• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: historical context ...
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: historical context ...


  • Subject: Re: historical context ...
  • From: Alexander Spohr <email@hidden>
  • Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 10:13:04 +0200


Am 15.06.2007 um 09:13 schrieb Andrus Adamchik:

Once WO got cheap, it didn't make any sense for those consultants to continue to push it. Imagine how many of the big 5 accounting firms would drop SAP if SAP where $249.95 ?

Still the idea that the price drop caused WO being squeezed out of the enterprise market is a myth.

Andrus, this is wrong. At least for Germany. We had an Apple sales force that pushed WO in almost every big player. Then Steve dropped the price at WWDC - and the Apple Germany sales guys did not know it in advance! The crowd cheered and we sat there aghast, as we just sold some licenses to the big T for 3/4 million DM. Another Consultant in a different company bought some at the same time and was lucky because he did not open that package and so could just give them back to Apple without reason, and then buy the cheap version.


Anyway, the sales team was not interested any more in WO as it made no more money. We where too small with just 50 people to invade the big companies with a 699-product. And did any of those big ones ever look at you from the side? Thinking what a stupid product you sold them for a 100k when in fact it was worth only 699? What a bad, bad feeling for the customer and us.

Another example is the biggest all-inclusive-travel company in Germany. We where three developers to manage their whole web site. We connected to plain ASCII-files, some databases and even the Amdahl- host in the cellar.
Then they got a bigger budget (around 10 millions), that screamed for more developers but WO was just to cheap by now. So they went to IBM as they had everything expensive to spend the 10 millons on. IBM needed 1.5 years to replicate with WebSphere what we had with WO...


I have more stories of the kind „WO going cheap, everyone runs“

There are other more realistic explanations that's been mentioned, but the price drop was simply a reaction to the given technology becoming a commodity, with alternatives tools being either free as in beer or free as in open source.

What is the current price of BEA WebLogic? Any info on WebSpheres prices? Those where the competitors.

SAP market is not nearly as commoditized as web application market, so that comparison is wrong.

This is true.

In other words, if Apple were to reinstate WO "enterprise pricing", WO use would go from hundreds (possibly thousands) of installations to single digits.

First i think it is to late to do so.

But really, I'd sell 1 WO licenses for 100k and consulting in a fitting range instead of explaining every customer for $0 why I want to use WO and not Struts to make better software faster.

	atze

ps. I know that this went different in other countries where Apple had own developers and tried to snatch the good projects from the external companies. I must say that the German version worked _very_ good for Apple and the free companies - Germany sold the most WO licenses worldwide as I recall...

_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden


References: 
 >Re: historical context ... (From: Paul Yu <email@hidden>)
 >Re: historical context ... (From: Ken Anderson <email@hidden>)
 >Re: historical context ... (From: Andrus Adamchik <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Moving to Eclipse...at least trying...
  • Next by Date: WO Template parsing
  • Previous by thread: Re: historical context ...
  • Next by thread: Re: historical context ...
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread