> By this argument it means no one could charge for Eclipse plugins. I'm not sure what I wrote that triggered that, but no, that's not what I mean at all...I just meant that if Adobe charges $300 for an original product, then a product that derives so much benefit from other currently functioning and successful programs should sell for less.
> IP theft...yes, and no. It's not legally IP theft, but seems morally akin to IP theft, to some degree. What can no one seem to understand that no one is saying Adobe isn't perfectly within their rights to sell the product for whatever price they want, but to their customers, but a price-point that is the same as an original product they created seems a little greedy. The idea being "Why do we charge this much? Because we can..." Perhaps we should take Adobe's financial approach to the issue and just encourage everyone to boycott the product until the price has to come down in order to quiet the howls of dissatisfied stock holders... -----Original Message----- From: Raymond Camden [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 5:23 PM To: cf-talk Subject: Re: ColdFusion Builder Released! By this argument it means no one could charge for Eclipse plugins. There are quite a few very decent, very well done Eclipse plugins that are not free. Shoot, by this argument no one should sell work they develop on Railo, since Railo is free. I'm sure you didn't imply that, but I think it is great the Eclipse plugin allows for this type of market. I'm not quite sure what you mean by the non-original UI. You say it's like Eclipse (well, duh, it is an Eclipse plugin??) or like CFEclipse which implies IP theft. Is that what you really mean? On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Rick Faircloth <[email protected]> wrote: > They can charge what they want, but that doesn't mean they are > right to charge any amount when a lot of the work in developing > the IDE (interface, plug-in style, etc., Eclipse and CFEclipse) was done by > others. > > Dreamweaver: Original product built from the ground up...charging > $300...justified > > CFBuilder: Non-original, tack-on plug-in, whose user interface isn't > even original (purposefully created this way, I'm sure, so > so that Eclipse and CFEclipse users would make an easy > transition to its use...again a benefit to Adobe by from the > work of others)...charging $300...not justified > > And, yes, I could make back the money soon if it cost $ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:332040 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
