>
>Well gee, Craig, let me think.... For starters, when I buy something from Amazon, except for MS software, I own it, I can loan it out, give it away or sell it.

Except for any software, not just MS

>As for as .NET MyServices (which is the programmer's vortex for the 'hailstorm') costs go, users (programmers & their clients) will be paying and paying and paying.

That's because the programms and clients are paying for a service, not a product. It's not different than paying for lawyers, accountants, doctors, and computer consultants.

>
>MS says it themselves (with my comments in parens):
>"Microsoft will operate .NET My Services as a business. .NET My Services will have real operational costs, and ... the people receiving the value-the end users-will be the primary source of revenue to Microsoft. .NET My Services will help move the Internet to end-user subscriptions, where users pay for value received. Microsoft will also derive some revenue from developers to help cover the costs of the services and products they need.

Many software companies are moving to a subscription model. In this case, .Net is the mechanism to get and deliver the subscription.

>
>These charges will be minimized to encourage the broadest possible range of developers to build for .NET My Services, but the usual costs for tools and support, as well as some minimal costs for access to a live test environment, will apply.

Nothing wrong with this. Developers pay for tools, support, and a test environment now.

>
>Service operators will also have a certificate-based license relationship with Microsoft that allows them to use .NET My Services, which makes it possible to ensure that no service using .NET My Services abuses the resources involved (uses it without paying per use),

or have access to data they shouldn't have. For example, if you buy a product from vendor A, vendor B will not have access to that information.

>affecting other users of the services. That certificate will make it possible to filter abusers out of the system. Obtaining a certificate and the ongoing right to use .NET My Services will have a cost associated with it. Higher levels of support, service level agreement and significant system use may result in additional charges, as well. We expect (but cannot promise, after we use our OS monoply to embrace the Internet and extinguish the competition),

Sun, Oracle, and others have a competing service. Remember, these services run on the server, not the client, so it won't matter if a vendor use .Net My Services, or a competing technology.

>however, that these costs will be significantly less than those of independently operating similar services.

Not the competing service I mentioned, but the cost of you or me developing, maintaining, and running the service for a particular business.

>
>Specific pricing for users, developers, and service operators will be announced in future."
>
>And they were. $10,000/year for programmer's clients, $1,000/year for programmers, plus $250 for each application the programmer writes, not counting future passport and other per-use access fees.

If your a big enough fish to want to use these services, you aren't going to care about these fees. Keep in mind who MS is marketing this to. Not the mom and pop store on the corner, but big companies.

>(MS says they are 'waiving' passport fees now. That means the fees are scheduled but, like 'no money down' schemes, the fees are eventually paid.)

I don't thing this is quite accurate. With no money down, you do eventually pay for all of it. Let's say that the fees are waived for the first year. MS won't go back and collect year one fees.

>Now, I have one application with 23 executables. Does one executable equal one application? MS doesn't say, yet. So, eventually, I would be paying a minimum of $1,250 to develop one application. If an applications took three months to develop the metered access fees, when they activate, could add 480*per-hr-fee to the total.

Well, look at this this way. Many ISPs charge per use fees to host web stores. Same thing here.

>
>I purchased VFP6 for $295. I paid $200 for Kylix. I can make as many applications as I want with either, without paying Borland or MS another cent. I downloaded KDevelop at no cost, and it is nearly as good as either now, and will probably surpass them in power and quality within a year. It only costs me my time to develop an application with KDevelop and I can deploy it freely as many times as I want.

You're comparing apples to oranges. .Net MyServices is not VFP nor is it Kylix.

>
>Clients can run my apps on their servers at their facilities, behind their locked doors, on equipment they paid for only once, running software they paid for only once. The data formats are open and importing and exporting of data will be easy, and neither will it be held hostage to access fees and trapped by propriatary data formats that import but no export capabilities. Data won't be subject to security risks that are so problematic for data residing behind MS web servers.

And you can develop and application that does the same things as what MS is proposing and then run it on your clients servers at their facilities and behind locked doors. What MS is saying is that to host the app on their servers will cost less than doing it yourself.

MS is not forcing you to use these services. They are offering them as an alternative.

>
>I could go on but my new grandson needs some attention.

Congratulations!