4 ms·

I'm not sure your comparison with Photoshop is great - Adobe aren't trying to get people to produce images specifically for sale in the "Adobe Photoshop Store",

by EwanToo 15y ago

I'm not sure your comparison with Photoshop is great - Adobe aren't trying to get people to produce images specifically for sale in the "Adobe Photoshop Store", where Adobe would get a 20% cut of the sale price. In this case, if an app developed by these tools and sold by Microsoft is a hit, Microsoft will be taking money from both sides. Microsoft are free to do what they want, but if developers choose to use alternative platforms, then Microsoft lose out on the real profit centre of marketplace sales.

dpark 15y ago
There are and will continue to be (I would assume) free tools for developing for Windows, including Windows 8. The Express tools are quite capable of doing the job. If you need the extra power afforded by the full version of Visual Studio, then pay for it, because you probably aren't really a hobbyist at that point.
- EwanToo 15y ago
  Some of the express tool limitations are quite surprising really, like the lake of source/revision control. You might only be a hobbyist, but source code control is still good practice. Either way, my point isn't really that the tools cost money, but that Microsoft will make more money from good quality apps being sold through their marketplace than they ever will do from sales of Visual studio to smaller developers. This is especially true given that Microsoft are willing to almost give away Visual Studio in small licence quantities if you sign up as a Microsoft business partner.
  - dpark 15y ago
    The lack of source control is not an unreasonable criticism. However, it's exclusion from Visual Studio Express does not stop a developer from using source control. > This is especially true given that Microsoft are willing to almost give away Visual Studio in small licence quantities if you sign up as a Microsoft business partner. I think you've hit on the issue. My guess is that Microsoft doesn't mind giving VS to you for free. What they mind is giving VS to most companies for free. And when you release the product as "free for personal use', it becomes a major pain to make sure companies actually pay for it. It's easier to have a normal price and make specific exceptions (DreamSpark, BizSpark, etc.).
- rbanffy 15y ago
  I find this idea that hobbyists don't need good tools to practice their hobbies interesting. It's like saying someone shouldn't have a good car because he/she doesn't drive a cab.

by EwanToo 15y ago

dpark 15y ago

There are and will continue to be (I would assume) free tools for developing for Windows, including Windows 8. The Express tools are quite capable of doing the job. If you need the extra power afforded by the full version of Visual Studio, then pay for it, because you probably aren't really a hobbyist at that point.

EwanToo 15y ago
Some of the express tool limitations are quite surprising really, like the lake of source/revision control. You might only be a hobbyist, but source code control is still good practice. Either way, my point isn't really that the tools cost money, but that Microsoft will make more money from good quality apps being sold through their marketplace than they ever will do from sales of Visual studio to smaller developers. This is especially true given that Microsoft are willing to almost give away Visual Studio in small licence quantities if you sign up as a Microsoft business partner.
- dpark 15y ago
  The lack of source control is not an unreasonable criticism. However, it's exclusion from Visual Studio Express does not stop a developer from using source control. > This is especially true given that Microsoft are willing to almost give away Visual Studio in small licence quantities if you sign up as a Microsoft business partner. I think you've hit on the issue. My guess is that Microsoft doesn't mind giving VS to you for free. What they mind is giving VS to most companies for free. And when you release the product as "free for personal use', it becomes a major pain to make sure companies actually pay for it. It's easier to have a normal price and make specific exceptions (DreamSpark, BizSpark, etc.).
rbanffy 15y ago
I find this idea that hobbyists don't need good tools to practice their hobbies interesting. It's like saying someone shouldn't have a good car because he/she doesn't drive a cab.