Comments
12 comments
-
When it comes down to it I think it's probably about right. The previous price tag was small enough for a developer to out of pocket expense it, but $95 still small enough to justify the productivity increase to his/her employer depending upon how much time they spend writing SQL. -
My issue is that my client (who would be purchasing the tool) would not look at it as $57 per developer for three developers and $57 per DBA for two DBAs, they'd unfortunately look at it as $95 per developer for 40 developers (37 who only use Oracle), and $95 per DBA for 6 DBAs (4 who only look at Oracle).
They manage to get the concept of an enterprise agreement with Microsoft, but not appropriate price breaks for dev tools - for some bizarre reason they insist on costing dev tools on a per person basis. -
I think most developers in the corporate world would have a tough time convincing corporate to puchase a tool that saves them a bit of typing.
It does save some time and is really nice for the developer but for $95 per seat I think it is a bit steep. It needs to be priced at a level that a developer thinks oh hell I will just buy it myself because I love it. It also depends on where your going to take it you mentioned that you were going to be adding features so it maybe something that you can't live without.
Just my two cents -
I have to disagree with this because look at Coderush priced at $250 per seat. This is pretty popular software. Granted the huge scope of features of CodeRush makes it nearly incomparible to Sql Prompt but they both have the same goal.mkearl wrote:I think most developers in the corporate world would have a tough time convincing corporate to puchase a tool that saves them a bit of typing.
Of course having said that as it stands I'm probably not going to buy Sql Prompt, but it also depends upon what changes from beta->release. If the price was $50 I would buy it as it is and live with the quirks. -
I really doubt my company would pay $95 per seat for the tool, but I would buy it myself if it was priced around $50.
-
Considering that Atadore was charging $25 per seat (too cheap, I know), I think $95 is a bit high.
That said, I would definitely pay $50 for the convenience of having auto-complete in Query Analyzer. However, if the price is much higher than that, I would probably use AquaData Studio, which also has auto-complete, as well as many other features. -
That kinda price would only be justified if the product was taken MILES ahead of where it was under Atadore and v1.4
Obviously 25 USD or whatever we paid for the v1.4 was rediculously cheap... but that is why we can easily dismiss various bugs, quirks and annoyances because hey "it didnt cost that much"
A price of $50 - $65 i would deem appropriate if it was to have the quirks/bugs fixed, some nice new functionality and a decent release cycle.
If you want top charge $95 for it then id be expecting HUGE improvements in customisiability spped and less quirkiness, total support for editing generated SQLCompare or datacompare scripts generated by other redgate tools). Especially when the release cycle will be alot less frequent than what atadore had... with other RedGate tools if there is a bug or feature annoyance that really hinders you, you have to wait months for a new release which fixes it. WIth prromptSQL atadore would fix and release things in a matter of weeks if enough people wanted/needed it! -
I completely agree with rgribble.
The previous low price meant I took a quick look, bought it, put up with the odd annoyance and was very satisfied with the response times of the original author.
$95 bucks? no way. It just isn't that critical a tool for me. Throw in some other tool as a sweetner at this price.
At $50 I would most likely buy it. -
I'd pay $95 for it if it does what it's supposed to. Just about to try the beta.
-
I agree with most in this post. I have been using PromptSQL for a while now and it is a good convenient product but has a few quirks. The old price point is low enough for a developer to buy at his/her own expense however $95 is just too steep for that. If all of the bugs and quirky behavior was fixed then I think that $50 would be a good price point and a developer could likely afford this out of their own pocket.
A price point of $95 would likely require the developer to justify this expense to their employer if they couldn't (or won't) pay this as an out of pocket expense. With the current features in 1.4 even with all of the bugs fixed I think it would be a hard sell to most employers. If there were additional features in the 2.0 release along with the bugs and quirks being removed then it may be easier to justify the expense to an employer depending on what those features were and the potential productivity gains that could be realized by thise features. -
Dang... i just finished my eval period and have a few others at work who were interested... went to the site to pay the $25 and found out it was sold to redgate!
$50 for single user sounds much better - and more agreeable for small companies w/3-5 users that need this. My company uses SQL Bundle from Redgate so i'm sure future development is in good hands. -
$26 looked good when i decided to evaluate...if all the bugs are fixed...$50 would be more appropriate. My company wouldn't agree for a $95 per user......i wouldn't mind buying out of my own pocket if its priced at $50
Add comment
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Update! We've decided to change the single user pricing to $50/user, with discounts for multiple copies. Thanks everybody who weighed in on this - it was good to hear you all.