC nor Rev are really
mass-market products. In all this discussions about pricing, let's
not forget that a cheaper product must generate enough sales to
offset significantly increased support costs.
Robert
