Software cost and edu discounts (was Re: Ada is not a failure.)

[agate!overload.lbl.gov!dog.ee.lbl.gov!hellgate.utah.edu!peruvian.cs.utah. edu!matwood@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Mark Atwood)]

In article <1993Jul27.134205.7881@vitro.com>
mzwick@vitro.com (Morris J. Zwick) writes:
>In article <1993Jul25.065103.19504@hellgate.utah.edu>
>matwood%peruvian.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Mark Atwood) writes:
>>
>>True, your LEAP program makes a stab at it, but it took an Ada vendor too
>>long to realize what nearly every other software vendor knows, the schools
>>are what will sell you.  (And don't tell me about "finantial realities".
>>Once you have the thing developed, it's next to free to copy and distribute
>                                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>This argument is specious. How do you expect to recover the costs of
>developing the software if you don't ask a high enough price?

I should have been a more clear on what I meant.  One of the weird things about
intellectual property (like software) as opposed to physcial items is that
the duplication cost is almost zero.  So if <Ada Vendor> sold their compiler
to businesses at the same high price they are currently charging, and GAVE
AWAY their compiler to schools, they only thing they would lose is the (small)
amount of money they would have made from the (very few) schools that would
have bought their product anyway.

Sounds like a low risk investment to me.

-- 
Mark Atwood                  | My school and employer have too many problems
matwood@peruvian.cs.utah.edu | without being blamed for mine.