[Fwd: Re: [antlr-interest] Re: Antlr Studio is cool.]

[Scott Stanchfield]

(I missed the list for some reason...)

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Re: [antlr-interest] Re: Antlr Studio is cool.
From:    "Scott Stanchfield" <scott at javadude.com>
Date:    Wed, September 21, 2005 6:27 pm
To:      "Ahmed Mohombe" <amohombe at yahoo.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

>> As far as I recall, Prashant never said it would be free. The
>> "video-only"
>> previews were just to demonstrate what he was doing and gauge interest.
> This was the impression letted to me and to many others I talked to.

In other words, if I don't say right from the start it's not free, it
*has* to be free?

Sheesh...

I made the same assumption upfront, and when he told me has was charging
for it I didn't even think twice about it. Totally within his right, and
there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.

That said, I suspect fewer people will use it because they can't leech it,
or because their so-called "morals" won't let them.

Not to get on a GPL diatribe, but I think it's a load of crap. If someone
wants to donate their work to others, that's cool. If someone wants to try
and recoup a little money for their time writing it, that's cool as well.

>> RE "testing a commercial product", have you never heard of public
betas? Many many many commercial products have public betas, and some
even ask that
>> you pay to participate (the M$ office betas, for example).
> Who said thy can serve as a model.

(I assume "they" instead of "thy")

I did. They exist (and have a right to). Just because you don't like their
approach doesn't make it invalid; it just means you don't agree with them,
and that's only a problem for people with that opinion.


>> Absolutely nothing wrong with this, so please chill...
> Just because it's legal, it doesn't mean it's moral or fair. Don't get
me wrong, I'm talking
> about M$ :). I really dislike this kind of 'tactics' also when others
try to copy them :).

I did *not* say Prashant was copying these "tactics". I don't feel these
*are "tactics". It's a business model that worked for them.

If you don't want to pay for it, then don't. Noone said you have to.

What if I said "it's immoral to *expect* all software to be free"? Does
that make it immoral? Of course not. Claiming "it's immoral to charge for
software" is just as nonsensical.

Later,
-- Scott