MSDE is a COMPLETE MARKETING FAILURE as ZERO PEOPLE USE IT for anything, even development.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Your notion that there is a one-to-one relationship between hardware and
software is invalid. What dictates (what ever has dictated) that there is
such a relationship? The costs of hardware are based on its research and
development, the manufacture of its components, the assembly of them and the
subsequent distribution of it.

The same goes for software, which while it's physical manufacturing costs
(boxes, CD-ROMs, etc.) is minimal, it's manufacturing costs in terms of
human capital expended to develop it sometimes boggle the mind. A product
like Microsoft SQL Server has more than 500 developers! That doesn't
account for testers, management, product support, sales specialists,
consultants, etc... that are all needed to maintain that product. Not too
mention the fact that Microsoft maintains three major versions (2000, 7.0,
6.5) across a multitude of server and desktop platforms, a variety of ANSI
standards, WWW/XML standards etc.

Unlike MySQL, there is quite a lot more involved in the manufacturing and
maintenance costs of SQL Server.

Last, I disagree with you completely that SQL Server is over priced.
Expensive, for a small business looking to use it with a world wide web
site, yes. Unless of course the application is built for internal use, in
which case the SQL Server 2000 license included in Microsoft Small Business
Server more than meets their needs. And, for that web application, they can
just as easily load MSDE on the server and use it for that; and use their
permitted licenses in SBS/SQL2K to connect to that MSDE database with their
tools (or the tools already found in VS.NET or a multitude of other
products, like MS Access).

As for your Wal-Mart/Saks Fifth Avenue comparison, it too is faulty. Both of
those retailers, who by the way, are in vastly different businesses than
manufacturing software, cater to wholly different market segments.
 
SBS, which Microsoft practically gives away, is still too expensive? I
completely disagree with you on that point and I believe it clearly shows
how out of tune you are with the marketplace and the bulk of small
businesses who purchase software.

Over the past ten years I've spent half my time working with big business
(large F500 firms and government enterprises) and the other half dealing
with small business (< 100 companies, often in the 5-20 employee range). I
have also worked for very large blue chip companies, and very small, very
tiny ones.

I just spent the past year relaunching a small IT services company here in
New York City that I was recruited to do marketing and general management
for. This company exclusively focuses on small businesses, particularly
those with five to twenty employees in services oriented businesses like law
firms, general contractors, small non-profits, etc.

In 2001 AMI Research did some reporting that showed the average, UNDER
invested small business spends about $685 per employee, per year on IT. The
ultra cutting edge spends about $1,700. Moreover, they also show that those
under invested companies, they typically generate about $123K per employee a
year in revenue. The ones that invest on the cutting edge, generate nearly
TWICE that, $231K per employee a year in revenue

The new version of SBS that comes with SQL Server 2000 will retail, list
price, at $1,499. That breaks down to:

$1,499 total licensing cost, with/ est.@$500 software assurance (2 years) =
$1,999

If you use software assurance as the measure of the lifetime of that
version, at two years that breaks down to $84 per month! That's too much?
$84 a month to run your business IT infrastructure?

Meanwhile, if you really need that website with a Microsoft database, why
don't you go host it? It's far more inexpensive, and the infrastructure is
more reliable and secure as it's separated from your back end. Hosting
services like www.discountasp.net, which is actually one of the more
expensive ones, charge only $20 per month to host a ASP.NET website on
Windows 2003 server with .NET Framework 1.1 support AND a Microsoft SQL
Server 2000 database.

If you want free, fine, go with Linux, and MySQL, and all of the other
equivalents. I just hope however you find some way to faithfully account for
the hidden costs of it, and at least do the open source people justice and
good by contributing your copious amounts of spare, free, invaluable time on
an open source project at SourceForge.
 
Not sure you understand the business model....

If it costs the developer $1500 then they need to pass that cost on to their
clients, mom and pop will most likely have to pay $3000 assuming a 50% mark
up.

Even if the developer has 10 clients in a year, thats cost them $150 and
with the mark-up probably cost each client $300 per year! Now equate that to
support offerings for ASP.NET and SQL Server (MSDE as well) with most
problems/Q & A being answered on FREE websites.

Also, in your scenario - how will mom and pop know there is a problem? They
will need some form of support contract - your nice cost effective MySQL /
PHP system is now very expensive because it has A LOT OF ON-GOING COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH IT!
 
That is definitely true of SUN and UNIX systems, Wintel the correction
happend about 3 years ago!

SUN are simplying bleating because they have lost a significant market share
and are in trouble - i give them 5 years before somebody buys them out for
existing support contracts/client base or they go bust.
 
Let's see......you have never started your own business....

Ok...let's put your proprietary code or business methods on some ISP that
you don't know....

Understand........
 
David Vins said:
SBS, which Microsoft practically gives away, is still too expensive? I
completely disagree with you on that point and I believe it clearly shows
how out of tune you are with the marketplace and the bulk of small
businesses who purchase software.

Over the past ten years I've spent half my time working with big business
(large F500 firms and government enterprises) and the other half dealing
with small business (< 100 companies, often in the 5-20 employee range). I
have also worked for very large blue chip companies, and very small, very
tiny ones.

I just spent the past year relaunching a small IT services company here in
New York City that I was recruited to do marketing and general management
for. This company exclusively focuses on small businesses, particularly
those with five to twenty employees in services oriented businesses like law
firms, general contractors, small non-profits, etc.

In 2001 AMI Research did some reporting that showed the average, UNDER
invested small business spends about $685 per employee, per year on IT. The
ultra cutting edge spends about $1,700. Moreover, they also show that those
under invested companies, they typically generate about $123K per employee a
year in revenue. The ones that invest on the cutting edge, generate nearly
TWICE that, $231K per employee a year in revenue

The new version of SBS that comes with SQL Server 2000 will retail, list
price, at $1,499. That breaks down to:

$1,499 total licensing cost, with/ est.@$500 software assurance (2 years) =
$1,999

If you use software assurance as the measure of the lifetime of that
version, at two years that breaks down to $84 per month! That's too much?
$84 a month to run your business IT infrastructure?

Meanwhile, if you really need that website with a Microsoft database, why
don't you go host it? It's far more inexpensive, and the infrastructure is
more reliable and secure as it's separated from your back end. Hosting
services like www.discountasp.net, which is actually one of the more
expensive ones, charge only $20 per month to host a ASP.NET website on
Windows 2003 server with .NET Framework 1.1 support AND a Microsoft SQL
Server 2000 database.

If you want free, fine, go with Linux, and MySQL, and all of the other
equivalents. I just hope however you find some way to faithfully account for
the hidden costs of it, and at least do the open source people justice and
good by contributing your copious amounts of spare, free, invaluable time on
an open source project at SourceForge.
Click to expand...

Honestly, even with Linux\MySql, you are better off having the web site
hosted elsewere. The cost of significant bandwidth and proper security
design on either system is far higher than the cost of the system or the
database it runs.
 
Actually, it's hardware companies like Sun who can't sell software.
Likewise, software focused companies who can't sell hardware and so on and
so forth.

I do buy into the notion that information technology is still in its early
hey days, much like that of the early auto manufacturers and the early
railroads. However, the analogy breaks when he talks about 'custom tow
trucks' and the rest of all that stuff.

Cars are not customized to the extent that software is. A much better
analogy is a house. Whether your own, or rent, you end up having to pay for
the ALL the costs associated with ownership. Be they property, taxes,
infrastructure, what you put in it, the things that come along that screw it
all up (weather) and a multitude of other things.

P.s. -- You're right, programmers can't sell software. That's why they hire
sales and marketing and general managers like myself who end up selling
oodles of it because they bother to take the time to understand the needs of
the customer, quality product, and the dynamics of markets!
 
I'm not aware of many 'mom and pops' that are flocking to PHP and MySql.
Most of them are lifestyle entrepreneurs who dabble in programming or who
used to be dot.com junkies.

Beyond that, the recommendations typically come from an IT services provider
or VAR who's business model is built around the services involved in
installing and configuring the platform. The latest Microsoft products
(especially Small Business Server) have made that far easier -- to the point
that Microsoft can garner a greater price and sell the license with less
margin for resale.

Meanwhile, not as much time is needed by an outside expert, if at all, to
install and configure it. Therefore, that antiquated VAR who only makes
money configuring the software and installing it (and who typically PADS the
work) can't offer much value anymore. Unless of course they offer something
which isn't as easy to setup, install, configure...

The more cutting edge services providers realize the value is in managing
the customer's infrastructure and supporting them; and that hand in hand
with that, what mitigates their cost structures in doing that (and
drastically increases their productivity) is increasing the quality and
stability of their deployments. That means developing and adopting best
practice -- which makes installation and configuration more efficient.

Which in the end make it all far more affordable (and better) for the
customer.

Last, I'd disagree with you that 'mom and pops' see IBM, Microsoft, Sun, HP,
and 'arrogant' programmers and developers all as the same thing. I think if
you do some real digging, as I have, you'll find it is a LOT more complex
than that. For every hater, I can find a lover of a vendor, a developer, a
programmer.

By the way, you may want to shelve your simplistic view of the IT
marketplace as vendors vs. programmers. Not all work done for customers is
development work; likewise, not all services work is technicical or involves
MySql and PHP or ASP.NET and whatever else you only think of.
 
I absolutely concur. Either eat the cost to buy another server and host you
web application server and another copy of the database in-house if you
really need to; or outsource and use a competent web hoster who supports a
Microsoft SQL or MySQL backend (many do both) and host the site elsewhere.
It's more secure, and you can leverage their investment in availability that
you can't make.

No one will notice if your internal systems are down if you host your
website and get a backup email relay service such as the one Verisign DNS
provides. But, they WILL notice your website is down -- even if it doesn't
generate transactions on the web for you. It will still impact your
customer's perceptions and trust in you.
 
If you read your development platforms documentation correctly you would
know that you can both compile and obfuscate your business logic. And, as
those who start and own and work for businesses know, you shop around, you
investigate, and then you come to a decision as to who's services you are
going to use.

There are a number of legitimate, well managed, well recommended hosting
services.

Last, if your proprietary business code or methods are SO GOOD that you
can't host them, then obviously, they are valuable enough that even if you
don't have the money yourself you can raise enough capital to purchase all
the hardware and software licenses you need to host the application
yourself.
 
Serge Shakhov said:
Hello

No, he is a real human. :-)
I've thought that nospam is bot as long as he starts debate about
Porche prices. Is it possible to write such an advanced robot?

By the way, as moderator of one of the FIDOnet conferences,
I can say that in FIDO areas religious (not technical) wars like this
are everyday occurrences.
Click to expand...
Unfortunatly, I've seen them many places. They are tiring things, all in
all.
 
It COULD be cheaper just to host it on their own instead of paying a
developer to constantly compile the whole thing. It's also faster that
way....

Mom and Pop are not going to be using VS.NET anyway....Web Matrix,
Dreamweaver, Notepad.....

No need for that unnecessary complexity for the tried and true simple stuff
with a little secrets....
 
THE only BOTs are the MVP, RD, OOP, and EmployEE ROBOTS who follow
mindlessly the mantra of what ever Microsoft or SUN or whatever .NET Authoer
says or writes about.......

It's seems that anyone can write a book these days on the SAME things...and
never get challenged.....

I didn't start the stupid Porsche analogy.....I fed it right back to him.
 
By and far, your 'mom and pop' shops don't develop applications, software,
or code of any sort! So your point is moot!

And if by 'mom and pop' you're referring to a INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPER like
yourself then it's time you stop your complaining and buck up for an MSDN
subscription or purchase the tool sets outright. I don't know many
carpenters, plumbers, etc... that go complaining to Black & Decker and
Snap-On Tools about having to buy and own the tools they use to build
whatever it is 'mom and pop' want.

Nor do 'mom and pop' go complaining about the cost of their foundation, the
land they purchased, or the labor that built and maintained their home!
 
Mom and Pop don't complain anymore to carpenters.

The goto HOME DEPOT and LOWE's and DO IT THEMSELVES.......

Ever heard of their slogans, "Do it yourself."?

How about VB?????
 
The 'mom and pops' that do the heavy lifting themselves are typically
experiences and/or already understand the heavy costs of doing it themselves
and make a conscious decision to do so. They don't go complaining to the
same tool and supply manufacturers about the costs involved.

Besides, most 'mom and pop' buy little things, for little projects. A very
SMALL demographic buys the things to build an entire HOUSE by themselves.
Typically it's changing a light fixture or buying a new tool. Which is no
different than buying an off the shelf packaged software product and
installing it; or tweaking the way an Excel spreadsheet looks.

Likewise, the vast majority of VB developers learned it because of a
programming class they took and because those classes no longer use products
like QuickBasic or the DOS basic of old. Even Borland's Turbo Pascal is out
of style after fifteen years. A small percentage of them are real
'application' developers. The same goes for most website developers. Most
people think that because you tweaked the way an HTML page looked you are a
qualified, serious, hard core web application developer.

Either way, at the end of the day this massive thread (dare I say tirade) of
yours comes down to one thing. You don't like Microsoft's licensing
mechanisms or costs. But, the fact remains, they are what they are, they
continue to sustain themselves because the majority of the market
understands and appreciates their value (and understands how much cheaper
Microsoft licensing is compared to IBM, Oracle, and others) and deems their
licensing to be fair and evenly priced.

You on the other hand, disagree with this, because you either don't fully
realize the full value, or cannot afford the licensing price. Which means
that you must make a decision. Either find a way to afford the licensing by
taking a look at the value it will provide (or not provide) or choosing
another product or solution. Something which you are more than capable and
allowed to do in this free country. Or, do what many an entrepreneur has
done, and roll your own, and sell it or give it away and fix the problem
yourself.
 
Back
Top