> I wasn't trying to disparage the decision or the product per se, but from my (systems administrator) viewpoint, being able to take the software home is the gravy to the meat-and-potatoes of protecting my network.

I agree that quality is the most important, but economics always comes into play. Anyways, we agree, so I'll stop on this...

> It *is* an interesting contrast to some vendors' decision to _tighten_ licensing agreements...

Yeah, I think someone touched on this idea earlier: If you don't let them take it home legally, they'll take it home illegally. So you aren't losing any sales, but you are making your product more attactive to people because they will feel legal. In fact, some sales might be lost because some home users actually buy software that they can pirate; but not many. I have to add that most professional developers fit into the legal buyers category, but we are by no means the majority.

Take it easy,
Joe