Hello,
Keil support did not reply yet - but am I correct in assuming that RL-ARM is now a part of MDK, and that each user needs to have a RL-ARM license paid for separately in order to be able to use FlashFS/TCPNet etc. (many samples in MDK 4.20 are broken, but the one that I did manage to compile failed to link complaining that my license is insufficient - that did not happen with MDK 4.14 !) ? If so, this is a HUGE expense. If my boss asks for my opinion (and I think he will) - we're going open source!
The interesting thing is the Cortex chips that can run without a single assembler line - the core takes care of setting up the environment for calling a C reset handler and standard C ISR functions.
With chip manufacturers supplying reasonable kick-start sample code, the need for the Keil simulator is decreasing while at the same time the cost of it is going up.
Most other companies that sees such an equation does what all hw product owners does, i.e. very carefully checks the price structure and sees how a product can be sold cheaper but in higher volumes to still maintain the profit. Almost all companies tries to get more customers since they are forced to sell at a lower price. Keil seems to go the other route - fewer customers but each customer charged more.
Per,
I fully support your proposals.
You posted
"Almost all companies tries to get more customers since they are forced to sell at a lower price. Keil seems to go the other route - fewer customers but each customer charged more."
I not sure if it applied fully, but a term I encountered recently could characterize this situation: "the economics of (customer) extinction"...
An open letter to Keil/ARM:
"Dear Madam/Sir,
Our local distributer of the Keil/ARM tool-chain has informed us that we better upgrade our tools soon because the prices of the RL-ARM library license is going up from 3400 euro per seat to 4190 euro per seat starting 1st of April.
With all due respect, I must point out to you that this is entirely unacceptable. I have a lot of respect for your mostly excellent tools, but I believe that in this particular instance you are hurting your own core business: There is a large number of commercial and indeed, outstanding open source alternatives available with more of less comparable functionality and occasionally with better documentation. I believe that a significant number of small to medium companies will refuse to pay these prices, and will search and find more cost effectives ways to get the job done . I cannot speak for others - but I can tell you that this is most definitely the trend of my employer. You're playing with fire! Wasn't your stated goal to promote the usage of low cost 32-bit microcontrollers? Do you really believe this pricing policy coalesces with this goal?
Kind regards,
Tamir Michael"