5 ms·
They did buy their tools, they just don't want to buy their tools again, and again, and again, especially if they don't see the value (at the level of the organ
by microcolonel 9y ago
They did buy their tools, they just don't want to buy their tools again, and again, and again, especially if they don't see the value (at the level of the organization) to bother with a new version VS when the one they have is largely adequate and accommodated.
- pjmlp 9y agoSame applies to any other commercial compiler outside GNU/Linux and BSD worlds. They don't offer upgrades for free. Even on macOS eventually getting a new version implies an hardware upgrade to get hold of the newest version, thus indirectly paying for the compiler.
- microcolonel 9y agoI don't particularly care, as long as there is no incentive for a company to be building software with pre-C++11 compilers. I don't have any problem paying for tools if it's covered or part of the budget. The problem is that the unique combination of ubiquity, expensive upgrades, and relative lack of substantial innovation (which would offer an additional incentive for upgrades) means that MSVC shops can be simultaneously willing to buy licenses one year, and unwilling to buy upgrades another. I don't like your inquisitive tone and persistent uncharitable reading of my comments, and I will not engage any further without an outright apology. Good day.