PDA

View Full Version : New Pricing structure


ABC123

davidv43
03-28-2008, 02:39 PM
COngratulations, guys! I think the new pricing structure offers tremendous flexibilty and a very good price point for PLatinum. I will be ordering my copy this weekend.

Thanks again to Alpha for hearing us and addressing our concerns. You must've learned that from MS ;)


Dave Volgas, MD

Tom Mills
03-28-2008, 02:54 PM
Certainly didn't address my concerns. Each application you develop for someone that uses Active Link tables will require it's own run engine.

Bill Griffin
03-28-2008, 03:03 PM
Make that at least 2 happy people. Unfortunatly it is always hard to please everyone.

NoeticCC
03-28-2008, 03:04 PM
That is a huge improvement, and the per site "custom" packages should keep everyone who dislikes the idea of needing per seat licenses when only a few are used at a time happy, too. I love that you can now add RTs up, this is a logical step and something that hopefully takes some confusion out of the licensing situation!

While I have my developer copy, we are still needing at least one more so I will put forward the recommendation to get a smaller RT bundle for initial trials alongside his copy, as we may well be better off with a per site license once we have a clearer idea what our needs are user count-wise.

Of course some will still not be happy, heck of course I'd prefer free runtimes or reusable ones but I do accept that the added power of active link tables (which in most cases can be limited to SOME users who need this, someone who creates their own reports and doesn't actually do data entry won't need them!) warranting a higher price, and the nature of Client Server apps (a full client server app, where only the SQL database is on the server and everything else is handled on the client) makes old style runtimes impossible to limit in user counts.

It's funny all the "hype" about client server apps really - I mean yes this is very handy for us for some things, but we've been trying to move away from a full client server system for some time, since unless you run something via an application server a lot of things that require automation are a hassle to set up!

Richard Rabins
03-28-2008, 03:11 PM
Certainly didn't address my concerns. Each application you develop for someone that uses Active Link tables will require it's own run engine.

Actually Tom - the new document https://www.alphasoftware.com/shop/alphafive/platinum/run_engines.asp

Has the following in it which I believe addresses your case.

Run Engine OEM Licenses
The Run Engine OEM License is appropriate if you have developed a "packaged" (off-the-shelf) application that requires Active-Link tables.

jaryder
03-28-2008, 03:12 PM
Great job on the pricing. Get Version 9 for DBF files just like prior versions. If you want to step up to SQL then the customer is going to have to pay for it which seems fair. Buy the way my company will more that likely have projects for both DBF and SQL platforms and I am agreeing with seat pricing for SQL.

You also addressed a situation with SQL deployment where your seats will be much larger that active users, just call sales and see what you can work out for that specific situation.

I am sure that you can not please everyone all the time.

Jeff

NoeticCC
03-28-2008, 03:15 PM
Also CONGRATS on writing an easy to understand, comprehensive document on RT licensing! This seems to be something that has long been overdue and it's great to see this realise in just one week after the initial pricing structure went up! :D

MikeC
03-28-2008, 03:20 PM
Richard,

Run Engine OEM Licenses
The Run Engine OEM License is appropriate if you have developed a "packaged" (off-the-shelf) application that requires Active-Link tables.

It sounds like the cost of this license is determined on a per application basis...but for those who may develope such applications there is a need to know (at least a ballpark figure) what the cost will be in advance....maybe with an example or so.

BTW--a MUCH more useful Runtime scenario and also not ambiguous in the explanation.

Tbaker
03-28-2008, 03:20 PM
Alpha has just regained the "trust" of the developer base. Richard, all those hours on the weekend will pay off with even greater expansion of V9.

Also, the explanation of the runtimes versus run engines is plain and simple to understand.

My congratulations to Richard, Selwyn and the Alpha Team for working on this problem and bringing it all home.

Tom Baker

Tom Mills
03-28-2008, 03:24 PM
I can actually use Platinum for my organization. What has been eliminated for me and (developers that wanted to target small jobs) is the possibility of producing fairly inexpensive apps for other people that don't use dbfs.

And the world is moving away from dbf's in droves.

Tim Sutherland
03-28-2008, 03:31 PM
I assume that Non Active Link Runtime installs will not require activation by the end user then?

Richard Rabins
03-28-2008, 03:32 PM
Richard,


It sounds like the cost of this license is determined on a per application basis...but for those who may develope such applications there is a need to know (at least a ballpark figure) what the cost will be in advance....maybe with an example or so.

BTW--a MUCH more useful Runtime scenario and also not ambiguous in the explanation.

Thanks Mike -

Re your question and Tom's

If you planning on building a "packaged" application that does use Active Links - just contact our sales folks at sales@alphasoftware.com for the costs on this (in advance if you like) - so you can plan accordingly. As I think we have demonstrated, we want our developers to succeed because it is in our mutual interests.

You will find that costs involved do not inhibit a small developer from building "packaged" applications that use Active-Link tables.

Richard Rabins
03-28-2008, 03:33 PM
I assume that Non Active Link Runtime installs will not require activation by the end user then?

That is correct Tim.

Tim Sutherland
03-28-2008, 03:34 PM
Thanks - great job...

Ordering my bundle now...

Tim

Tom Mills
03-28-2008, 03:41 PM
The problem isn't with packaged applications. It's just that low-cost custom applications against free databases like Access and MYSQL can't be done with Alpha now.

Low cost custom apps used to be Alpha's wheelhouse. Now they will have to continue to be done in dbf's and dbf's are dying out. That's why it was so important for Platinum to come out.

I understand. I pled my case and lost.

reynolditpi
03-28-2008, 03:42 PM
Yippie!!! Christmas has come early for Tony:)
I have purchased and am downloading now!

Thanks Alpha Team.
T

jaryder
03-28-2008, 03:42 PM
You can distribute Alpha with DBF files using a simple install procedure that most customers could follow. When you start talking about SQL you are looking at a windows tech to setup windows server and MS SQL or a Linux Guru to setup a Linux server and Mysql. Neither one of these will be cheap so paying for per seat is just another cost when using SQL.

If developers are looking at developing small 3 to 10 user applications why would you use SQL? In most cases the setup and support costs would be higher for a application running SQL compared to DBF.

Just my 2 cents

Jeff

tcausey
03-28-2008, 03:50 PM
Richard,

What can I say? If someone is willing to listen to his or her customers at this level, make significant changes, and do it all within a week how could I not upgrade? I couldn't answer this with anything but - upgrade now.

I am therefore upgrading and downloading Alpha Five Version 9 Platinum Edition + Alpha Five 5 User Runtime License as I type. And, should I wish to either go in the Active Link Table or WAS direction in the future, Alpha Five will be my first choice as those options are still available.

Thank You!

Tom

NoeticCC
03-28-2008, 04:00 PM
You can distribute Alpha with DBF files using a simple install procedure that most customers could follow. When you start talking about SQL you are looking at a windows tech to setup windows server and MS SQL or a Linux Guru to setup a Linux server and Mysql. Neither one of these will be cheap so paying for per seat is just another cost when using SQL.
MySQL runs fine on Windows & is free, at least for now (since Sun bought it who knows?), and is fairly easy to set up as far as I remember... But yes, the setup effort is greater for SQL databases and anyone wanting to knock together quick, easy to set up apps at a low price should think twice about anything that requires setting up a database server on a network, as this always heightens the likelihood of needing further support rather than being a quick one-off job.

Where active link tables really shine is plugging into EXISTING setups to replace multiple systems used in the same company... Although MySQL, as well as free editions of databases like Oracle XE, can be useful, but in many cases updates can be coded in XBasic for small apps, and SQL updates in Xbasic are included in the DBF only RTs :)


If developers are looking at developing small 3 to 10 user applications why would you use SQL? In most cases the setup and support costs would be higher for a application running SQL compared to DBF.
Completely agree there!

Tom Mills
03-28-2008, 04:10 PM
Let me give you 2 reasons why you might want to use a free version of MYSQL rather than dbfs. Your database contains information that not everyone that has access to the network needs to see.

You can encrypt the tables in A5 but then you can't use some other tool like Excel or Access on it. But with MYSQL you can set up security to restrict access and still use 3rd party tools

Or, you have your App on a laptop. If data is in a MYSQL database you can get to the database anytime you have an internet connection. You don't have to set up a Web server. (you might be able to do same thing with VPN, but it would be more complicated.)

NoeticCC
03-28-2008, 04:37 PM
Let me give you 2 reasons why you might want to use a free version of MYSQL rather than dbfs. Your database contains information that not everyone that has access to the network needs to see.

You can encrypt the tables in A5 but then you can't use some other tool like Excel or Access on it. But with MYSQL you can set up security to restrict access and still use 3rd party tools

Or, you have your App on a laptop. If data is in a MYSQL database you can get to the database anytime you have an internet connection. You don't have to set up a Web server. (you might be able to do same thing with VPN, but it would be more complicated.)
Sure, I do understand that, however neither of those reasons are really applicable for the concept of "cheap, custom app" that as you say Alpha developers have been able to create up until now...

If you can't create an app without the functionality of Active Link tables, then it's unlikely that the app in question would be a straightforward job of the "cheap and cheerful" variety you were on about in your previous post, and a custom job of that variety would have required at the very least a separate RT bundle for the customer even in Version 8 so little really changes...

Plus, who says ALL users have to have Active Links? Only those users who need to update this information regularly, in complex forms, need the active link tables - for reporting against the same data, and for more simple activites that can be achieved with Xbasic code to update the SQL database you don't need the RT engine after all!

And as others have pointed out, the OEM engine now includes Active Link Tables for pre-packaged apps too....

christobal
03-28-2008, 04:46 PM
As a developer who main target frame is the 3 to 10 User market I can not let :

If developers are looking at developing small 3 to 10 user applications why would you use SQL? In most cases the setup and support costs would be higher for a application running SQL compared to DBF.

go by without commenting:

Most small businesses run some sort of data collection software. Windows type based upon a Microsoft Data Engine. Formally most applications which where MsOffice OLE enabled included MSDE. Since the introduction of Ms SQL 2005 Microsoft have discontinued the previous MSDE distributions. Developers can now develop Apps based upon the SQL Server Express Edition (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/express/comparison.mspx). Using the advanced features version there is no difference in management compared to the full Bloated SQL server.This allows minimal transitions for developing Apps which will eventually run on SQL dedicated servers.
The small business Apps are always lacking in functionallity and have little room for tweaking or enhancements. This is where AvPlatinum with active tables comes into it's own, allowing low cost application development based on already recorded data (Most small businesses will continue using outdated software due to the "high cost" of data transitions).
No need for "gurus", just common sense and utilizing the vast amount of readily available documentation.


The Big Boys at Richmond always turned a blind eye to the "Home Installations of Office" in all its early forms with regards to legitamacy of licenses. See where it's got them today, with regards to market shares in the corporate world. After the "Home" market comes the "small business" market with regards to sheer numbers. Keep it "cheap & easy" and you could make a fortune!

DaveM
03-28-2008, 06:03 PM
Chris is so right!


The Big Boys at Richmond always turned a blind eye to the "Home Installations of Office" in all its early forms with regards to legitamacy of licenses. See where it's got them today, with regards to market shares in the corporate world. After the "Home" market comes the "small business" market with regards to sheer numbers. Keep it "cheap & easy" and you could make a fortune!