Don't force me to retain the old version

• 
  Hi there,
  
  Thanks for posting,
  
  Our plan at the moment is to continue to provide a fully functional free (to be clear - that is the same functionality as is in the product today) version for the community.
  
  I understand that many people will be sceptical about this regardless of what I say but I hope that people will keep an open mind and will judge us on our actions over the next few months and not their understandable fears over the future of what is a massively popular tool.
  
  James

  James Moore August 20, 2008 17:52

  - 0 +
• 

  James Moore wrote:

  Hi there,
  
  Thanks for posting,
  
  Our plan at the moment is to continue to provide a fully functional free (to be clear - that is the same functionality as is in the product today) version for the community.
  
  I understand that many people will be sceptical about this regardless of what I say but I hope that people will keep an open mind and will judge us on our actions over the next few months and not their understandable fears over the future of what is a massively popular tool.
  
  James

  
  Most of us are skeptical because many of us do not see Reflector as a viable commercial venture, *if* you are going to do as you say (e.g., your plan 'at the moment' - continuing to offer the current version free of charge).
  
  Therefore, my guess is that since Lutz sold out on us, and you paid him for Reflector, once you realize that there is little room for a commercial version of it alongside the free or 'community' version, we will eventually see you tell us something like: "well, that was the plan at that moment".
  
  Aside from fixing the lousy UI Reflector has (something that most of us tolerate and do not care about all that much), I don't know what else you can do to make a commercial version of it, that can effectively compete with a free version that is so feature laden.
  
  So, I think what most here need to pay attention to is your first sentence: 'Our plan the moment', and that the 'moment' will not last long.

  caddzooks August 26, 2008 15:32

  - 0 +
• 

  caddzooks wrote:

  Most of us are skeptical because many of us do not see Reflector as a viable commercial venture, *if* you are going to do as you say (e.g., your plan 'at the moment' - continuing to offer the current version free of charge).

  
  I love what Lutz Roeder has done, but I see lots of ways that this application could be improved for developers in a way that many would be willing to pay for.
  
  I'm glad that Redgate is committing to keeping the core of it for free and I hope that they will maintain the free version as well (fix bugs, keep it in line with current frameworks, etc).
  
  I have already submitted some updates that I would pay for and I am excited to see what other folks would like to see it do.
  
  Anyway, I totally see this as a viable commercial venture.
  
  I agree about the UI thing. Get a better UI and integrate it with VS if possible. Even though many tolerate it, there are plenty that would pay for the better interface (if it really is better, that is).

  CStroliaDavis August 27, 2008 09:58

  - 0 +
• 
  Don't worry about them taking away current features. If they do, open source versions will pop up. It's not that hard to disassemble and format the code to IL, C# or VB.NET. Just enough of a pain that it's better to download .Net Reflector. If features go away, you'll see numerous HOW TO publications with complete functionality.

  avidtrober September 03, 2008 19:33

  - 0 +
• 

  caddzooks wrote:

  Most of us are skeptical because many of us do not see Reflector as a viable commercial venture

  
  Which leads one to be skeptical as to why buy it? :-)
  

  caddzooks wrote:

  Therefore, my guess is that since Lutz sold out on us, and you paid him for Reflector, once you realize that there is little room for a commercial version of it alongside the free or 'community' version, we will eventually see you tell us something like: "well, that was the plan at that moment".

  
  And, out comes (perhaps dozens and dozens?) open source HOW TO publications.
  

  caddzooks wrote:

  Aside from fixing the lousy UI Reflector has (something that most of us tolerate and do not care about all that much),

  
  interesting. What's wrong with the UI?
  it's the add-on architecture that's poor. And, the "must upgrade or I delete myself" I can't stand.
  

  caddzooks wrote:

  I don't know what else you can do to make a commercial version of it, that can effectively compete with a free version that is so feature laden.

  
  Does someone have a lot of money they don't know what to do with? Or, just unaware of what's available on a worldwide web basis (or certainly will be) with this move.
  

  caddzooks wrote:

  So, I think what most here need to pay attention to is your first sentence: 'Our plan the moment', and that the 'moment' will not last long.

  
  It's takes a weekend to show how to use a V-pattern and break down the IL into statements so that you can put it in any language you want it in. Enough of a pain to not do it yourself, but not enough to just roll your own vs. someone asking for money.

  avidtrober September 03, 2008 19:45

  - 0 +
• 

  avidtrober wrote:

  It's takes a weekend to show how to use a V-pattern and break down the IL into statements so that you can put it in any language you want it in. Enough of a pain to not do it yourself, but not enough to just roll your own vs. someone asking for money.

  
  ECMA 335 + unmanage reflection APIs (the managed are just wrappers, but not one-to-one) + V-pattern + statement-to-language = open source.
  
  Any fancy features beyond that are winforms-provided.
  
  Lutz may sold because who else would buy it???
  
  Don't worry, you won't lose free .Net reflection with pretty much the same features as provided now, maybe even better ones, because there are plenty of unfinished-to-shelved projects lying around.

  avidtrober September 03, 2008 19:52

  - 0 +
• 

  avidtrober wrote:

  
  interesting. What's wrong with the UI?
  

  
  Sorry, this isn't UI school.
  
  If you have to ask that question, that's where you need to go to understand what's wrong with it.

  caddzooks September 04, 2008 05:43

  - 0 +
• 

  caddzooks wrote:

  avidtrober wrote:

  
  interesting. What's wrong with the UI?
  

  
  Sorry, this isn't UI school.
  
  If you have to ask that question, that's where you need to go to understand what's wrong with it.

  
  lol....I found no caddzooks UI school via google. Are you reading HOW TO 101 books and just woke up on the worng side of the bed this a.m.?
  
  The UI isn't perfect, but it's very functional. Sure, some things could use tweaking, but if you can't answer a simple question perhaps you don't know the answer your self:
  
  what's wrong with the UI (in your humble??? opinion)?

  avidtrober September 04, 2008 08:57

  - 0 +

Add comment

Please sign in to leave a comment.