The prices I gave below. They are $15,000 per CPU if you buy per CPU. If you want to get a package price on more than one CPU, we have the four CPU bundle called the Quick Start at $29,000. We don't have any 2-CPU pricing.
Now having said that, where you are working on a Flex application that requires different deployment options, let us know. We are flexible to work with you. Please don't mistake us being flexible with wanting to keep the pricing private. The pricing is clearly stated. If you need something we don't provide, let us know because we want to work with you. Lucian -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Shirey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 12:27 PM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Flex 1.5 price I am more than a little frustrated about this... why don't we discuss it right here publically? Why is there a pricing scheme that is private interview based? I just want to know: Is there a 1CPU price? If so, what is it? Is there a 2CPU price? If so, what is it? These are not difficult questions. If there are no purchasing options available that are smaller than this 'starter kit'. Please just say so. As I already said in my private email. I need to know the answer to these questions. I have a lot of damage control to attend to. -- Matthew On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:16:43 -0800, Lucian Beebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Maintenance will be calculated based on the CPUs or Quick Start price if you > go that route. . I think that's pretty consistent with other software > industry norms. > > > > I'll make you the same offer, Simon. Where you have serious projects > running, lets talk directly and find a way to make this work out. > > > > Lucian > > > ________________________________ > > > From: Simon Fifield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 11:49 AM > To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [flexcoders] Flex 1.5 price > > > > > My clients have also stretched themselves to purchase the 2cpu license, > which cost more than the Dual Processor server they purchased to match the > spec. > > > > > > Now that the license for Flex is either 1 or 4 cpu does this mean that my > clients are going to have to more than double the original purchase price > when they need to renew their maintenance license? > > > Or will the 1 cpu license cover the whole server? (i.e. does cpu mean server > or does it mean processors?) > > > > > > Simon > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Matthew Shirey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 31 March 2005 18:17 > To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Flex 1.5 price > > What about a 2cpu license? Please answer. Your 'starter kit' is > overkill for us. If our price is based on a minimum 4cpu price, then > this is no longer a joke at all. We will have to drop Flex and never > look back. We will have wasted months of training and actual > development time. This is NOT a price I can justify to anyone. > > We're seriously disappointed in Macromedia at this time. We're a very > small shop and its starting to look like Macromedia does not care > about the little guy at all anymore. > > -- Matthew > > > On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:00:13 -0500, Darron J. Schall > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Jeff Steiner wrote: > > > > >Lazslo, while the samples look great, is still based upon Flash player 5 > > >(Beta 3 of Lazslo is player 6). It is one of those things where you have > to > > >wonder - how does Lazslo know what to extend of the Flash Player. The > > >people that are contributing to it make guesses and try to extend the > > >capabilities as far as they can, but they are still limited in their > > >knowledge. I have never seen an API to the Flash player made readily > > >available to the public. Also - as the Flash Player gets more > complicated > > >it will become more difficult to code hooks into the player to give > > >developers the same functionality that is provided by Flex, and Breeze, > and > > >Flash, ........ > > > > > > > > As a Flash developer, I'd like to chime in here.. > > > > The fact that Lazslo works on Flash Player 5 really isn't an issue. In > > fact, I'd say it's a bonus! Here's why: > > > > * Because Lazslo outputs to Flash Player 5, it has a larget target > > audience. See the penetration stats: > > > http://www.macromedia.com/software/player_census/flashplayer/version_penetra tion.html > > -- FP 5 is 97%. FP7 is 82% - so apps created in Laszlo have a better > > chance of being viewed > > > > * There are no "older is slower" arguments. The v7 player will play a > > v5 swf faster than the v5 player, because the v7 player itself is faster > > than the v5 player. > > > > * The internals are abstracted away. Right now your Lazslo code > > publishes to .swf, but it's not tied to the Flash Player in any way - > > there are no MovieClip references, etc in your lazslo code. In fact, > > you don't even use ActionScript, you write in JavaScript. There's > > nothing to stop someone from writing a new "player" and with a few > > tweaks to the Laszlo compilation process you could have output for that > > new player. > > > > When you develop an application, do you really care about the internal > > API calls of Flash Player 7? If I'm a Lazslo developer, I say no.. I > > know what tags I can use in my markup, I know what the APIs are, and I > > use them and get a *working* .swf file. As long as it works, that's all > > I care about. If SWF5 is all it takes to make it work, then that's cool. > > > > Is there anything in v7 SWF that would benefit Lazslo apps? Not > > really. Some of the new things added in FP 7 over FP 6 is case > > sensitivty, depth management functions (getNextHighestDepth..) , context > > menu, etc,. The biggest change would probably be embedded video, and > > that may be a show stopper for some.. but it's rare that an > > "application" needs video in it. FP 6 adds some things over FP5 like > > ShardObjects, so I can see how upgrading to v6 in that respect would be > > benefitical. FP 6 also added different event handlers than FP5 > > (.onPress, vs on (press)) - but that has 0 effect on how I code my > > Lazslo markup. The FP6 style event handlers are meant to make AS coding > > easier, but Lazslo doesn't care about that because it has it's own > > coding model. > > > > The fact that Lazslo accomplishes what it does on an old version of the > > SWF format is not a drawback, it's a benefit. There's really no reason > > to use SWF7 if everything you need to do can be accomplished in SWF5. > > The fact that Lazslo separates itself from the Flash Player is another > > benefit as well.. If something should ever happen, maybe legal issues > > or whatever, Lazslo can output to, say, Java applets or whatever, since > > the code is all abstracted from the VM and the compilation process > > handles the dirty work of putting your code into a format the VM can > > understand. > > > > -d > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > Yahoo! Groups Links > > To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/ > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
