llothar schrieb:
> Open your eyes man. This is not a speculative argument, i describe
> reality.
I don't deny that yours is certainly a legitimate
reality. Perhaps the number of copies of your editor
sold does not warrant a supported copy of ISE's toolset.
Could that be right?
And for sure, not just once have I heard about ASP.NET job
requirements where either VB or C# is in informally wanted,
not anything else. Java and LAMP are ubiquituous in their
respective markets.
But this is nowhere near a complete picture of the
programming labor market. Like you have said, a
profitable business does not necessarily need the masses.
Some profitable businesses are intrinsically oriented
towards smaller groups of buyers. They must! These businesses
have no need for loud public advertising. That might even be
counterproductive.
>>> Yes they have a GPL version but that does not help.
>>> If you want a user base you also need a free for commerical compiler.
>> Do you mean, an Eiffel tools user base with necessraily smaller
>> scale business plans?
>
> Smaller business plans or just a secondary solution for smaller
> inhouse stuff
> and simple tools.
GPL proper is not in the way of writing inhouse stuff. In case ISE's
GPLed inhouse stuff generates profit, then likey sending some of
the profit to ISE (or some GPL project?) will be in order, I'd say.
> Even larger companies have such requirements. And
> with this
> price tag you have to walk through one or two controller offices to
> get it approved.
I don't think that car makers, banks, insurance companies, hardware
designers etc. have much of a problem with licensing cost;
compare licensing cost to typical wages in backend programming
(ACID SQL, J2EE, non-junk hard read-time controller software, ...).
If you see the sums then the mentioned $$$$ will not make much
of a difference.
In fact, how much is VS PRO with MSDN *per* *year* and
seat? I understand this is the most widespread IDE used
when writing MS Windows software.
I'm mentioning hard real-time because there you hear the same
arguments about dead languages and then some. What you call
expensive (and what _is_ expensive for many self-employed or
semi-employed programmers) is a normal price for compilers
and tools when it comes to writing programs that control
the brakes of vehicles, robot arms, measurement instruments
and such.
> Without a larger community Eiffel has a hard time as libraries are
> today much more
> important then a nice language. Like it or not but that is the fact.
No need to stress the lack of scripting libraries. But how
are some missing libraries an "insane thing"?
A lack of libraries is probably not a problem on .NET either,
because .NET _is_ a type library. Eiffel and .NET are well
integrated, Eiffel# being among the first .NET languages
(Uhm, not surprisingly).
> Unbelievable that there are still people out there
> that are
> impossible to do a post mortem analysis.
IIRC, I have just seen a recent photograph of an Eiffel
compiler vendor holding his young daughter and standing
in front of a nice house. Would you think they are in trouble?
You know, because some people their language is dead...
|
