Borland's prices are too high?
S.B Chatterjee wrote: "Borland has announced their C#/.NET Builder tools along with the prices. $69 for a personal edition and $999 for a professional version. That's fourteen times as much! jeez... I don't see developers flocking for that one. I'll stick with my VS.NET (under MSDN Universal, of course)."
[rant]
Well, I don't know. This week, Microsoft admitted that the ASP.NET editor in VS.NET 2003 is seriously flawed and can't be fixed easily (thus: will not be fixed 'till the next VS.NET upgrade, probably in 2004). $999.- is a lot of money, but if you consider it might be a tool which offers more functionality (f.e. refactoring tools) than VS.NET does, it isn't a lot of money. If you consider that VS.NET Enterprise Architect is also very expensive but doesn't deliver all what it promises (ever tried to refresh an ORM model from visio? Tried to edit UML within Visio and tried to use the .NET types? Also wondered why you had to click a zillion tabs/windows before you could add an attribute? ), I don't think Borland is way off base with their prices: the prices reflect the quality you buy.
I'm looking forward to see what Borland will come up with. If the editor will have more features than the VS.NET editors (and in the ASP.NET area: it simply works without killing your code), it will be a top-seller. It's hard to judge their product just by looking at the pricetag, because if I take that analogy, I can honestly say: for $159,- Visual C# delivers what it costs.
[/rant]
PS: ever calculated what that MSDN universal subscription costed you? If this isn't your first year, you payed a lot of money for just VS.NET 2003 and Win2k3 server. Think about that.