Unfortunately, I was not able to find any sign of the prices on the Cincom smalltalk site. Does anyody know at least a ball park ranges or examples of pricing for "Corporate end user license" and "corporate server license" ? Is it a 10 bucks a seat or 10.000? is it a 100 bucks a server or 100.000?
> I don't know about corporate end user pricing. Just email James > Robertson or give them a call. They are nice.
> Mike
I believe that this pricing model makes it impossible to introduce VisualWorks into new (skeptical) organizations. Especially how do you account for annual Cincom Smalltalk based revenues if you are using a mixture of languages and tools? I know several companies that use Java-based solutions that are moving to open source solutions to avoid to pay fees for development environments, enterprise servers, etc. If you tell them how wonderful Smalltalk is they are maybe interested. But if you tell them about the pricing model they certainly say: No way!
And the one person company (maybe a student) that want to make a simple application for a friend, giving him like $1000 for the whole thing or alike, probably choose Python or Ruby when he hears that the whole profit will go to Cincom (+ an additional 6% of the friends certainly uncertain revenue).
> Unfortunately, I was not able to find any sign of the prices on the Cincom > smalltalk site. Does anyody know at least a ball park ranges or examples > of > pricing for "Corporate end user license" and "corporate server license" ? > Is it a 10 bucks a seat or 10.000? is it a 100 bucks a server or 100.000?
Also, quoting James:
"The cheapest commercial license you can get now is a Small dev, limited to one end user (i.e, you)
That costs $200 per year, and includes support and new releases as long as you stay current
There's also a $700 license that allows deployment to 5 end users
> I don't know about corporate end user pricing. Just email James > Robertson or give them a call. They are nice.
by (my ;) definition no trading entity that does not display its prices transparently is nice ;) no matter honw nice people they employ or good products they have. And let's stay at that since I am not interested in starting flame war but in finding out examples of pricing for the kind of license I have mentioned.
So still please, if someone can provide examples on pricing for the types of license I have asked for, I would be very gratefull. (you can also email me with details).
> Contact Andrew McNeil - amcn...@cincom.com - for information
well thanks, I will find my way to their sales. But if anyone knows, please give me a ballpark examples of pricing for the two types of licenses I have asked for. email is also ok.
on the other hand by not posting rigid pricing schemes it allows a vendor to negotiate and therefore help fledgling startups where they can, charge fair prices to those more capable and overall survive. Cincom cannot compete in the "tools" business , they have to be in the "business enabling" business , the fact is that to really know how they can help you , you will need to sit down and speak with them. Only then will you know if a mutually beneficial partnership can be established.
We happen to combine a lot of open source with VisualWorks here at our shop. You get what you pay for. I may be quite happy with using an open source black box like an Apache server but that is entirely different proposition than a development environment.
The one person company can use a Non-commercial license until it makes sense for him to "go commercial". If you are making money is 6% really that much? That is less than NYC sales tax. If you sell something for $100.00 is giving Cincom six lousy bucks that much of a deal? Six dollars for hands down the best enterprise development platform in the planet?
> on the other hand by not posting rigid pricing schemes it allows a > vendor to negotiate and therefore help fledgling startups where they > can, charge fair prices to those more capable and overall survive. > Cincom cannot compete in the "tools" business , they have to be in the > "business enabling" business , the fact is that to really know how they > can help you , you will need to sit down and speak with them. Only then > will you know if a mutually beneficial partnership can be established.
well I certanly disagree, and the resoning above actually strenghtenes that stance of mine. But as I have said I do not want to turn this thread into pricing models holly war. I was/am only interested to receive pricing information.
OCIT wrote: > We happen to combine a lot of open source with VisualWorks here at our > shop. You get what you pay for. I may be quite happy with using an open > source black box like an Apache server but that is entirely different > proposition than a development environment.
I know. But still you often get this kind of reaction.
> The one person company can use a Non-commercial license until it makes > sense for him to "go commercial". If you are making money is 6% really > that much? That is less than NYC sales tax. If you sell something for > $100.00 is giving Cincom six lousy bucks that much of a deal? Six > dollars for hands down the best enterprise development platform in the > planet?
I agree, but I have gotten this reaction from many newcomers (sometimes students) that maybe want to use Smalltalk to hack something that maybe, or maybe not, will give some money. Maybe they count on a profit not exceeding $500. It would maybe be nice to have a lower limit.
This complaint about pricing comes up a fair amount - Let me address a few points.
1) Posting Prices. Cincom, as a corporate entity, doesn't do that for any product. The company has been in business since 1968, and has been continuously profitable over that period. There are aspects of corporate culture that can be changed, and others that are hard to change. This policy falls into the latter bucket
2) "Fairness" of pricing. Well - the bottom line is, if we did what people wanted, and gave the product away - the version you got for free would be the last version you ever saw. The engineering group isn't free, and the only way to pay them is to charge for the product.
3) Following from (2) come questions about the way we price. Simply put, the model people say they want - one time developer licenses, followed by unlimited use - has been tried. You'll note that ParcPlace (and descendents) went broke using that model. You'll also note that Borland has been driven pretty close to bankruptcy on that model. The sad fact is, that model just doesn't work. Using it leads to either
-- tiny engineering groups who's job is to simply maintain the product -- death of the product and/or the company selling that way
4) Following from (3), I get asked "well, what about open sourcing and charging for support"? I'll point out that RedHat ran away from that model, and that the largest OSS vendor using it - JBoss - has yet to turn a profit (they are, in fact, deeply in the red). As with (3), this model doesn't work.
Having said all that, we recognize that interested people need more information about our pricing, and that our models might need to evolve over time. Rest assured, we are talking about this internally.
> What I find weird is that it seems like you *still* haven't contacted > Cincom for pricing.
> Stating here that their pricing presentation is broken won't fix this > for you....
Funny thing is that I am interested in getting the public or independant price information if possible, not discussing Cincom policies, but allmost all replies concetrate on either Cincom policy of not publishing the prices, or on mine of beeing hesitant to be exposed to the sales prematurely.
I prefer not to talk to the sales until there is a reasonable chance that I will actually buy. I might be preparing a bid, I might be preparing proposition for the management, I might be developing an idea and trying to find out if it makes sense or not, I could be doing several other things, where knowing a ball park figures is essential, but talking with sales is step too much, and often causes completely unnecessary preassure and exposure from sales.
Second reason is that when prices are not transparent, one gets into the situation very similar to buying leather jacket on Istambul Bazar. Any bit of information you can have before you engage in conversation with the eloquent gentleman can help to reduce your missery at least a bit.
> Rephrased in an (overly) confronting way: are you serious?
Paraphrased from movie Glengarry Glen Ross: "No, I just like to talk to salesmans ..." ;)
Do I have application where I think VW might be suitable or even maybe needed? Yes.
Do I prefer to talk to their sales completely unprepared and clueless? No.
Will I actually buy something? Depends on many things, price beeing important one.
So if you have some information that you are willing to share, I will be truely thankfull to hear it. And I will contact sales (or maybe allready have, or never will) when I feel ready for that, and when I choose so.
> Funny thing is that I am interested in getting the public or independant > price information if possible, not discussing Cincom policies, but allmost > all replies concetrate on either Cincom policy of not publishing the prices, > or on mine of beeing hesitant to be exposed to the sales prematurely.
One problem seems to be that you assume there is such a thing as 'public or independant price information'. For better or for worse since shops each barter for their own price I guess that would be seen as private information not fit to be published here. Try it over a beer (visit some VW shops in your neighborhood).
> I prefer not to talk to the sales until there is a reasonable chance that I > will actually buy.
> One problem seems to be that you assume there is such a thing as 'public > or independant price information'. For better or for worse since shops > each barter for their own price I guess that would be seen as private > information not fit to be published here. Try it over a beer (visit some > VW shops in your neighborhood).
jaro...@gmail.com wrote: > This complaint about pricing comes up a fair amount...
[snip]
> 3) Following from (2) come questions about the way we price. Simply > put, the model people say they want - one time developer licenses, > followed by unlimited use - has been tried. You'll note that ParcPlace > (and descendents) went broke using that model. You'll also note that > Borland has been driven pretty close to bankruptcy on that model. The > sad fact is, that model just doesn't work. Using it leads to either
> -- tiny engineering groups who's job is to simply maintain the product > -- death of the product and/or the company selling that way
I was very interested to find out that this situation is present in other fields apart from software. I recently got taken to dinner by customers of customers of VW. I won't tell you who the company is but it is a provider of semiconductor manufacturing equipment and a ControlWORKS user. Their typical machine sells for a few million dollars each. Machines tend to stay in use for a long time (10 to 15 years).
What surprised me is that the company does not find depending on the up-front cost of the machine a sustainable business model and instead arranges that about 60% of its revenue comes from services, specifically maintaining and upgrading the machine over its life, plus training and mentoring in using the machine (which can include learning Smalltalk and ControlWORKS programming).
When I bought a new car last year I talked to one of the senior sales staff at the dealer in San Francisco. They said that the dealership makes essentially zero dollars on the sale of the car since new car prices are quite competitive. I believe him in my case because we bought a year's end model with a $4,000 discount. Instead the dealership makes its money through servicing, both in revenue from the car owner and in subsidies from the car manufacturer. Apparently the dealership receives moneys from the manufacturer in an ammount dependent on the dealership's customer satisfaction rating. The net result is that when my son twisted off the rear-view mirror of the car while I was vacuuming it and he was getting bored, the dealership fixed the mirror under guarantee since we'd naturally rate them highly for doing so.
When Cincom bought me a new 64-bit laptop a few years back it came loaded with the most obnoxious feature I've ever seen. When a search (e.g. for files) in the WinXP finder failed I was presented by a series of alternative searches more likely to succeed. Except that these searches were for things like vacations, new cars, etc. i.e. my new laptop is a medium for advertizing. I saw a web page related to this that was aimed at people marketing through the laptop. Essentially computers are now sold at or near cost and revenue accrues through services (support) and response to advertizing (including portal memberships like AOL).
Now the last example I find obnoxious, but the first two seem perfectly reasonable to me. The Cincom pricing model is all too common, makes sound business sense, and hence underlies VW's continued availability and evolution. How many people wanting to produce commercial products with Cincom Smalltalk don't want to be paid for their product? -- _______________,,,^..^,,,____________________________ Eliot Miranda Smalltalk - Scene not herd