[DUG] A change in upgrade policy coming from Embarcadero

[Kyley Harris]

At the end of the day, I'd like to know if Embarcardo is making huge
profits, or losses.. or mediocre..
it benefits none of us if their pricing is not sustainable..

Perhaps in all liklihood, most of their revenue is from existing delphi
owners, more than new customers, and the upgrade prices is no longer
sufficient to keep them afloat..??? its a thought..

I'd be inclined to think that the Upgrade is too low, and the Retail is too
high, and a nice balance in the middle of simply setting one price for all,
(new or old) and at a sustainable value would benefit everyone the most... I
would rather pay $2000 a year and keep them in business, than pay $400 a
year, and have them sold again and see delphi go down the chute.

On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 7:35 PM, Jolyon Smith <jsmith at deltics.co.nz> wrote:

> A sliding scale on the face of it appears "fairer", but when assessing
> "fairness" it's also worth considering that someone still using Delphi 1
> (to
> take an EXTREME and ridiculous example) has not only not paid for Delphi
> 2-2009, but has also not enjoyed or benefited from Delphi 2-2009 either.
>
> That's the additional "price" they paid for NOT upgrading.
>
> And there will undoubtedly be additional costs in managing an upgrade
> policy
> that differentiates between different types/loyalties of customer.
>
> Surely much easier to take a "No Nonsense" approach.  Once a customer
> always
> a customer and glad to have you on-board, no matter when you last spent
> money with us.
>
> Turning a customer away - explicitly or by disincentive - just because they
> haven't spent any money with you *recently* is just petty.
>
> Now certainly we can point to any number of other companies that don't
> offer
> various upgrade pricing schemes, the question is, is what's right for a
> XYX-Other product also right for Delphi?
>
>
> In this case, I simply don't see how it can be a commercially realistic
> business attitude - the people you are turning away are those people least
> likely to spend money with you already (by definition, because they haven't
> been upgrading and since that was their choice, there were probably good
> reasons, OTHER than simple cost).
>
> Those already spending have already spent.  All you are doing is making it
> even *less* likely that those already *least* likely to spend with you will
> choose to do so again.
>
> But as I've pointed out before.... this is not really an issue for those
> using Delphi for commercial gain where the costs are relatively trivial
> compared to the rewards.  My concern is for the hobbyist/community
> developer
> that arguably has always been the backbone of the Delphi "market".
>
> Just look at the amount of community code now present in the editions we
> are
> all being asked to pay through the nose for.... FastCode, FastMM4,
> DevExtensions, DelphiSpeedUp, PNG support and no end of improvements
> *inspired* no doubt by community improvements in GExperts etc.
>
> All these things were developed and made available for free then poached,
> <cough> I mean " acquired for the greater good of the community" by
> Borland/CodeGear/Embarcadero, but now we're told that it's entirely
> reasonable for them to charge TOP $ and we should just "suck it up".
>
> After taking so much from the Community is it really unreasonable to ask
> that a little consideration be given to that community (and I don't just
> mean in the form of compensating those individuals whos work is selected to
> make it into the product, but rather in terms of fostering that community
> further and encouraging *others* to make such equally valuable
> contributions, even if they perhaps aren't in a position to be billing well
> heeled customers by the hour to fund their Delphi habit.
>
> Borland were roundly criticized for turning their back on the "community
> developer", but lest we forget, it was Borland that (eventually)
> resurrected
> the "Turbo Explorer" FREE editions.
>
> Embarcadero need to address the huge gap at the bottom of their SKU ladder.
>
> A Pro Edition that costs as much for a new license as a not-awful second
> hand car is NOT a viable proposition for a community developer, and neither
> are upgrade prices that cost as much as a half-decent, brand new PC.
>
> The Turbo's need to come back.  And quickly.
>
>
> And I mean proper "Turbo's", with sensible limits.  Disallowing the
> installation of components is dumb, when a great deal of community activity
> is *creating* components.
>
> But equally supporting extensive refactoring and modeling and SCM
> integrations is dumb since these are the things that are of most value to
> someone who's "time is money".
>
> There should also be no restrictions on use, OR a Community Edition which
> is
> entirely free but which prohibits use for commercial gain, with a license
> upgrade to permit the use for commercial gain, without unlocking any
> additional functionality (or perhaps removing some watermarking, for
> example).
>
> Watermarking may be the way to go actually.
>
> Digitally signing any compilation products produced using the free edition
> and rejecting **those** binaries if you attempt to install them in the IDE.
>
> i.e. you HAVE to distribute source code if you create anything you wish to
> share, using the Community Edition.
>
>
> Now there's an idea.
>
>
> Having spewed/brain-dumped this lot into this email I'm now going to
> cannibalise a lot of this for a blog post I think, so apologies for any
> déjà
> vue you might experience thru Delphi Feeds later.
>
> :)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi mailing list
> Post: delphi at delphi.org.nz
> Admin: http://delphi.org.nz/mailman/listinfo/delphi
> Unsubscribe: send an email to delphi-request at delphi.org.nz with Subject:
> unsubscribe
>



-- 
Kyley Harris
Harris Software
+64-21-671-821
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.123.net.nz/pipermail/delphi/attachments/20090921/9007bcf7/attachment-0001.html