Thanks, Red Gate
-
Is it possible to stick with the free version or does it still force you to "upgrade" at startup? And is there any way to bypass the update?
I was able to stop latest pre-RedGate version 5.1.6.0 to update itself with a "dirty" hack circa 2009. :) "C:\Program Files (x86)\Nirsoft\RunAsDate\RunAsDate.exe" /movetime 11\08\2009 16:21:42 "C:\Program Files (x86)\RedGate\.NET Reflector\Reflector.exe" Just create a shortcut with command line like above and forget about updates. P.S. You willl need NirSoft's RunAsDate[^].
-
My last check, Reflector is obfuscated.
:..::. Douglas H. Troy ::..
Bad Astronomy |VCF|wxWidgets|WTL*cough*ildasm/ilasm*cough* Seriously? I mean, there's one single boolean comparison between us and a perpeptually usable free version of reflector. We're a community of programmers, I mean, seriously? Surely someone can pull it off. Maybe even I could! (Although I think the author was (hopefully) a little smarter than I would manage :laugh: )
Don't forget to rate my post if it helped! ;) "He has no enemies, but is intensely disliked by his friends." "His mother should have thrown him away, and kept the stork." "There's nothing wrong with you that reincarnation won't cure." "He loves nature, in spite of what it did to him."
-
Reflector, our beloved Reflector, will never be free again. From version 7 on, you'll have to dish out 35$. I don't know if it's a repost; search didn't produce results. Feels wrong. X|
-
Reflector, our beloved Reflector, will never be free again. From version 7 on, you'll have to dish out 35$. I don't know if it's a repost; search didn't produce results. Feels wrong. X|
Why is it wrong? I think it's well worth that money. It's their software and they have the right to have you pay for a license. So, I repeat, Thanks Redgate, for allowing to use Reflector so long for free!
-
They might not have got the halo effect they were hoping for with the free version; but they have gotten a forked tail, pitchfork, and horns effect by pulling the plug on it. There is exactly zero chance I will ever lobby for buying a redgate product in the future; and a 100% chance I will lobby against efforts by any co-workers to do so.
3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18
That's dumb. $35 is cheap.
I'm not a player, I just code a lot! Alex Dresko
-
I was able to stop latest pre-RedGate version 5.1.6.0 to update itself with a "dirty" hack circa 2009. :) "C:\Program Files (x86)\Nirsoft\RunAsDate\RunAsDate.exe" /movetime 11\08\2009 16:21:42 "C:\Program Files (x86)\RedGate\.NET Reflector\Reflector.exe" Just create a shortcut with command line like above and forget about updates. P.S. You willl need NirSoft's RunAsDate[^].
Access denied. Reason: Hacking, Spyware/Malware Sources, Software Downloads PS normal download sites like cnet/tucows don't get blocked for the 3rd reason, I think I've only seen it in combination with other banned things...
3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18
-
That's dumb. $35 is cheap.
I'm not a player, I just code a lot! Alex Dresko
-
Why is it wrong? I think it's well worth that money. It's their software and they have the right to have you pay for a license. So, I repeat, Thanks Redgate, for allowing to use Reflector so long for free!
I don't have a problem with them charging for the new version, but having the existing version expire and delete itself is totally unacceptable. Imagine if Microsoft tried to do this. How would you feel if they announced new versions of SQL Express and Visual Studio Express which would cost $35, and hidden in the FAQ about the new release, they casually threw in the fact that all existing installations of previous versions would expire and remove themselves from your system? If they were stupid enough to do that, I think the negative publicity would practically destroy their developer tools division. Thanks to Lutz Roeder for creating such a great tool; no thanks to RedGate for destroying it. Here's hoping JetBrains are serious about this: http://blogs.jetbrains.com/dotnet/2011/02/reflections-on-recent-news/[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
I could. I most certainly could. But I have a feeling that the next time you need to do something that only Reflector can do, you'll cough up the $35 yourself. Personally, I'm going to get the $95 pro version since I've got to buy a license anyway.
I'm not a player, I just code a lot! Alex Dresko
-
Access denied. Reason: Hacking, Spyware/Malware Sources, Software Downloads PS normal download sites like cnet/tucows don't get blocked for the 3rd reason, I think I've only seen it in combination with other banned things...
3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18
That's strange. I guess it's AV or "smart filter" complains. The RunAsDate's author warns that some AV solutions mark the EXE as a malware which it's not. They do that for only reason IMHO that the tool hooks Win32 API functions and is not on the whitelist and not signed. Anyway I've used it for years without a hitch, of course, YMMV.
-
You know, I find that annoying, but then I found it annoying that the once a year I need it, I'd always find it had expired. But, $95 IS small change for any working developer outside India, surely, and Red Gate clearly did not buy it to just keep giving it away. Don't blame Red Gate for paying for it and expecting a return, blame the guy who sold it, he must have known this would be the result.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
It's not the cost of the new version that's the problem; it's the fact that all existing copies will expire and start demanding money that's causing the most upset.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
Reflector, our beloved Reflector, will never be free again. From version 7 on, you'll have to dish out 35$. I don't know if it's a repost; search didn't produce results. Feels wrong. X|
Recipe for a monopoly: 1. Buy or build a really good product 2. Give it away 3. Wait for all the competition to disappear 4. Wait for everyone to become hooked on it 5. Start charging for it Drug dealers have been doing it for years. Considering the price of their other offerings, do you REALLY think it's going to stay that (relatively) cheap once they get you used to paying for it?
Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, For you are crunchy, and good with mustard.
-
They might not have got the halo effect they were hoping for with the free version; but they have gotten a forked tail, pitchfork, and horns effect by pulling the plug on it. There is exactly zero chance I will ever lobby for buying a redgate product in the future; and a 100% chance I will lobby against efforts by any co-workers to do so.
3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18
I'm with you on that. Lutz was able to provide this software free of charge for a long time, now some Oracle wannabe company does that? No way I will support that. I prefer supporting Sun wannabe comanpanies than this kind of atrocity. It's good that this will stimulate me to better understand IL code when I need to figure out stuff going on the .net framework. And perhaps, build my own disassembler.
-
Reflector, our beloved Reflector, will never be free again. From version 7 on, you'll have to dish out 35$. I don't know if it's a repost; search didn't produce results. Feels wrong. X|
Uh... Do you develop software for a living? Do you work for free? This is the last place I'd expect to hear complaints about wanting to get paid for work done. Jeesh. $35 is pretty cheap for a useful tool. If it's not useful, don't use it.
Steve Tahan Savannah River Site Aiken, SC
-
That's strange. I guess it's AV or "smart filter" complains. The RunAsDate's author warns that some AV solutions mark the EXE as a malware which it's not. They do that for only reason IMHO that the tool hooks Win32 API functions and is not on the whitelist and not signed. Anyway I've used it for years without a hitch, of course, YMMV.
-
I'm with you on that. Lutz was able to provide this software free of charge for a long time, now some Oracle wannabe company does that? No way I will support that. I prefer supporting Sun wannabe comanpanies than this kind of atrocity. It's good that this will stimulate me to better understand IL code when I need to figure out stuff going on the .net framework. And perhaps, build my own disassembler.
One of the reasons Lutz sold Reflector was because he was NOT able to maintain Reflector anymore. It had grown beyond his ability to keep up with it.
I'm not a player, I just code a lot! Alex Dresko
-
One of the reasons Lutz sold Reflector was because he was NOT able to maintain Reflector anymore. It had grown beyond his ability to keep up with it.
I'm not a player, I just code a lot! Alex Dresko
I can be totally wrong but I disagree. When the app was his yet, really, it worked the same way it works today and I never needed a patch and never ran into an issue. He could've kept the reflector that way, IMHO, he didn't even have to dedicate himself to that project anymore, it was good as it was and as it is. He might have gotten carried away by requests and support, but as a free application he didn't have to commit to any of that. Now, I beleive the real reason is money. I beleive he's 100% right and I'd do the same if I could be paid for some hard work that provides a high quality software. As you said it, he "sold" it and he earned it. It's too bad we now have to pay. I was hoping that red-gate would concentrate on selling the extensions only, which are really useful, but not mandatory.
-
That's dumb. $35 is cheap.
I'm not a player, I just code a lot! Alex Dresko
35 USD would be fair, but the Redgate purchase page says 69 EUR (~94 USD) for a license without upgrades and support. This is quite expensive for a tool which have seen only minor improvements in the last years. A full version of ReSharper cost 176 EUR (not to mention their special offers) and to be honest, ReSharper is more than four times as much worth than Reflector (at least from my point of view).
-
I can be totally wrong but I disagree. When the app was his yet, really, it worked the same way it works today and I never needed a patch and never ran into an issue. He could've kept the reflector that way, IMHO, he didn't even have to dedicate himself to that project anymore, it was good as it was and as it is. He might have gotten carried away by requests and support, but as a free application he didn't have to commit to any of that. Now, I beleive the real reason is money. I beleive he's 100% right and I'd do the same if I could be paid for some hard work that provides a high quality software. As you said it, he "sold" it and he earned it. It's too bad we now have to pay. I was hoping that red-gate would concentrate on selling the extensions only, which are really useful, but not mandatory.
The source of my comments: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKnEjiSGZLA[^]
I'm not a player, I just code a lot! Alex Dresko
-
The source of my comments: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKnEjiSGZLA[^]
I'm not a player, I just code a lot! Alex Dresko
I've seen that, but that's red-gate speaking. They don't speak for Lutz. If I hear from him that it was more about maintainabilty than for the money, than I'll agree with you.