Not sure where you're getting your prices. VS is expensive, but it's not that expensive. The professional edition is probably the one to shoot for if you're buying a license. I have access to ultimate, and I do not use any of the more advanced features. Professional is selling for $800, and Ultimate is just over $6,000. It is also worth keeping in mind that you're not just buying Visual Studio, you're getting an MSDN subscription as well which allows you to download pretty much all Microsoft software for development purposes. This includes all of their office suites, all of their operating systems, etc. Plus it's not all that hard to get those tools (even ultimate) for free. Check out Bizspark, WebsiteSparkand DreamSpark.
1. Visual Studio costs lots of money!!! VS2012 Ultimate is $13,000!!!
The only reason I know is because I was pricing it out a few months ago. It really is $13,000. See for yourself Visual Studio 2012 Ultimate
- $13,299Visual Studio 2012 Premium
- $6,119Visual Studio 2012 Professional
Visual Studio 2012 Express - Free
I use 2010 ultimate at my workplace. I probably don't use most of the features which come available with it, so I probably wouldn't miss them. But, it's still expensive software! I can't justify spending $13,000 for the top notch IDE with all the bells and whistles.
This is just flat out wrong. Mono and MonoTouch allow you to run your .NET apps on OSX, Linux, Android and iOS. You may have heard of an XBLA game called Bastion.They used a version of MonoGame to take their XNA game and build it for the Google App Store.
2. If you want to code for the MS platform using their API's (DirectX, XNA, .NET), you get locked in to the MS ecosystem. This limits the market base you can target. Java apps, on the other hand, will work on any platform which can run and support the JVM. You don't have to run any VM's or third party software. (note: the VM is included in the JVM). Making .NET available on non-MS products is contrary to Microsofts big picture business plan -- to build and run an MS controlled ecosystem.
I knew someone would come back with Mono, so I purposefully wrote my paragraph carefully. Mono is an open source API developed by a third party to make .NET operable with non-MS platforms. My claim is that out of the box MS .NET is not cross platform compatible. .NET is supposed to be Microsofts response to Java, which can be run on any hardware platforms which support the JVM. MS isn't going to go out of their way to make sure that .NET works on Linux because it doesn't align with their business vision of a MS only ecosystem. So, .NET is Microsofts answer to Java, but it's breadth just isn't comparable. For the multiplatform conscious developer, its more prudent to work with Java.
30% is the standard. It's what Apple and Google both charge. As far as I know, Microsoft is the only one that drops it to 20% after a certain amount of revenue. As far as app stores go, it's a pretty good deal.
1. The pricing structure for selling apps in the windows store.
Considering how I'm already slightly biased against it and a little reluctant to spend time, effort and money on developing a Win8 app in the first place, if all MS does is match their digital distribution competitors at a 30% take, I will be even more hesitant. They'd better sweeten the pot a bit and go down to 25% at the least, and ideally 20% overall. The first $30k should be all mine! Everyone wants their slice of my pie (government taxes & Microsoft)! Once I cover my development costs, I'd be willing to split the revenue a bit more generously... if I was going to charge.
Microsoft Source: When you sell apps through the Windows Store, we assess a Windows Store fee. For apps that generate less than $25,000 in sales, this fee is 30%. After the app generates its first $25,000 in sales, the fee on the subsequent revenue drops to 20%.
My point is that microsoft is late to the digital distribution market. They need to convince developers that it's worth their time and effort to go through the trouble of targetting the win8 platform. I've got my reservations about the number of people who will adopt Win8. Most people will probably be happy with Win7, so the number of possible customers browsing the windows store won't be the whole windows users population -- it'll probably be a very limited subset. I think microsoft needs to undercut their competitors (Apple, Google, Steam, etc) with their revenue sharing model. Microsoft really needs to make a comeback in the digital distribution marketplace. It's not very incentivizing to offer the same pricing model because then the main differentiating factor is going to be who has the most eyeballs and MS isn't going to be a leader. I probably don't need to tell anyone this since most of us already know it, but the adoption of a platform is heavily influenced by the number of tools and apps available for it, which is in proportion to the number of developers building for the platform. It's right in line with their grand strategy of building and maintaining their MS ecosystem.
Edited by slayemin, 31 October 2012 - 10:56 AM.