Re: What is wrong with Ada?

[Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus@futureapps.de>]

On Wed, 2007-04-25 at 13:54 +0200, Markus E Leypold wrote:
> Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus@futureapps.de> writes:

> > Maybe they don't publicly announce prices to make sure
> > they can provide affordable solutions? 
> 
> The mirror side is: Charge what you can get. That is something
> people^Wcustomers don't like.

Or pay as little as possible, there are always two parties
in a bargain.

>   http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2006/07/31.html

(Another argument: Dell is a free loader because they don't invest in
researching and developing the products they sell cheaply (computer
tech), unlike other computer makers. Good or bad?)

>   http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/CamelsandRubberDuckies.html

Some interesting speculations starting from Say's theorem
and some non-empiricism. So what? Wouldn't it be more informative
to observe what appears to be working, and how, in the Ada
market?
  Unlike the C#/VB market, the Ada market has some
potential of being competitive: there is more than
one tool vendor, and the free-beer edition of GNAT
is gone.



> Just differentiate service contracts and license to use and
> structure the service into different levels.

I see just this happening.



> If you mean they didn't charge for DOS -- you're wrong.

Huh? MS software was both expensive and copyable.


>  I'm almost sure that your thoughts to
> a certain extend agree with those of certain Ada vendors and the spin
> -- "to make sure they can provide affordable solutions" -- is
> certainly identical.
> 
> But that proves in my eyes exactly that they are absolutely clueless
> about marketing and customer psychology 

You mean, RR Software's compiler and tools, publicly priced
slightly above MSVSStandard, only doesn't sell in the millions
because it is more expensive than commercial entry VS?

And you think that once Aonix offers a 249 € compiler,
the will start selling so many copies