• From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
• To: "'Len Bullard'" <cbullard@xxxxxxxxxx>,"'peter murray-rust'" <pm286@xxxxxxxxx>,<xml-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 12:27:04 +0100

> That's pretty much what I remember too.  Even the MS products 
> were free to download.  That was one of the aspects of the 
> SGML On The Web project.  It kneecapped the overpriced 
> software market.

Unfortunately, I think it also kneecapped the free software market to some
extent. It's noticeable how few of the XSLT 1.0 vendors are producing a
version 2.0 product, and in most cases I think the problem is that it's
difficult to produce a business case for developing free software. People do
a 1.0 out of blind enthusiasm and optimism, but a decision to do a 2.0 tends
to be more hard-headed.

The sort of six-figure sums that Omnimark used to quote were clearly out of
proportion to the value that most users were getting, and this severely held
back the SGML market. But I don't think that zero is the right price either.
For a healthy market, software should be like books or music - $25 to $50
should be the normal price. The pendulum has swung a bit too far in my view.

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: SGML complexity
    • From: Elliotte Harold
  • RE: SGML complexity (was: RE: Re: Recognizing...)
    • From: Len Bullard

• References:
  • RE: SGML complexity (was: RE: Re: Recognizing...)
    • From: Len Bullard