You are correct. WebObjects is one of the only examples of a totally
weird economic model. Drop the price, demand drops. Isn't it
suppose to be the other way around?
Once the price dropped, Apple could not support a major software
sales force to push WebObjects. Many of the IT shops just lost track
of WO. It wasn't taken seriously because it was too cheap, but not
open source. It did not show up on anyone's radar because there was
no sales force to push it. Many of the high-end consulting services
companies also suffered tremendously because of the price drop. So
we end up where we are now.
Hopefully, with WO 5.4 things will be better.
Paul
On Jun 14, 2007, at 1:36 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
From: Mark Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: June 14, 2007 1:15:32 PM EDT
To: WebObjects Apple Dev <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: historical context ...
Poor choice of words on my part, I meant unlimited clients, per
server.
I also had the impression that WO was taken more seriously when it
had high-end pricing. Interesting, isn't it?
Regards,
Mark
On Jun 14, 2007, at 11:40 AM, Alexander Spohr wrote:
I remember these prices:
Developer: $3000
Deployment: $100.000 (Per System, unlimited CPUs)
Dep-Backup: $50.000
So there never was an unlimited deployment.
And that where the best times for WO; you could sell it to the Big
Players.
After the price-drop no one took WO seriously anymore. It almost
killed the high-end market.
atze
ps. We started using WO with version 0.9...
Am 14.06.2007 um 16:19 schrieb Mark Morris:
As I recall (and I didn't start with WebObjects until 1997, so it
could have been different in 1995 ;-), it was $50K for an
unlimited deployment license. I believe the per developer costs
were much, much less, but I can't remember specifics.
-- Mark
On Jun 14, 2007, at 3:49 AM, Cheong Hee (Datasonic) wrote:
It was once even voted by developers as the top 3 Java Developer
Tools in one of the surveys, if I could recall correctly ...
The price at that time was nearly USD40k per developer license!
Wait a minute...
On Jun 13, 2007, at 11:43 PM, Gavin Eadie wrote:
The approach, which supports development for Sun's Java, will
allow programmers to vastly expand offerings on the Web,
changing
it from a fairly static medium to a more interactive one.
Did it start out supporting Java, then switch to Objective-C, and
then back to Java??? If so, I had missed that part.
No, I assume that was a misunderstanding by the original
journalist,
like the comment about writing web browser plug-ins.
WebObjects was originally written for Objective C; WebScript was
added later, and Java was added even later still.
Paul
PS Shame I can't be at WWDC; in other news, the root canal
treatment
is going well.
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/markm%
40onpointsoftware.com
This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/atze%
40freeport.de
This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Freeport & Soliversum
Alexander Spohr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.freeport.de
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/markm%
40onpointsoftware.com
This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
