Rev 2.02/New pricing (The novel)

[curry]

Geoff Canyon wrote:

>  >> re: final compiles: it shouldn't matter, at least as far as the
>  >> result.
>...
>  > It would matter, obviously, or I wouldn't have mentioned it. (Hint: we
>  > were talking Studio + Express.)
>...
>Both have the same build ability: Marty and Wendy
>can both build for Mac OS X and Windows, and their apps will be
>byte-identical. Marty's Windows app, built in Studio on OS X, will be
>the same as Wendy's Windows app, built in Studio on XP.

I'm trying to involve you in considering these points more 
thoroughly, rather than just giving you the short answer. 
Byte-identical standalones are only one aspect to consider in this 
situation.

In fact, bringing Mary and Wendy into the picture may be a good idea, 
because the difference I'm trying to get you to see involves the 
developers and their work environment in addition to the Rev IDE and 
the applications produced. Imagine Marty and Wendy at work on their 
applications. They edit, they build...then what? (You may have to 
consider a few different types of people and work too--to make it 
simple, let's just compare me to Marty and assume he's making 
shareware.)

Let's take a look at Marty in his small home office room....

So, Marty tweaks and gets the Windows copy working right on his 
Express version, then copies the stack back to his Mac.

Then, he gets his Windows app built from his Mac and (as Martin 
suggested--good example) he opens it on PC to change the file format. 
Even if it was a small enough file to ignore that, how is he going to 
package the file? It depends on what Marty is using, but he may very 
well compress and package his Windows versions with different 
software (Windows software) than his Mac versions. And there may be 
other similar needs. So he still needs to transfer the app back to 
his PC.

Now, is Marty on a network? Maybe, maybe not. Since he's using Studio 
rather than Enterprise, let's assume maybe he's still not set up 
quite that well with equipment, and isn't networked. So he may 
transfer by internet or removable media, and the stack itself may 
have fit on a floppy, but the app won't, so Marty may have to take 
some time switching internet connections (he's just a Studio user, 
remember, and may be cutting a few corners) or he may have to go get 
a zip drive or two if he doesn't have one.

Ah...now the file is on the internet! But wait--is it the final 
release, or a beta? Either way, Marty may find that users report a 
bug or two that must be fixed right away. And he may have some 
problems with files or servers. Any number of things may make Marty 
have to go back and repeat his compiling process--and here's where 
the concept of workflow really begins to kick in: you don't just 
consider one iteration of a process; you have to consider what 
happens when it repeats, too. It may be repeated on the same project 
as well as repeated on different projects.

In fact, that's precisely the reason why Marty had purchased an 
Express version too (a rather ungainly and expensive combination to 
keep up after the initial sale price ended) to add to what was 
supposed to be a rather complete solution in itself. Marty's Studio 
version cranked out byte-identical copies of Windows apps, but Marty 
was developing cross-platform, so he some changes and tweaks were 
often needed. He used platform-conditional code, as many other 
developers did, and that had to tested to see if there were no 
bugs--and often, even when there were no bugs, he saw places for 
improvements to be added when testing.

If that only happened once, it wouldn't have been so bad. If it was 
only a case of verifying and changes were only needed once or twice a 
year, it wouldn't have been bad at all! But in fact, changes were 
often needed, and sometimes there were problems that were hard to 
track down and had to be tested repeatedly--each time jotting down 
notes and going back to try a few changes to the code, and repeating 
the tedious process of getting it back to the PC and opening again to 
try it again.

Finally, Marty had realized that his time was slipping away. His 
friend Wendy had told him he was getting to be a nervous wreck. In 
desperation, he had added an Express version and started juggling the 
two.

So why didn't Marty just get a Enterprise version? Is that the 
solution to workflow? Perhaps, but Marty bought Studio as a complete 
cross-platform tool within his budget. Can we blame him for doing 
this when he was encouraged to do so? Unfortunately, Marty's budget 
is still roughly the same. He and Wendy get together and look at his 
books--she's better with accounts--and they agree that he just can't 
swing it this year. Maybe next year. In fact, Wendy warns him that 
his finances aren't going to withstand his Express addiction much 
longer. Marty's sunken eyes look tiredly from his Mac, to his PC, and 
back to the Mac again. Is Studio a complete product? He can't deny 
it; it's byte-identical. But the workflow...the workflow.... Head in 
his hands, we leave him for the moment.

Another friend--Lee Linux--is using two Express editions--one for 
Linux, one for Mac. Lee had taken a look at Studio and shook his 
head--a somewhat lazy person who didn't fancy a long editing-testing 
cycle--but although it was a good area he was breaking into, there 
was still enough of the old attitude that a segment of Linux home 
users had about registering their software (although that was 
changing) that Lee didn't want to risk the big investment of the 
Enterprise edition. (Even half-price would have been a little above 
his head, but unfortunately, Lee came to Revolution a little too late 
to take advantage of it.)

So Lee was making software with Express and said, "So it has a quit 
screen--so what? I have a good workflow, okay? You guys look tired! 
How about me?" But one day Wendy, who worked in a school, actually 
saw a couple of people trying Lee's software at the computer lab. She 
moved closer and overheard one saying that she was interested in 
buying it the first time she looked--until she saw the promo screen 
when she quit. That didn't give her a good feeling about the 
reliability  of the software. Her colleague agreed--he told her of a 
bad experience his friend had with some software like that.

Wendy told Marty about it on the phone. "Should I tell Lee?" she 
said. "I don't know," he said, "but I'll never give in. I'll never 
have that splash screen." He was getting that weird tone again that 
he had so much lately, so Wendy ended the call quickly. She was 
worried about Marty. Lee might have few customers, but at least his 
health was okay....

-- I hope that *illustrates* some of the points that have been made. :-) --

Curry