On Dec 22, 10:59=A0pm, "Jan Karman" <*a...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> I agree fully with most of the statements, except the last one.
>
> I think APL-vendors have been making careful terms in their policy,
> as far as I can see. Free runtime interpreters seem to me crucial
> for distributing, because =A0"you need to be a domain expert before
> you contemplate using it" (right you are!!), and if you do you must
> be able to share your expertise with others in your field, or be able
> just to provide "systems" (programs) even without awareness of the
> underlying product.
It is our goal to make our products easier to get started with.
We're investing in a new book about APL, tutorials and code samples,
which should all to come "on line" in 2008.
We have also made the Dyalog product very much more accessible than
it has been in the past. It is free for educational use, and costs
only =A350 for "non-commercial" use (any use except selling products
based on APL or using APL to run your own business). Several hundred
licenses have gone out under these programs since they were
introduced.
If you just want to share techniques and are not charging for
your work (even indirectly), note that ONE of the ways to license
Dyalog APL is to pay 2% of your Dyalog-based revenues. If you are
giving your product away, 2% is not very much :-)
It would be nice if we could just let our customers pay use whatever
they like, but we have a responsibility to our existing customers to
make enough money to stay in business (and GROW the business). The
market is not (yet) big enough for us to be able to give the products
away and live off "collateral" revenues.
We're working on it / Morten
|
