3 ms·
And prohibitively expensive. You can't position CL as an alternative to, say, Node when the only decent IDE for developing in it costs thousands of dollars.
by bitwize 4y ago
And prohibitively expensive. You can't position CL as an alternative to, say, Node when the only decent IDE for developing in it costs thousands of dollars.
- pjmlp 4y agoFirst there are cheaper license options, second, each one gets the tooling they are willing to pay for. Even street performers pay for their tools, even if it is from some second hand place or street bazar. Bazar doesn't mean one gets to take what is on the stands.
- bitwize 4y agoSure, you can get nerfed tools at lower license tiers. But if you can get full tooling with a UI that's more modern than Windows XP for some other language for less, why not pay less? This is why Lisp got its lunch ate in the 90s: Lisp vendors vastly overestimated the willingness of developers to pay dearly for Lisp when they can get 80% of Lisp for no or much more reasonable cost.
- pjmlp 4y agoThey underestimated the success of UNIX workstations, which weren't properly cheap, even though they got the UNIX source for peanuts. In any case the original comment wasn't about software prices, thus the goal has been moved for quite a bit.