On Jan 27, 2011, at 12:56 PM, Jan Goyvaerts wrote: > What a coincidence... Jetbrains proposed RubyMine today also. ! :-) > > http://www.jetbrains.com/ruby/
Well, Jetbrains has a business model that works for them. They make money selling IDEs for real money. And as long as they keep making products that people will pay for, they'll have a business. (I'm a long time customer myself.) > > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 21:46, Vince O'Sullivan <[email protected]> wrote: > "we are unable to justify the continued allocation of resources" > > It's a perfectly reasonable reason for the the move. However, given > that NetBeans is given away for free (as in free beer) the question > has to be asked: What, exactly, does justify the allocation of > resources? How, for instance, is the allocation of NetBeans resources > to Java justified? What are the criteria that failed to be met by > Ruby? > > Vince. It always seemed to me that the addition of support in NetBeans for Ruby and other non JVM-related languages was a knee jerk reaction by Sun to the growing popularity of alternate languages/frameworks. I never really understood why it made sense for them to spend money supporting Ruby in their Java IDE, but I assume they thought that it *might* have the potential of introducing the Java ecosystem to developers who would otherwise not be using Java. Although, it was (so I hear) a pretty good environment for developing Ruby apps, so from an engineering perspective, they did a good job. It's just that pesky business model that didn't quite work for them. Rob -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
