One thing that nobody seems to have pointed out is the current price is not $999. As Peter commented (and a number of people seem to have read in a snippy tone unfortunately) the price rises have been and continue to be well telegraphed with the opportunity to lock in the current price. Regardless of that though I do tend to agree that those with turnover of under $20000 or so (and not really likely to expand that) looking at > 5% of that going as an expense on development platform would struggle to justify it. In those cases they would either need to look at other platforms or determine if they can obtain equivalent revenue by changing their business model to use the GPL version. How LiveCode capture the $200 per year or so those users might have on offer without sacrificing revenue from those with higher turnover is something I'm sure is under consideration. Note that I'm not really including those that have a reasonable prospect of revenue growth because they can probably tap into public and private sources of startup support.
Cheers Monte Sent from my iPhone > On 3 May 2016, at 1:40 AM, RM <richmondmathew...@gmail.com> wrote: > > With the exception of the PDF reader (as you pointed out) for development > purposes there is no real difference between Livecode versions > (and I am aware that you are pushing for further differentiation, and I > understand your rationale), so paying $999 for a year for something whose > single difference fron the FREE version is the ability to protect ones' code > really does not seem justifiable. _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
