I'm using Code Red for Cortex M0 development. It's not my day job,
but more of a side business for me.
From: l... [mailto:l...] On Behalf Of Paul Curtis
Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 5:03 AM
To: l...
Subject: RE: [lpc2000] Re: NXP Buys Code Red!
"Current Code Red customers using non-LPC platforms will continue to have
support through May 2014."
So, if you bought it for something other than an LPC platform, you're
bang
out of luck and need to find an alternative if you're in active
development.
I wonder what SiLabs will be doing with their Precision32 toolset which is
Code Red underneath?
Perhaps it's a non-issue. Nobody has indicated that they're using Red
Suite
in a commercial capacity here.
> > So, if you bought it for something other than an
LPC platform, you're
> > bang out of luck and need to find an alternative if you're in active
> development.
>
> Sounds like a great marketing opportunity for those guys who develop
> CrossWorks ;-)
Yeah, RAL had a marketing dept, I'm sure they'd be right on it.
:-)
> > Perhaps it's a non-issue. Nobody has
indicated that they're using Red
> > Suite in a commercial capacity here.
>
> I'd be surprised if commercial Red Suite users would be found hanging
> about round here - they would be eligible for email support. Our
> experience is that our supported users prefer to communicate directly via
> email rather than on a public forum.
There are quite a few customers of ours that knock about here; I was just
wondering whether any Code Red customers were.
I'm sure you can construct a lot of hypotheses about why NXP bought Code
Red; I think it's like purchasing a system integrator. However, given
NXP's
PR, I guess you're going to see the rebranding of Code Red tools to
LPCXpresso and the price plummet to $0. Pure conjecture, of course...
--- In l..., "Paul Curtis" wrote: >
> So, if you bought it for something other than an LPC platform, you're
bang
> out of luck and need to find an alternative if you're in active
development.
>
Sounds like a great marketing opportunity for those guys who develop CrossWorks
;-)
>
> Perhaps it's a non-issue. Nobody has indicated that they're using
Red Suite
> in a commercial capacity here.
>
I'd be surprised if commercial Red Suite users would be found hanging about
round here - they would be eligible for email support. Our experience is that
our supported users prefer to communicate directly via email rather than on a
public forum.
"Current Code Red customers using non-LPC platforms will continue to have
support through May 2014."
So, if you bought it for something other than an LPC platform, you're
bang
out of luck and need to find an alternative if you're in active
development.
I wonder what SiLabs will be doing with their Precision32 toolset which is
Code Red underneath?
Perhaps it's a non-issue. Nobody has indicated that they're using Red
Suite
in a commercial capacity here.
'In addition, the full Red Suite product will continue to be sold for 8
months through to the end of December 2013.'
Reply by Paul Curtis●May 1, 20132013-05-01
> > >> What price do you think a professional tool
should be? How do you
> > >> arrive at that figure?
> > >>
> > > In my opinion a "bare metal" C/C++ compiler price shouldn't be
> > > higher then EUR750,00 and EUR100,00/year for maintenance.
> >
> > I'm not sure you can maintain an adequate engineering team at that
> > level if you are an independent development system provider. EUR 750 -
> > 30% selling through distribution is EUR 525. Don't you think that is
> > rather a paltry sum? And EUR 70 a year to keep updated with new
> > features, new processor support?
> >
> It is only matter of quantity and product portfolio.
Il 01/05/2013 00:29, Paul Curtis ha scritto: >
>
> >> What price do you think a professional tool should be? How do you
> >> arrive at that figure?
> >>
> > In my opinion a "bare metal" C/C++ compiler price shouldn't be
higher
> > then EUR750,00 and EUR100,00/year for maintenance.
>
> I'm not sure you can maintain an adequate engineering team at that
> level if you are an independent development system provider. EUR 750 -
> 30% selling through distribution is EUR 525. Don't you think that is
> rather a paltry sum? And EUR 70 a year to keep updated with new
> features, new processor support?
>
It is only matter of quantity and product portfolio.
Reply by Paul Curtis●April 30, 20132013-04-30
>> What price do you think a professional tool should
be? How do you
>> arrive at that figure?
>>
> In my opinion a "bare metal" C/C++ compiler price shouldn't be higher
> then EUR750,00 and EUR100,00/year for maintenance.
I'm not sure you can maintain an adequate engineering team at that level if
you are an independent development system provider. EUR 750 - 30% selling
through distribution is EUR 525. Don't you think that is rather a paltry
sum? And EUR 70 a year to keep updated with new features, new processor
support?
>>
>> What percentage of your business expenses are spent on your software
>> tools?
>>
> Too much, is around 22% every year.
Software is a consumable, it is not an asset. It rusts and needs to be written
off. 22% is clearly meaningless because the percentage will depend upon the
makeup of the business.
-- Paul.
Reply by Paul Curtis●April 30, 20132013-04-30
>>
>> A race to the bottom helps nobody--doesn't help the customer,
doesn't
>> help the vendor, and are as hell doesn't help competition,
innovation,
>> and progress. Remember, you don't want your tool vendor to go out of
>> business because you took a short-term view and squeezed them on price!
>>
> I understand that you develop and sell Crossworks so I think that your
> opinion is influenced from your business and the effort you spend daily
> to improve and develop it, I think you know perfectly the effort
> necessary to realize it.
Indeed my opinion is certainly coloured by the daily work of maintaining and
enhancing our toolset. However, I've done my own set of tool purchasing in
the past,
> But from my point of view it is only a tool I
> need to do my job and so there are times that my customer can pay to
> have the best tool and times they can't.
And that's why there are lots of options in the world. However, there is
no "best" tool. There may well be a "most appropriate tool" for a combination
of criteria, and I may well try to provide the best experience I can, but there
isn't "the best tool" as a blanket statement.
A vendor and a customer need to feel comfortable with the cost of the
transaction. Choosing a toolset is usually based on a number of factors, and
one of the major factors will be price.
-- Paul.
Reply by "M. Manca"●April 30, 20132013-04-30
Il 30/04/2013 23:27, Richard Man ha scritto: > Our commercial tool is $249 and $499 includes a
(non-GDB homegrown)
> debugger. Crosswork is somewhat higher at $1500. Any commercial project
> should be able to afford our tools, if not Crosswork's.
Yes, I think your price is good and lower as I wrote in another reply.
Personally I think to have used ICC only 1 time a lot of years ago for a
Motorola microcontroller... but I am not totally sure.
>
> Yes, you can pay $4000 for IAR/Keil or more for $6000, but you don't
have
> to.
>
> It's very funny, one user just switched from GCC AVR to our ICC AVR, he
had
> some questions and wondered how to access our mailing list. I told him
> about the list and made it clear that if it's a compiler or even C
language
> question, he can and should ask us. Our users are more familiar with the
> 1000s of AVRs and hardware but WE support the compiler. While Atmel owns
> AS6 and by proxy, supports GCCAVR, they still do not take ownership of the
> compiler tools and you are on your own when it comes to compiler questions.
Yes, the support is another point to consider, I think that who develops
on Linux doesn't need so much support with GCC but other needs and
generally they have to find support on yahoo groups or other independent
channels.
