> Of course I do, don't you? My goal is to profit financially, but my larger > "working goal" is to help my clients succeed...and sometimes that means > giving things away for free, when my clients need it.
That would seem to be a rationale for giving discounts to some and not to others. Which, interestingly, is what Adobe has done - at least with Flex Builder: you can get it for free if you're unemployed or a student. But do you just give everyone a discount because one of your clients thinks you overcharge? That's what you're asking Adobe to do. And the reason I object so strenuously to this, every time you do it, is because if everyone holds out for some theoretical cheaper product, Adobe will simply stop selling the products that don't make money. Because that's what big corporations do. Adobe doesn't come round to your shop and tell you how to price your products, do they? If they did, you'd presumably resent that, right? But you know better than they the value of their own time and resources? Really? > Not my comment and not what I meant...there's a difference between original > software (as original as things can get these days) and a copy. What is that difference, exactly? At what point does something become original in your mind? I'm sure Dreamweaver, like CF itself, takes advantage of third-party libraries. I would not be surprised if, like with CF, some or many of them are open-source. So is it because you can see this reuse as an end-user? In my opinion, the use of Eclipse is a feature, not a bug. Adobe doesn't have anything special to bring to the table as far as writing a code editor, or a filesystem browser. It makes sense for me to use a product where those generic features are already tested, rather than one where they're brand new just for the sake of being brand new. > I would expect that something more original to cost more than something that > is less original. But again, why would you expect this? The cost of an application has very little to do with its originality or basis. The fact that you can get an OS for free, but have to pay $0.99 for a fart app for your iPhone should make this obvious to you. In the case of commercial software, it has to do with what it's worth to users of the application. This is why you can make a living writing CF. I can guarantee you that nothing you write as a CF developer is new under the sun - it's all been done before. Why should you get paid at all? Because, presumably, you provide value to your clients, by making their solution work exactly like they want it to, or by adding features as needed. > Sure you could, if learned to react to things other than from a rational > stance...everything can't be decided by reason alone. Beliefs and feelings don't serve as justification for an argument. They may serve as rhetoric, which is not the same as an argument. Arguments depend on logic. As said by a smarter and funnier person than me, "An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition." You can't establish a proposition with feelings. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ http://training.figleaf.com/ Fig Leaf Software is a Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB) on GSA Schedule, and provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized instruction at our training centers, online, or onsite ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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:332083 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
