Re: What do you think about ActiveState's Visual Perl .NET??

(I also noticed that they put a bit of a hefty price tag on it - but that's another matter for another time).

Actually I'd like to address this one now if you dont mind.

Activestate has been a long term champion of Perl, they have put serious programming and marketing effort into making Perl a competetive language in one of the largest software markets there is. Its arguable that Activestates work with Microsoft has legitimized the use of perl in many enviornments where it would have otherwise been forbidden. They have put considerable effort into improving perl on the Win32 platform, they have employed at least a couple of perl gurus (Gurusamy Sarathy & Dominus when the latter wrote the regex debugger) and they did so before YAS offered funding to the likes of TheDamian and Elian and Larry Wall. They release a perfectly capable and free version of Perl (one that is used I have no doubt by a considerable, if not the majority of the monks here).

Considering all of this I for one do not begrudge ActiveState charging what is necessary to keep themselves afloat in these difficult times and ensuring that these very same programmers can make a living. And frankly I resent the implication (made not only by you but by others as well) that they are not entitled to do so.

I for one am very happy that ActiveState maintains its focus on Perl, and that they are continually trying to push new boundaries and produce new and exciting products. I hope they continue to do so, and I hope the community of Win32 Perl users dont take that effort for granted.

Regarding the rest of your post VisualPerl is simply an IDE for perl that lives within the .NET framework. It can everything that normal perl can do and (a few things extra). It has a powerful regex and code debugger. In short I think its a good buy if you already have dot net to use. (Our team was impressed enough that we got our normally parsimonious company to buy us four seats.)

Yves / DeMerphq
---
Writing a good benchmark isnt as easy as it might look.

Comment on Re: What do you think about ActiveState's Visual Perl .NET??

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: What do you think about ActiveState's Visual Perl .NET?? by Sifmole (Chaplain) on May 31, 2002 at 11:57 UTC
I have to agree with demerphq. I find such statements quite hypocritical. A large number of the people on this site are paid to code Perl, and an even larger number mention regularly that they would love to be paid to code Perl. All ActiveState is doing is looking to be paid for their work. If you don't feel their work is worth paying for then don't buy it.	[reply]
Re: Re: What do you think about ActiveState's Visual Perl .NET?? by mrmick (Curate) on May 31, 2002 at 17:58 UTC
First of all, I am NOT begrudging ActiveState being compensated for the effort they have put into any project that they may have. They have done a wonderful job porting Perl to WIN32 and any tools that they create as added value are certainly worth being compensated for. My comment about the price tag was simply me noticing that there was considerable cost for this and not yet knowing what value this would bring me. I get paid to program. I expect others to get paid to program. I just was not, and still not certain, about what I would be paying for in this case. There is nothing hypocritical about wanting to know what you will be paying for. Would you buy a house or a car without understanding what it will do for you? No matter what the cost, everything is an investment and should be treated as such. Before you start resenting what you think someone has implied, be certain of what they mean. Mick	[reply]
Re: Re: Re: What do you think about ActiveState's Visual Perl .NET?? by demerphq (Chancellor) on Jun 03, 2002 at 10:49 UTC
First of all, I am NOT begrudging ActiveState being compensated for the effort they have put into any project that they may have. Ok. My comment about the price tag was simply me noticing that there was considerable cost for this and not yet knowing what value this would bring me. No. That may have been what you _meant_ but it wasnt what you said. I quote (with added emphasis) (I also noticed that they put a bit of a hefty price tag* on it - but that's another matter for another time).* The phrase 'hefty price tag' to me implies that you think it is overpriced. (And yes, I can hear you saying 'hefty' meant that its a lot of money. Well how can you know its a lot of money if you dont (as you admit) know anything about it?) This view is further reinforced by your following phrase, where you imply that the subject of their pricing is matter that should be discussed and debated at a later time. If you didnt think that the matter was contentious then I doubt you would have said either. No matter, the point here being that you can't fault me, (and others) from reading what we did into your words. There is nothing hypocritical about wanting to know what you will be paying for Of course not. But then again you didnt say "For me the price is quite expensive, is it worth it?" Perhaps that was what meant to imply, but obviously the message wasn't recieved as intended, which I would say is usually a good indication of an unfortunate choice of words. Before you start resenting what you think someone has implied, be certain of what they mean. Caugh I certainly try to give writers the benfit of the doubt, but in writing and reading there is _never_ certainty, and IMO the burden of clarity is on the author and not the reader. In future if you wish to avoid such misconceptions then perhaps you should avoid phrases that even if they arent meant to come across as innuendo and insinuation. Yves / DeMerphq --- Writing a good benchmark isnt as easy as it might look.	[reply]
Re: Re: Re: Re: What do you think about ActiveState's Visual Perl .NET?? by mrmick (Curate) on Jun 03, 2002 at 13:09 UTC
The solution is simple: If you don't understand.... ASK! Mick	[reply]


Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister
	PerlMonks