madison

Dev Connection

Ed Burnette
Home / News & Blogs / Dev Connection

Red Gate: We could not make the free model work for us as a commercial company

By | February 2, 2011, 6:05am PST

Summary: Today, .NET Reflector goes from being a free program to a paid program. Not only that, but all current versions will stop working unless you buy a license.

If you’re a .NET developer, chances are you’ve heard of .NET Reflector, a decompilation, debugging, and reverse engineering tool for managed code. Originally written by Lutz Roeder, .NET Reflector was acquired by Red Gate in August 2008. At the time, James Moore, Red Gate’s general manager of .NET Developer Tools said:

“Our commitment is to maintain an amazing free tool that will continue to benefit the community while seeking input from users on ways to make .NET Reflector even more valuable.”

In a sure-to-be controversial decision, the company is preparing to renege on that commitment. This morning, Red Gate Software announced that it will charge $35 for the basic edition of .NET Reflector 7, scheduled for release in early March. According to Neil Davidson, co-CEO of Red Gate,

“We provided .NET Reflector without charge for two-and-a-half years, but unfortunately could not make the free model work for us as a commercial company. Charging this nominal amount – about the price of a tank of gas in the U.S. – will enable us to dedicate a team of developers to make sure that Reflector remains a valuable, up-to-date tool over the long term.”

See also: Video with Greg Tillman and Simon Galbraith on the future of .NET Reflector.

I sat down with Greg Tillman from Red Gate’s marketing team to get their side of the story…

Next: Why the free model didn’t work >

More from “Dev Connection”

Topics

Red Gate Software Ltd., .Net, Application Servers, Middleware, Software Development, Software/Web Development, Enterprise Software, Software, Ed Burnette

Ed Burnette is a software industry veteran with more than 25 years of experience as a programmer, author, and speaker. He has written numerous technical articles and books, most recently "Hello, Android: Introducing Google's Mobile Development Platform" from the Pragmatic Programmers.

Disclosure

Ed Burnette

Ed Burnette is a Manager of Mobile Development at SAS. However the postings on this site are his own and do not represent the positions, strategies, or opinions of his employer.

Biography

Ed Burnette

Ed Burnette has been hooked on computers ever since he laid eyes on a TRS-80 in the local Radio Shack. Since graduating from NC State University he has programmed everything from serial device drivers and debuggers to web servers. After a delightful break working on commercial video games, Ed reluctantly returned to business software. He currently develops enterprise software for Android phones and tablets.

In his copious spare time, Ed writes and speaks about all kinds of technology and software. His most recent books include the Eclipse IDE Pocket Guide from O'Reilly and Hello, Android: Introducing Google's Mobile Development Platform from the Pragmatic Programmers.

Talkback Most Recent of 22 Talkback(s)

  • morons!
    these greedy bean counters haven't heard of the FOSS model.
    It's time for a new ledership at red gate not some incompetent M$ puppets!
    ZDNet Gravatar
    Linux Geek
    2nd Feb 2011
  • RE: Red Gate: We could not make the free model work for us as a commercial company
    @Linux Geek - RedGate is a commercial software company, not a charity. They employ a team of people to improve their products. How are they to pay these people if they don't charge money for their products?

    If the whole world created projects using the FOSS model, everyone would be unemployed.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    bitcrazed
    2nd Feb 2011
  • RE: Red Gate: We could not make the free model work for us as a commercial company
    @bitcrazed
    RedGate did not create this tool, it was created by Lutz Roeder. When RedGate acquired the tool, they said

    "Under an agreement announced on Wednesday 20th August , Red Gate will be responsible for the future development of .NET Reflector, the popular tool authored by Lutz Roeder. Red Gate will continue to offer the tool for free to the community."

    AND

    "We accept the fact that there will be scepticism, but we can point to a good track record of support for the community."

    See the context on RedGate's site:
    http://www.simple-talk.com/opinion/opinion-pieces/the-future-of-reflector-/

    In the retail space, this is known as bait-and-switch. RedGate should be ashamed of themselves and I hope everyone who has any say in purchasing will support their competitors instead.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    jovball
    2nd Feb 2011
  • RE: Red Gate: We could not make the free model work for us as a commercial company
    @Linux Geek

    You must be one of those socialists wink

    You can argue philosophy all you want. but this isn't theoretical. They tried and it didn't work. I know, it obviously needs your deep tech knowledge and marketing smarts - why not give them a call.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    tonymcs@...
    2nd Feb 2011
  • RE: Red Gate: We could not make the free model work for us as a commercial company
    @Linux Geek Was it just me or did anyone else read this comment in Professor Hubert J. Farnsworths voice? :o)
    ZDNet Gravatar
    loulou14
    2nd Feb 2011
  • RE: Red Gate: We could not make the free model work for us as a commercial company
    @Linux Geek

    Maybe if you give them some money then the rest of us can use it for free.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    herry.k
    3rd Feb 2011
  • RE: Red Gate: We could not make the free model work for us as a commercial company
    This is so much bullshize! The reason nobody bought the other tools was they're too expensive for any individual to buy. I did look at their other tools and while I was impressed, I could not afford to buy them. Give me a break! With this, they've already shown they break their promises. Do you think I, or anyone else, will ever trust them again? Absolutely NOT!

    Furthermore, it's not their marketing of Reflector that has failed, it's the marketing of their other products that has failed!

    I guarantee you this will backfire on Red Gate!
    ZDNet Gravatar
    ahmed zahmed
    2nd Feb 2011
  • RE: Red Gate: We could not make the free model work for us as a commercial company
    ahmed zahmed --

    So what you're saying is that since Red Gate is now charging for Reflector, you not only won't buy it, but you'll also refuse to buy all of their other products that you never bought before ... and this will somehow "punish" them?

    Uh, yeah.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    Churlish
    2nd Mar
  • RE: Red Gate: We could not make the free model work for us as a commercial company
    @bitcrazed: You seem to be missing the point that Red Gate made a very specific commitment to the developer community when they acquired Reflector. Is a corporate entity somehow entitled to a more lax interpretation of the word "commitment" simply because they suddenly decide that a valuable service to the developer community is worth less than than a juicy new revenue stream?
    Of course Red Gate has to make money. But they market several very successful products. I don't think you need to be concerned about their ability to pay their employees.
    They are unhappy because the free Reflector didn't turn out to be the loss leader they hoped, so they are instead opting to throw this prior commitment out the window and cash in on a captive user base.
    Greg the Marketing Guy's statements notwithstanding, this decision has nothing to do with the cost of maintenance. It's all about an inability to resist the lure of a guaranteed revenue stream.

    Had Red Gate ever really looked at this as a commitment to continue to provide this valued and appreciated service to the developer community, they would either continue to fund it as a cost center or release the free version code base to open source and let the community maintain it. But the "commitment" -- like the justifications presented as they now abandon it -- was just marketing spin.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    Software_Cynic
    2nd Feb 2011
  • RE: Red Gate: We could not make the free model work for us as a commercial company
    You work/play in .net space and are now shocked to find demands to pay to continue to play?
    ZDNet Gravatar
    wkulecz
    2nd Feb 2011
  • RE: Red Gate: We could not make the free model work for us as a commercial company
    @wkulecz I am shocked to find such blatant underhandedness and broken promises!
    ZDNet Gravatar
    ahmed zahmed
    2nd Feb 2011
  • RE: Red Gate: We could not make the free model work for us as a commercial company
    I sell a commercial product too ... but I wouldn't break a promise like this.

    The deal was simple: RedGate acquires product IT DID NOT WRITE in return for a promise of a free version forever. Period.

    I hope Lutz has the right to take it back if RedGate violates that covenant.

    The ******** about the expiration data is UNBELIEVABLE. Let's say they want to break the deal and start charging. The LEAST they could do is set the expiration date on the last free version to "forever". Hiding behind Lutz's practice - which was reasonable for a solo operation - is affront to our intelligence. They have the source code; a perpetually free version cannot be a difficult "fix".

    Shame, shame, shame!
    ZDNet Gravatar
    wardbell
    2nd Feb 2011

  • ZDNet Blogger

    What Lutz thinks
    @wardbell I sent mail to Lutz to see what he thinks about it but he didn't answer. According to sources who know him, I've heard that he's ok and pragmatic about it, but I'd rather hear it from him.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    Ed Burnette
    2nd Feb 2011
  • RedGate must be in financial peril.
    Otherwise, why would they take such a step, when they know it's going to generate a lot of anger.

    W
    ZDNet Gravatar
    warren.postma@...
    2nd Feb 2011
  • Ripe for alternatives
    There are alternate decompilers/disassemblers out there, but Reflector commanded the most usage because it was free and very effective. Without the free part, and I don't care if it's $3.50 or $350, its allure considerably drops. In fact, its allure dropped when it went to Red-Gate and each download required an email address submission rather than just downloading the damn tool! (which I am sure they used to calculate number of unique user downloads, i.e., sales).

    However, what you'll see are alternative decompilers springing up, some yet-to-be-born, some already in existence but improving, and all perhaps even garnering inspiration from decompiling Reflector itself (in fact, Reflector was originally based on an MSFT .NET SDK sample project of the same name).

    So, short term it's a setback for the community; longer term though the developer community will have responded with a better and free workaround. Short and long term it will simply be a boneheaded move for Red-Gate whose execs probably watched a PowerPoint Marketing Guy put together showing how number of downloads/month * $35 USD = mad revenue, and like in way too many other software companies, they believed it.
    And I agree that this was planned all along.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    gjbdebug
    2nd Feb 2011
View More Comments

Talkback - Tell Us What You Think

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
Click Here

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

Blog Roll

Blog Archive

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources