Re: VS.NET is too EXPENSIVE. Developers switching rapidly from it.
From: JohnW (John.Wentworth_at_emersonprocess.com)
Date: 03/29/04
- Next message: ian: "Re: VS.NET is too EXPENSIVE. Developers switching rapidly from it."
- Previous message: Doug Carr: "Re: Cannot create merge module in VS 2002 or VS 2003"
- In reply to: Mike Cox: "VS.NET is too EXPENSIVE. Developers switching rapidly from it."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 29 Mar 2004 15:56:20 -0800
mikecoxlinux@yahoo.com (Mike Cox) wrote in message news:<3d6111f1.0403281012.7877707f@posting.google.com>...
> I'm a big fan of .NET and Visual Studio.NET. But at my company, we
> are going to switch to Linux because, quite frankly, VS.NET costs way
> too much in light of the huge competition from Linux. After all, in
> order for MS to be successful it needs a large group of developers.
>
> At my company, I'm an MS proponent, but I have LOST the battle in
> terms of justifiying the cost of using Visual Studio when there are
> free Linux alternatives. My company won't use Visual Studio.NET stuff
> for internal use because of its cost. Why should management spend
> thousands of dollars per year for MSDN and VS.NET per developer when
> it can just use Open Source software and documentation for free?
> Especially considering the fact that g++ is really standards
> compliant, and that there is ACE+TAO for CORBA development. There is
> troll tech for GUI app development which is completely cross-platform,
> and you can choose the license you want, GPL or commercial. There is
> even mono and eclipse for .NET development.
>
> Why does anyone need Microsoft Visual Studio.NET and MSDN then?
> Especially when it costs thousands per yer for one developer? I can't
> make the cost argument, and there aren't any Visual Studio.NET
> installations at my company, only VS 6.0, and any upgrades that happen
> will be to Linux.
>
> But all is not lost. If you follow my pricing guide lines, you will
> see people stay or convert to VS.NET. I am in the trenches so I know
> what is going on. Here are my price ideas for VS.NET:
>
> Visual Studio.NET Professional: 129 dollars
> Visual Studio.NET Enterprise : 199 dollars
> MSDN (The Enterprise version) : 125 dollars per year.
> VS C# Basic Edition: 29 dollars.
Microsoft and VS.NET is where the demand is and the future is as far
as I am concerned (I may be wrong). I would have no interest at all in
working for a company that doesn't help me keep my skills sharp with
what is in demand. How many job ads do you see in your area for g++
skills compared to vc++ and vb? Looking on Monsterboard.com for my
area and you see a big fat zero for jobs.
Since programming jobs are hard to come by now thanks to outsourcing,
I can't afford to waste my time with Linux or the like.
- Next message: ian: "Re: VS.NET is too EXPENSIVE. Developers switching rapidly from it."
- Previous message: Doug Carr: "Re: Cannot create merge module in VS 2002 or VS 2003"
- In reply to: Mike Cox: "VS.NET is too EXPENSIVE. Developers switching rapidly from it."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
