Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Sets Tolls for .Net Developers

michael posted more than 12 years ago | from the firstborn-son-comes-later dept.

Microsoft 484

matsh writes: "Today Microsoft revealed the cost of signing up as a developer to .Net. Entry level is $1,000. Standard level $10,000. Custom support will cost even more."

cancel ×

484 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Rich Bastards (-1, Offtopic)

R-66Y (150658) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471356)

I can barely afford food at Subway. :(

Later,
Patrick

Re:Rich Bastards (0, Offtopic)

FreshFromTheCows (517865) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471363)

I'm soooo sorry, I don't think I could live without subway lol

Don't worry (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2471369)

Vodka still tastes good, girls are cool and you're free to run Linux!

Re:Rich Bastards (0, Offtopic)

thilmony (248711) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471433)

what do you usually order? I like the subway club.

Smaller developers (4, Insightful)

izwiz (444693) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471358)

Interesting. What they are doing then is creating a bar to smaller (perhaps hobbyist) developers.

That just means that less cool stuff will be produced then I suppose.

Re:Smaller developers (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2471378)


That just means that less cool stuff will be produced then I suppose.

Or... it means that more developers will switch to a development environment that they can afford.

Re:Smaller developers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2471409)

my favorite part of that thig was where he said the numbers bar cover thier cost, 1000$ per year entrylevel+250$ for every single app you create, this may be one of the first times one of microsoft's stratagies to stop developers that can't buy the stuff actually backfires and they do lose money on(though when he said the barly covering the costs thing, he didn't meen it)

Thin Edge (1)

heretic108 (454817) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471483)

Of itself, it looks innocuous.
One can argue that any serious programmer will find a way to come up with $1k. It's not that much, considering that any decent musical instrument costs at least $1k, and impoverished musicians find a way to come up with that sort of cash all the time.
Forgive my paranoid leaning, but I can't rule out that this price may increase exponentially if/when .NET becomes more widespread. Don't forget that there are many well-funded interests whose financial welfare depends on silencing (or at least controlling) the independent creator.

So don't be surprised to see the $1000 entry level's facilities being eroded to nothing, and real access costing upwards of $50k+

Why Shouldn't they? (2, Insightful)

DavidpFitz (136265) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471359)

Sounds like a fair game to me...

They obviously think .NET is strong enough to warrant this -- and if you think it's rubbish, then they're only shooting themself in the foot!

Seriously though -- in a way it's better than giving it away with copies of Visual Studio .NET because then every second web site out there would be Passport authenticated etc... Hell, raise the price to $500,000!!!!!

They ARE giving away copies of Visual Studio .NET (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2471488)

At least they gave me one copy of their fully-functional beta. I didn't even bother installing it since I don't develop on windows anymore. I couldn't care less about that .NET bullshit.

whatszatt .NET (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2471504)

.NET, ????

uhh, I think we made a security hole in your
NET , its umm really insecure and ahhh well we aren't going to fix it and ahhh, well you can't fix it either. So relax and enjoy it.

"OBEY!!!!!!!!! ME!!!"
invader bill gates

Australian Pricing? (1)

laptop006 (37721) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471360)

Anyone know international pricing?
I have several friends who will be required to pay for it, and knowing big companies they will charge more than twice the US cost.

More on the broad front (4, Insightful)

pointym5 (128908) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471362)

... in the war to drive out small-scale developers in favor of well-controlled large corporate entities. People paying that much money for the privilege of developing software are very likely to be quite aggressive in convincing themselves that they're happy. And note that much of the fees here will come from big fat IT budgets for internal application development. CIOs just want an empire like anybody else, and this sort of thing really fuels the fires.

Re:More on the broad front (1)

FreshFromTheCows (517865) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471375)

I don't think I would say that within the last year, That there are a ton of companies anymore that have fat budgets..

Re:More on the broad front (3, Interesting)

bricriu (184334) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471443)

Moreover, I think this is an incentive to drive out freeware and open-source developers. Who's going to spend $250/$1500 on something that's not going to make them a penny in return? The big benefit to this for MS is that fw/o-s often provides functionality that they would rather not let you have, or that they would rather charge you for (my fav. current example is Virtual Network Computing 3.3.3r7 [cnet.com] , which -- for free -- does everything that PCAnywhere does).

Yah know what though? It's going to KILL them in the web market. They think I'm going to include the web-based version of .Net calendar on my little site? Think again. JSP is still free, and ColdFusion ain't so much. I don't care how many dorks still use FrontPage, they're going to drop it like a hot potato when they realize they have to cough up for using widget X.

I thought Microsoft had learned this lesson before (4, Offtopic)

joshv (13017) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471365)

One of the reason that so many people are now using Windows 9x/ME/2000 is that Microsoft bascially gave away their SDK back in the days of Win 3.x, while IBM was looking to their OS/2 SDK as part of their revenue model, and charging accordingly.

I would have thought Microsoft learned a valuable lesson back then.

-josh

Re:I thought Microsoft had learned this lesson bef (4, Insightful)

swb (14022) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471403)

They did. The lesson was to give it away until the competitors selling theirs went away. When they go away, charge as much as you like.

Re:I thought Microsoft had learned this lesson bef (1)

a_n_d_e_r_s (136412) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471422)

Well Mucrosoft succeded to drive out IBM by giving away the SDK when IBM required money for it.

Now Linux are on the verge of driving out Mucrosoft using the same tactic.

Those that do not learn from history...

Linux (0)

Maxthemax2000 (318606) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471439)

(Score:-1 OffTopic)

That wont work on linux

Re:I thought Microsoft had learned this lesson bef (5, Informative)

NeoMage (29426) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471440)

Dear o dear, this news item is really going to confuse all you people who like to speak before you have done your homework.

For starters, this is the ".NET My Services" service, it is NOT the .NET platform itself, nor is it an SDK. People are free to write .NET applications for NOTHING and all the SDK is online at msdn.microsoft.com (fuck the link, you can cut and paste).

This is no different from the city library developing a .NET service for reserving books or something and charging you to use it.

Re:I thought Microsoft had learned this lesson bef (2, Insightful)

fulgan (116418) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471518)

This is actually a much more complex problem: ".net" is a buzzword use for everything and it's opposit on today's MS products: from "application framework" to productr denomination to general startegie to actual technology to services.

It's actually becomming a real problem in the developpement because so many people are confused by this that they think that only "VS.net" can create web service applications and that only ".net server" can be used as a server plateform.

This Has Nothing To Do With The SDK (5, Informative)

Carnage4Life (106069) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471468)

One of the reason that so many people are now using Windows 9x/ME/2000 is that Microsoft bascially gave away their SDK back in the days of Win 3.x, while IBM was looking to their OS/2 SDK as part of their revenue model, and charging accordingly.

The article is about pricing for accessing .NET My Services [microsoft.com] which used to be called Hailstorm not the .NET Framework SDK [microsoft.com] .

Re:I thought Microsoft had learned this lesson bef (1)

Dunkirk (238653) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471473)

If there were ever a more perfect example of how Microsoft's monopoly is hurting the market (and individuals), I don't know what it would be. This perfectly shows that because of their presence, they feel that they can do whatever they want.

Just look at CE. When I was deciding between a Palm and a CE machine, I was extremely tempted to go with the Microsoft-based products because they were giving away their easy-to-use development tools. I didn't. I bought the Palm, but I never spent the $300 on CodeWarrior, nor did I spend the many hours it would have taken to figure out how to make a GUI using the open-source tools.

As I get on in years, it's increasingly interesting to me how much we can learn from history. We've seen this before. Many times. Once Microsoft gets a lock on a market, they make that market a revenue generator. After taking a bath on IE for years - don't think that didn't take millions to get coded - we're paying for it with higher costs for XP and strong-arm tactics to force companies to upgrade every seat they own (my company allowed themselves to be used).

Now, they've taken a long enough bath on IIS (which was also offered for free, remember), and they're going to get they're money back on it. The only hope in this case is that they don't have a lock on this market. [computerworld.com]

Priced to entice? (1)

jason99si (131298) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471366)

I have to wonder if MS is pricing to lure developers to utilize their new facility. And if that is the case... why is entry level $250 a pop?

Do they think this is a bargain? And who is to say where the prices are going to go once they do manage to hook some suckers?

And Sun ? (2, Interesting)

rainer_d (115765) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471367)

Can sombody post a comparison ?
Java Developer Essentials is about 50 USD per year, IIRC.
But what else do you get for 1000 USD ? Or 10000 ?

Re: comparison w/ developer connections (5, Informative)

bLanark (123342) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471383)

This isn't for the SDK/tools, which you can get via the MSDN, if not for free online.

This is to be hosted/linked/use the core .net services such as passport. If you're developing an in-house app that doesn't touch the microsoft .net website (damn, the terminology is all wrong) then you don't need to pay your 10K USD.

Re: comparison w/ developer connections (1)

CodeMonky (10675) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471419)

Mod this up and up and up please.

Re:And Sun ? (1)

Hagabard (461385) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471495)

They're stating how much it costs to interface with their .NET services (Calendar, E-mail, To-do). This is a strategy to stifle virus/worm development by out-pricing the virus-writers. If SirCam (a large app?) was written to utilize mailboxes for forwarding through Microsoft's .NETit would cost the developer $10k per year. The likelyhood of this fellow paying those costs would be slim so the worm will easily be prevented from propogating.

Very smart, Mr. Ballmer, very smart...

Here comes the Sun (1)

AppyPappy (64817) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471368)

Here comes the Sun
Doo doo doo doo
Here Comes the Sun
And I say
It's alright.

I remember when IBM had this same attitude. I wonder whatever happened to them.

Re:Here comes the Sun (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2471391)

Sun?

They have the most outrageous pricing of their development tools! Have you ever taken a look how much a mere Forte C (not C++) compiler costs?

IIRC, their least expensive license (single per CPU) for Sparc is about $5000. Yeah, you can go for gcc but it sucks goat penis on non-ix86 platforms.

Black hole sun
Won't you come
And wash away the rain
Black hole sun
Won't you come
Won't you come

Re:Here comes the Sun (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2471501)

Have you ever taken a look at compiler costs? [sun.com] Forte C/C++ is $3495. That per RTU not per CPU. You can buy a 1, 10, or 25 pack at lower costs. I'll grant thats a lot of money, but not near what you indicated and it's only a one time investment.


I'll definately agree gcc sucks goat-penis on non-i86 machines, but will add that it sucks goat penis on i86 too.

Re:Here comes the Sun (2, Insightful)

Scooter (8281) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471487)

Here comes the Sun
Doo doo doo doo
Here Comes the Sun
And I say......
It's the most primitive load of junk I've seen in a long time for £80,000.

We bought a Sun E450 (against my wishes - the decision was taken before I got there so it was too late for serious debate). It had 4 SparcII 500Mhz cpus (this is about a year ago), 280Gb disk and 2Gb ram. It cost 80 thousand UKP. It came with:-

Solaris 8
No compiler.
No development tools such as make, M4, autoconf..
No decent desktop (do they really think anyone can be bothered with that joke desktop they supply, with no drag n drop, no file associations etc etc)

The hardware was out of the Arc - no RAID, no mirroring.

At the time I got a quote from Dell for an equivalent power machine - it came in at about £12,000 - with quad channel RAID controller, and 4 PIII Xeon 733Mhz cpus.

Sun charged us over 4000 a peice for the 18Gb Western Dig disks alone - each! When I quizzed them on this - they replied that they get the "best ones". My arse! My room full of Dell servers has WD disks and not one of them has failed - ever (2 years old now). But then even if one did - the servers are all RAID 5 so it won't bring the system down!

Same deal with the RAM - same stuff you can by on the open market - 10 times the price.

When you buy kit from Dell or Compaq (and probably everyone else too) the racks come with nice rack specific monitors, a proper rack keyboard that has a trackball, and fold away neatly. Except if you by a Sun server for 10 times the price - the damm keyboard was too wide to even fit through the rack door - no special monitor, and none of the doors shut properly.

"What a shoddy pile of old rubbish" was my first and lasting impression of "what Sun can give you for £80,000"

We got shot of it last month. Replaced by one Dell 6450 with RedHat Enterprise.

Sorry - this is completely off-topic - but I felt the need :)

Re:Here comes the Sun (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2471491)

great little diddy george. perhaps my favorite from the mop tops (although they were far past that stage when that was written).

yo, sign me up! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2471371)

newsflash:

good software costs money, which is obviously something most of the readers here know nothing about.

Re:yo, sign me up! (1)

anuj (78508) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471404)

sure, good software costs money, but at some point it isn't about:
10 developers @ $100 a piece = $1,000.00
turning into
10 developers @ $1,000 a piece = $10,000.00

it's more like:
10 developers @ $100 a piece = $1,000.00
turning into
1 [desperate|gullible] 'developer' @ $1,000 a piece = $1,000.00

obviously the blind and complacent thing to do would be to assume that every single current developer in your camp is either desperate or gullible (or both) and will stick with your absurd pricing policies for bet..uhh..bad or worse.

it's not like i can get visual studio.net "personal edition" for free, is it? even for personal use? well, head over to java.sun.com and download your free copy of j2se now to use for your amazing pleasure.

~A

yes, a bit of a ramble, but i'm trying to make a point here.

Pay fees to use .Net services? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2471372)

They want us to pay at least $250 per .Net service used in an application? Why bother? Nimda installs for free.

i have become comfortably numb (2, Interesting)

anuj (78508) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471386)

my eyes just glaze over when i see microsoft's revenue and restriction plans.

it's something i've come to expect and pass over. pretty soon the whole world should be getting numb to microsoft, and when people get numb to something, that something starts losing any appeal it might ever have had.

can you say ibm?

the article from a couple days ago about microsoft going the ibm way (existing but not cutting edge) is being fulfilled with every developer's rolling eyes.

~A

So does this.... (1)

FreshFromTheCows (517865) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471388)

Mean that there won't be any OSS projects coming to the platform anytime soon? ;)

To hell with the little guys (1)

Wiseazz (267052) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471389)

That's great for the hundred or so companies that can afford it... what happens to the 250,000 that can't?

Oh, that's right, they've got that whole monopoly thing going on and the 250,000 HAVE to pay, or else hire a whole new IT staff of open source developers. Silly me.

They may be telling the truth (3, Funny)

OeLeWaPpErKe (412765) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471390)

Developing centralized authentications system - 5 mil

Building and connecting the required datacenters - 250 mil

Preventing Hackers from gaining access - unknown (but don't worry, they didn't pay this one)

Having it cracked less than a day after it's release, which will cost million after million to your customers - PRICLESS

Odd business model... (2, Flamebait)

motherhead (344331) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471393)


Incentive \In*cen"tive\, a. [L. incentivus, from incinere to strike up or set the tune; pref. in- + canere to sing. See Enchant, Chant.]

1. Inciting; encouraging or moving; rousing to action;
stimulative.

It would appear that Microsoft is not seeing the numbers they would like in Office XP sales. They have the audacity to host a media extravaganza including Madonna in New York to hoopla WinXP, despite recent events (they want to "show the world that America is still doing business"... that costs money... they are launching Xbox next month. That will cost money. the economy is bad, and people are keeping both hands on their wallets...

I may be wrong here... but it looks to me like i am seeing a sick company...

Desperation \Des`per*a"tion\, n. [L. desperatio: cf. OF.desperation.]
1. The act of despairing or becoming desperate; a giving up
of hope.

2. A state of despair, or utter hopeless; abandonment of
hope; extreme recklessness; reckless fury.

Re:Odd business model... (1)

NeoMage (29426) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471448)

You are wrong, and I'm glad you had the wisdom to know it.

Microsoft has billions in cash, who the fuck says they can't spend a little on launching products? What is your point anyway, just because things are tight in the US doesn't mean Microsoft should save it's pennies. Microsoft is a global business, and not every country is holding on to their wallet....

Re:Odd business model... (1)

sgt101 (120604) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471493)

Moron.


Microsoft has approximately $30 billon (and growing) in the bank, in cash.


To give some perspective: MS could buy a major telco, from cash.


Now, that would be trouble!

This is .NET My Services, not all of .NET (5, Informative)

gburgyan (28359) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471394)

This is not MS trying to inflict a toll on development -- this is MS trying to make money by selling a service. The .NET My Services is a service that interfaces with MSN Messanger to allow instant communication with your users and also authentication. Seriously people, every time MS charges for something it becomes news on slash...

The last company [cardinalcommerce.com] I was working for was going to authenticate financial transactions. Let me tell you that they were not going to do it for free. How is this any different? Or maybe the phone company charging for setting up your phone lines and billing your company monthly?

MS is charging for a service and you can choose to use it or not.

Perhaps the open source community can get together and create a distributed authentication system to compete with it.

Re:This is .NET My Services, not all of .NET (0, Troll)

Alrocket (191107) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471434)

Yeah, and we all know how good their services are!

What a joke...

Al.

Re:This is .NET My Services, not all of .NET (2)

CodeMonky (10675) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471441)

The libertyproject alliance is attempting to do just that. Sun Cisco IBM (basically every big tech firm except microsoft)

projectliberty.org

Re:This is .NET My Services, not all of .NET (3, Funny)

TheMMaster (527904) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471490)

There seems to be a significant difference betweer:
projectliberty.org [projectliberty.org] and
libertyproject.org [libertyproject.org]
this is one type I really didn't want to make with my boss watching...

Re:This is .NET My Services, not all of .NET (1)

CodeMonky (10675) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471516)

yeah i know. pop ups forever.

Re:This is .NET My Services, not all of .NET (2)

TheMMaster (527904) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471466)

In fact, they are creating something: .GNU [dotgnu.org] (or dotGNU ;-)
It's a decentralized system but with the same functionality as .NET/hailstorm/myservices/otherBS
check it out,

Online banking?? (2, Insightful)

nullset (39850) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471395)

The story mentioned online banking two or three times. I will NEVER use the same password for bank accounts that i would use for hotmail, much less the same authentication service.

Converging things like that is bad, mkay?

--buddy

Re:Online banking?? (0)

Flakeloaf (321975) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471517)

Being Canadian, I don't associate the word "passport" with any kind of security, unless of course I happen to be a terrorist.

That's not the half of it... (2, Insightful)

Zocalo (252965) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471396)

There are on-going charges on top of that too, of up to $1000 per application developed. I expect there is a $POA license for unlimited applications as well that the big service companies will go for. Microsoft really has a thing going for generating income through licensing at the moment doesn't it?

I suppose that's one way of dealing with the industry downturn in the hope of keeping your shareholders happy. It'll be interesting to see how well it fares in real life of course...

GPL: Free to download, free to upgrade, free to use next year, but you may need to pay for support.
MS: Pay to have delivered, pay to upgrade, pay to use next year, and you will have to pay for support.

Well, my cash-strapped industry-downturn budget's made up it's mind...

Don't compare (2, Interesting)

saqmaster (522261) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471397)

I think these prices are fair for what you're getting.. You have to actually look at what it is you're getting, rather than instantly comparing it to other things, like open source.

Personally, I believe that if something is good enough, it is worth paying for. Look at Hotmail, the largest free online email service - it's a pretty good deal, it's never down really and you get a lot of features.. Now if you wanted to implement this kind of service into a more corporate environment, surely you'd expect to pay for it?

The extra charges for customized solutions and support - what's the problem with that? Anyone in the market for purchasing bespoke solutions would budget for obtaining a customized product and excellent support services - I know that there are hundreds, probably thousands of companies out there making bespoke solutions that charge an absolute fortune for it, and then totally extortionate the client when it comes to post-sale support..

I think Microsoft are getting their shit together with this and do have a good focus on the future. With the failings of the dotcom model, someone needs to start using the web for just more than a bunch of websites offering resources and to put this emmence network to some practical use.. .NET/Hailstorm/MyServices is a new business idea which is benefiting from the Internet and will offer companies a good service..

Yeah, Sun may try and compete. They may try and compete against Passport. True, Passport isn't widely used on 3rd party websites - but with the integration with .NET - this intergration count will surely go up.

And at the end of the day, you're not being forced into using it. You can still go off and use whatever technologies and platform you wish. You may opt to not pay for such services, but if I went to a garage to get my car serviced and was told it was free, i'd be rather dubious about the quality...

Re:Don't compare (1)

rootofevil (188401) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471425)

MS didnt create hotmail thou. they bought it. so its not really their good, more like their money, that has that happening. all they actually did is add security holes/and passport.

Re:Don't compare (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2471436)

Hi Bill. Good luck.

Re:Don't compare (4, Insightful)

rknop (240417) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471454)

With the failings of the dotcom model, someone needs to start using the web for just more than a bunch of websites offering resources and to put this emmence network to some practical use.

Where does this assumption come from that if big companies aren't making money off of it, the net is not being of practical use? I just don't get it. Yes, I can see why companies would want to find a way to make the web useful for business. What I don't get is why all of us as a whole world population should think that this is necessary for the web to be useful. I send lots of E-mail; I find scientific preprints online; I can easily post information that people across the world can see; I download huge quantities of free software to run personal and professonal workstations; I order some books and computer hardware online. All of these things are of tremedous use to me, but by and large only the infrastructure providers are profiting off of it. Why should we think that the web isn't of any use right now just because, as one self-styled luminary noted, it isn't obeying some basic rules of business?

Mind you, if companies do find ways to make money off if it, I don't begrudge that... IF (1) I'm not forced into using it (and with M$ behind passport, I bet it will get very difficult for me to do the sort of online commerce I've done in the pass without giving into it, which will piss me off), and if (2) the great elements about the open web which is a "collection of websites" right now don't go away (and the entertainment industry very much wants them to go away in order to turn the internet into the next TV so that they can more easily make money off of it). I'm not anti-business, but I really would like the internet and the web to keep some of the great features it has right now.

-Rob

Re:Don't compare (1)

khuber (5664) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471463)

Thank God Microsoft is going to put the Internet
to "practical use" so we can stop pissing our
time away out here.

-Kevin

Microsoft has the right to make as much money... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2471399)

...as they can.

And any of you that like money should be able to relate.

University Students (1)

akula1 (463239) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471402)

My university signed an "agreement" two years ago, wherein Microsoft got 14 million dollars and students get the right to *borrow* a CD to install Windows/Office/Visual Studio. (On a side note, the EULA clearly states that we have the right to install the software, but not the right to burn a CD of it for backup)


It would make sense for MS to try to hook developers while there still young and impressionable. (Drug dealers in my high school did the same thing. Just say no, kids.)


Anyone know if Universities like mine are going to get copies of the .NET studio?

Re:University Students (1)

agentkhaki (92172) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471453)

You're at U of M, correct? I'm not sure if we're getting .NET, but it would be nice.

Re:University Students (1)

akula1 (463239) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471476)

Actually I'm at Penn State. I know that Pitt has the same deal with MS also. Apparently they convinced a bunch of schools to buy in on the deal. Our Vice-Provost was shocked when someone told him that not everyone uses Windows and that it therefore didn't benefit all of the students.

Don't they have enough money already? (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471406)

Microsoft is probably one of the richest corporations in the entire software industry. Every few years, they produce another OS and sell hundreds of copies making thousands of dollars each time. They produce a word processor and spreadsheet that can only be used on their OS, and charge people for that. They charge a cut for the total cost of almost all PCs that are sold. Isn'rt it time they stopped charging people for everything, and realised that there are more important things than money in the world?

Re:Don't they have enough money already? (1)

NeoMage (29426) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471489)

There are a lot of things that Microsoft does for free that people simply take for granted.

Take technical support for instance. Developing one hotfix for a product, testing it, regression testing it and then deploying and tracking that hotfix, then giving free phone support for all hotfixes..... costs LOTS of money. How do you think they can afford to do all that?

Also, every SDK is online for free plus a shitload of other content.

I guess people only pay attention to the things they have to open their wallet for. Take some time to think about the massive operation behind the scenes before you worry about how much Windows XP costs you.

How many cs majors will just pirate it anyway? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2471407)

Alot. MS was built on piracy: DOS, Win 3.1, Win95, Visual [anything], etc. All heavily pirated. How many programmers traded compilers among each other in high school and college? Most, I'm sure. I know I got my pascal, Quickbasic, and several C++ compilers from friends. I also gave copies to other friends. I only bought 1 version of dos, never bought windows until 95. Why do people pirate? Look at the price of software. What'll happen if .NET stuff has workable copy protection? It'll flop. Free (pirated or otherwise) or very cheap is REQUIRED to start a new "standard". You need young geeks to work with it, grow with it, learn it, etc.

Re:How many cs majors will just pirate it anyway? (1)

gazbo (517111) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471467)

Soooooooo........Microsoft should allow piracy as part of their business model, to support further growth.
I like it - suggest it to Billy G, he may even give you a job.

Pirate WHAT? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2471484)

The article is referring to microsoft's .Net services, like Passport, etc.
You're talking about .Net the development environment. Sure you could pirate Visual Studio .Net, but that wouldn't get you on Microsoft's distributed .Net service, which you probably won't ever need to use unless you're developing a web site that is going to use Passport authentication.

Hell, you can already download the compilers and SDK's from Microsoft for free anyway.

For whom the bell tolls... Subscription (2, Interesting)

swordboy (472941) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471413)

Make note that this is a subscription, not just a flat, one-time fee. This looks like the beginning of Microsloth's relationship with everyone's wallet.

How does this affect Mono? (2, Troll)

rknop (240417) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471414)

I see things like this, and my first reaction is that it confirms my biases that Miguel de Icaza et al. have gone completely off their rocker by thinking that they can work with Microsoft and support .NET using Mono or anything else developed as true free or open source software.

How does this affect Mono anyway? Will somebody have to cough up in order to develop Mono? While, sure, Ximian could pay, what happens when Ximian does an Eazel? Nautilus is still with us; if Mono is open source, it would still be with us too, except then who has to pay? Or does M$ then sue the entire open source community for working on a .NET application without anybody paying the fees? Or do we really believe that somehow Mono is going to have unfettered access to the APIs it needs without having to pay?

Or would it only be the users of Mono who had to pay the fees?

The lesson I personally would take from this is "stay away." The free software community would do much better to come up with its own solution to the need (if there is one) that .NET is addressing, rather than trying to support the .NET platform. Honestly, if we don't want to hand over all final control of all computing and web standards to Microsoft, we need to be doing everything we can right now to (at best) make them irrelevant, or (at worst) keep just enough of a competing presence in there that open standards can't be summarily ignored.

-Rob

Mono has nothing to do with .NET My Services (2)

Carnage4Life (106069) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471519)

I see things like this, and my first reaction is that it confirms my biases that Miguel de Icaza et al. have gone completely off their rocker by thinking that they can work with Microsoft and support .NET using Mono or anything else developed as true free or open source software.

Mono has nothing to do with .NET My Services a.k.a. Hailstorm. Miguel said as much when I interviewed him for Slashdot [slashdot.org] and the same thing is on the Mono FAQ page [go-mono.com] .

Mono is a development platform, .NET My Services are web services provided by Microsoft. What exactly makes you thing there is any relationship at all?

Buying what !? (1)

sevensven (183607) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471416)

Quoting from news.com :
"Muglia said for entry-level, small-scale applications, Microsoft will charge developers $1,000 a year for access to .Net My Services and $250 per application they create.

For standard use, which Microsoft expects will involve the majority of users, Microsoft will charge $10,000 per year for using .Net My Services and $1,500 per application."


So, MS is betting that their infrastruture (data centers plus .net software) is bringing something that didn't existed before and that will generate enough money to "entry-level, small scale applications" that will allow them to pay the investment and still get something back ?

I don't think so, Bill, and I'll keep those $1000 for me, if you don't mind, because there are lots of stock alerts, calendars and messangers for free out there, with open source and backed by real people and not some strange hive minded corporation.

Lol, it good to see microsoft is thinking ahead! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2471417)

Well I will just go over to to the local bookstore and get myself some nice php and perl books, along thousands of my 18 year old friends looking for a programing platform on wich you can make a living in the future.

Ofcource microsoft (I feel the dollar sign would be really apropriate here but I might set of the lameness filters) will end up giving "vb.NET for kids" "c#.NET for teething kids" away to techical education organizations to turn them in to msce production facilities.

What does it cost now?? (1)

attobyte (20206) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471423)

In windows what does it cost to write a program? You have to buy a compiler.. $500? But you can write as many programs as you want.

Misleading (1)

diepan (258887) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471426)

I think the post is misleading, the fees relate to the use of "My Services" (formerly known as HailStorm) only and not to .Net deveopment in general as someone could deduce.

Quote from the site: "Microsoft on Tuesday announced the first details of what it will charge software developers to build applications linked to its .Net My Services Web services plan."

Well, how much does Linux development cost? (2, Flamebait)

Jagasian (129329) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471428)

How much does it cost to sign up as a Linux developer?

*snicker*

Re:Well, how much does Linux development cost? (1)

javajerk (524939) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471522)

Well, for one thing:

Your soul!

And if you are particularly unlucky, it might take away your social life as well...

(I already lost count of the number of kernels I had to install in the past month...)

Lars

Giving away brainshare is a bad idea (2, Troll)

Jeppe Salvesen (101622) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471429)

Microsoft will be losing brainshare like crazy. The colleges that still teach microsoft technologies will now get yet another good reason to toss out Microsoft technologies. Mine taught us assembler and some pretty interesting details about NT in OS class. That was about it.

And look where it got me. A great job programming a credit card fraud detection system using Linux, Mysql and Perl. A competitor didn't believe his own eyes when he saw the performance on our solution. He implemented using .NET.

Anyhow - just say no, kids. And if you mention the $1000 price tag, your manager will be more likely to say go ahead if you propose using open technologies. They are getting pretty fed up with Microsoft licensing.

That wasn't coherent. I hope some parts were slightly informative.

Re:Giving away brainshare is a bad idea (2, Insightful)

CausticPuppy (82139) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471505)

That wasn't coherent. I hope some parts were slightly informative.

Not really, because the article refers to MS's .Net services, not the development environment. You can write applications with visual studio .Net that don't use the services (primarily distributed authentication). You're getting the two confused. You don't even have to use VS .Net since you can download the CLR and compiler for free. Blame Microsoft for creating the blurry line between their own services and their development environment-- there really is a distinction though.

Oh, pay attention... (2, Informative)

aziraphale (96251) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471430)

This is about the cost of becoming a corporate partner for use of My Services (that's what they now call HailStorm, if you weren't paying attention).

The actual cost of developing for .NET? That'll be a big fat zero, over and above the cost of your Windows licence (although once the BSD port has happened, that'll wipe out that little overhead.

Download the .NET platform SDK, and you'll find you get the CLR, the framework libraries, the compilers, and all the command line tools you need to play with .NET.

And that'll cost you nothing. no-thing.

Yeah, VS.NET will cost you hard earned cash. So will a Windows server licence or two for hosting. But even MS isn't stupid enough to create a barrier for entry so high that nobody jumps over it at all.

Stripped down version? (2, Funny)

imrdkl (302224) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471431)

I wonder if they'll sell me just the exploitable bits? :{)

The giveaway (2)

BadDoggie (145310) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471450)

Giveaway as in "Reveal what's up" and not as in "Here ya go, buddy, have one on me":

"I think the numbers are quite reasonable. The applications are putting a load on us," Muglia said. "These numbers are barely covering (our costs)...We're not making money with these numbers. We want to make it as friction-free as possible to adopt this new platform."

Despite some opinions here, $250 is not a lot for a small developer to pay for a year's certification. Look at Sun's licensing scheme. I have no trouble believing MS aren't maknig a penny and may even be losing money on the scheme right now. What did IE development cost them and was it worth it to own the browser market? Lots, and yes. They're very good at this game.

Think about what's going on: MS want to make it easy for developers. They're offering low prices to get a lot of companies to accept and adopt quickly. Consider IE: "Warn if Site Certificate Invalid" and "Notify if certificate has been revoked" are standard options and default on.

Once MS can get to critical mass with .NET and their certiication, your mother-in-law is only going to use MS-certified apps. MS will control the content and the prices will then change to ensure a steady profit stream. This is fairly close to a give-away as it stands, and it meshes with the browser they give away already, and which they have set the way they want it.

Microsoft have added an "E" to their formula: Embrace, Extend, Entrench, Extinguish.

woof.

How am I ever going to beat what's-his-name's "Green Eggs and Hamlet" sig?!

Customers being charged, not just developers (1)

SomethingOrOther (521702) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471451)


Microsoft expects to earn most of its profits from .Net My Services through subscriptions charged to consumers
(snip)
.Net My Services defines a range of services available to consumers,from online calendar and contact-list access, to document storage and electronic-wallet services.

ROFLPMP!
Sounds like a brillient bussiness plan to me!
Lets try charging people for what they can already get for free. Micro$oft must have really lost the plot.

Although then again, I'm sure people are stupid enough to see this as the latest 'must have upgrade' and will become tied into using it, in typical microsoft style.

Why would I pay for .NET services? (2, Insightful)

jkujawa (56195) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471455)

Microsoft says customers who sign up for .Net My Services, expected to debut in full next year, can expect to eventually get one-step access to electronic documents, contact lists and calendars; instant alerts on stock changes, weather forecasts and flight delays; and automated transactions, such as online banking, ticket purchases and stock trades, from Microsoft and its partners.

I get all of these things for free from various places around the net. In a lot of cases, there are even places that will give me one stop shopping ... My Yahoo! comes to mind. Why does M$ think they can get me to pay for this?
Oh, yeah, I use a Mac and Linux. I couldn't pay for them if I wanted to.

Re:Why would I pay for .NET services? (1)

Evangelion (2145) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471515)


You don't get it. This isn't a stupid pager thing. This is for developers who want to integrate access to those sorts of things in thier apps - that's who is going to pay for it, not the user (directly).

Were Microsoft, we dont' have to! (1)

TheLoneCabbage (323135) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471456)

Anybody remember the old SNL skit about the phone company and a particularly rude operator.
"Were the phone company, we don't care"

Welcome to monopoly abuse. They figure that they have such inertia that they no longer have to be nice to developers. It's an interesting theory. What comes first the chicken or the egg = Do IT departments make decisions based on a suporvisory dictator ship, or do they consult their programers on what they would be most productive at.

.Net is going to be a facinating piece of development software to work with, but will that facination be enough to overcome the tendancy to use what is at hand.

As a third rought will Visual Studio .Net just get pirated like VS6 and spread that way as a defacto standard... go figure piracy could actually help MS. But given their recent draconian behavior I'd be on the lookout for coded lags intended to identify pirates by thier compiled code (MSWord 2000 already does it). In this case you could develop apps, but couldnt release them untill you payed a tax to MS.

And keep in mind, indvidual developer arguments are not really effective. MS doesn't care about individuals, only corporations. And other posters haven nailed it on the head:MS wants easy to control corps that can be predicted and culled.

BTW: Are the advantages of .Net that great? To justify such a steep migration path? Will this herald much larger tarifs in the future?

Badly worded headline (2)

CodeMonky (10675) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471457)

MS isn't charging you to develop .NET apps (minus the cost of IDE which you don't need either if you are inclined), they are charging you to use their MyServices stuff (passport, etc) which I think is perfectly reasonable.

Read the EULA carefully (1)

heretic108 (454817) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471460)

...before you buy.
And not just the present EULA, but future copies.

It can't be ruled out that EULAs may have provisions forbidding deployment of code with open source licenses, or containing/facilitating content critical of Microsoft etc.

Sounds like its a bargain. (1)

sane? (179855) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471461)

Hmm, looks good.

$1000 a year to develop and use .NET, and in doing so help to protect and bolster Microsoft's position. Sounds like fair recompense.

Sounds like its very worthwhile.


Hang on, they want ME to pay THEM.....not the other way round?

Is that right?

Microsoft. Go for a long walk off a short pier.

How about changing the headline (1)

JohnStClair (24498) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471470)

Reading the article, it's clear this only applies to .NET My NET Services, and has nothing to do at all with .NET.

How much does MS charge people to put content on MSN? I don't know, and I don't really care. If I did want to put stuff there, I'm pretty sure they would charge me, based upon some sort of SLA. Why would it suprise anyone that the same would be true of apps running off MS Messenger?

Doh! I forgot -- we don't bother to check anything around here.

Johnh

Is that all??? (1)

vandan (151516) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471474)

I was wondering where all the good marijuana had gotten to. Billy has it!
After paying $50,000 in Win2k / Office XP fees, we will certainly be looking for ways OUT of this sort of thing, not INTO it.
We already have StarOffice 5.2 / 6-Beta on most desktops. But it's always good to get a little more motivation.
Maybe I should go back to trying to get Kylix to stay up for more than 5 minutes...

Not for .NET itself, but for .NET My Services (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2471477)


This is not for .NET alone, as in VB, etc, but for .NET My Services.

News Flash! (1)

kireK (254264) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471478)

Microsoft charges money to play in their playground!
DUHHHHHHHHH

Ximian's Mono (1)

mlefranc (85595) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471479)

What is the relevance of this for the Mono project from Ximian ?

Double Dipping and the Boston Tea party (1)

NZheretic (23872) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471494)

For Users
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-7617467.htm l
"""Microsoft expects to earn most of its profits from .Net My Services through subscriptions charged to consumers. At the same time, it will charge its business partners and developers a small fee to gain access to the .Net My Services user base. Muglia said fees for companies participating in the service will be "nominal."

Analysts have speculated that Microsoft will charge consumers a base fee of $25 to $50 per year, plus a usage-based fee depending on which services are used and for how long."""

In the late afternoon of December 16, 1773, men disguised as Indians boarded the tea ships and dumped the tea into Boston harbor.

Maybe it's time to revisit that particular "tradition" with a few new twists.

Can MS pull it off? (1)

marijnm (454978) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471496)

I'm wondering, it's a much used practice to either give away the client part and ask money for the 'server side' or SDK or the other way around. Now they charge for both. Why don't they give away free access for a limited time? That way, everybody could try it out and walk into the MS trap.

That's a bit like they did with windows as well. They didn't give it away, but they also didn't try very hard to stop all the copying for personal use, as long as the big companies bought licenses.

I think (and maybe it's wishfull thinking) MS underestimates the diversity on the Internet. The holes in their Internet related stuff won't help much either...

MarijnZZ
(hmmm, a javascript vi editor would be nice...)

Er, this is simple people. (0)

DeepFyre (469193) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471497)

One person has noticed this that I can see so far and hopefully I can reiterate:

This is only for access to the Passport system for the single sign on.

Hence the cost per application.

I think too many people are knee jerk reacting to this, making comments before using their heads.

My only criticism is that Microsoft say this will only just cover their costs, which I'm a little suspicious of, since bandwidth use would be minimal. I think that the costs would be recovered very quickly given the projections of the number of companies signed up for this. I'm guessing that even eBay have to pay a lot of money for the privilege of this, since I bet they have a custom contract as well.

Evidence of demand, benefits for customer (5, Interesting)

pubjames (468013) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471500)

What I don't understand about Microsoft's .NET strategy is

a) Where is the evidence of demand for it?
b) What are the benefits for the customer?

I regularly buy flights on the net, also books. I tend to use the same companies each time. They have my details, I just need to select the product I require and click the accept button. I know that my info. only resides with them, and I trust them not to spread it around.

Where does .NET fit into this?

I am imagining going to a web site, say Amazon. The site asks me "Can Amazon access your hobby list to make recommendations?" Er, sorry, no it can't. "Can Amazon access your calendar so we can find when your birthday is?". Er, nope. "Can Amazon access your address book so we can tell your friends about our great products?" Absolutely not. "Can Amazon access your job profile so we can suggest some business books?". No, and stop asking the dumb questions. The answer is no.

There are lots of, for instance, on-line calendar services available, which can be accessed from any web enabled device or WAP phone. Do people use them that much? What would Microsoft provide that I can't already get? And would it be worth paying for?

Please, someone tell me, I'm dying to know. What is the benefit to me, Joe Consumer, of .NET???

Costs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2471509)

Muglia said for entry-level, small-scale applications, Microsoft will charge developers $1,000 a year for access to .Net My Services and $250 per application they create.


.NET My Services = HailStorm. If you want to write HailStorm apps, it will cost you. If you want to write generic .NET apps, it will be free.

they sure think it's worth it... (1)

wiswaud (22478) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471510)

"For people who are doing serious business with this--companies using it for mission-critical needs and need a higher degree of quick support turnaround--we will have custom pricing," Muglia told CNET News.com.

Do i need to add anything before you start laughing, or is it just me? mission-critical? A .NET heart-lung machine perhaps? It'll cancel all further appointments if things go wrong.

So let me get this straight... (1)

Obsequious (28966) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471512)

Microsoft is basically saying, "We're going to make you use .NET to develop software. We're also going to make you pay for us to maintain the infrastructure so it doesn't cost us anything to make you use it."

This is insane, and it's classic monopoly pricing. Most companies follow general market principles, like supply and demand, and ubiquity. Sun could never get away with charging consumers for a service and ALSO charging app server vendors for the privilege; the vendors and app developers just wouldn't stand for it. MSFT can get away with it because they're MSFT.

Could someone please explain to me how this is not leveraging a monopoly on the desktop (which will, realistically, require consumers to use .NET) to get an unrelated market (app developers) to pay money? I'm trying to remain objective here, but...

Lets compare prices: (2)

MongooseCN (139203) | more than 12 years ago | (#2471514)

.NET "Entry-Level" subscription
Subscription: $1000 per year.
Cost per application: $250

.NET "Standard" subscription
Subscription: $10,000 per year.
Cost per application: $1500

Linux
Subscription: $0 per life
Cost per application: $0
I don't get it, is this for support on your product you are developing? What about a university or a person making a program on their free time? There's no way some high school kid is going to pay $1250 to hack around on some code while learning C.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>