Cof file and CCS maintenance fee

[Peter Mayhew]

This is very odd, my code works fine, but just by adding the line

[troky]

[Peter Mayhew]

Well I’ll keep a close eye on this discussion and see what other peoples views are as well. If most people are in agreement, then maybe we should all stand together and make our voices heard to CCS. After all we are the customer and in the end they would have to listen to us if the matter was taken seriously.

I'm tempted to first see some more opinions and then maybe we could also send an e-mail to CCS raising our concerns, then they might start to see that maybe things need to be changed. Either way if you don't ask, then your'll never know!

Maybe there is another side to this that I am not aware of, and that this is in fact the best method already in force (the maintenance fee). Your comments are welcome, and I’m prepared to listen.

[Frank]

If you want free updates for one year, then go pay $800.00 US for HighTech C.

http://www.htsoft.com/

[troky]

The issue here is not paying for updates and new versions but paying for patches and bugfixes.
Point is, if I buyed , for example, v3.100 then I want it bugs-free, so IMHO, all versions from v3.100-3.199 should be free for me and, hopefully, without many bugs. I don't need support for new chips because when the time comes I _will_ pay for that new update.


Troky

[dyeatman]

Wow!
One side just wants free bug fixes and the other side seems to understand the cost differential issues. I am somewhere in the middle...

All of us want something for nothing, even me! :-) My prediction is that CCS will eventually get tired of being hammered and give everyone the free updates for a year BUT the initial license (for PCM for example) will be > $200 instead of the $125 it is now. They have to get their revenue somehow. "OR" you could look at it that the PCM compiler costs $225 for the initial purchase (which is still MUCH LESS than HiTech or C18) and the problem is solved.

Realistically one needs to remember CCS is a small company providing a nitch product and it takes capital to stay in business. Why do HiTech and MChip charge so much more ($800/$495) for a product that ALSO has bugs and does not have many of the specialized "features" of CCS? Because they include free bug fixes, but they also have to make money and chose to make it faster (or more of it) than CCS maybe? Or they have more programmers on staff and it costs more to develop? Who knows...

As someone who personally owns five different compilers I can appreciate the cost issue but, while I agree with some of the opinions raised here, I also consider the CCS compiler a good value and have used it for the last four years or so with great success. Coding syle and how many "whiz bang" "C" tricks you try to use does affect how many bugs you encounter so I keep it clean and simple when possible. Many times the code comes out smaller (which is the preferred result) when I do something the simple straight forward way and, as a benefit, the code is much more readable.

I have remind myself periodically this is NOT an ANSI compiler and I can't do all the fancier stuff here. After all it is a highly specialized lowly PIC and if I need something fancier and more powerful I use the 8051 or 68K family. When I started with the PICS (and CCS) I learned I had to totally change my method of thinking from the Windoze programming world....

Personally, in four years, I have encountered only two serious "bugs" that could be truly blamed on CCS and not my trying to get "fancy". In both cases I coded around the problem and went on. In the same four years I found more than 30 bugs in the MS and Borland compilers and I paid a LOT more for them! I would have to say that most of my luck with PICS is likely due my conservative programming style which I mentioned earlier.

I, for one, hope CCS does not take all the criticizm too personally and "knee jerk" about all this. Everyone has the right to voice an opinion but CCS has to make thier decisions based on cost models and good business practice regardless of what we tell them. I would hate to lose them in the marketplace because they got bullied by their cutomers into doing something that caused them to go out of business. At the same time they do need to be responsive to those same custiomers. Everything has a cost...

An alternative is to issue single bug fixes for proven serious bugs to folks with specific problems who dont have the maint update option. Upgrades and improvements (new features and add'l PICS) would go only to the ones who pay add'l for it. Of course there are pitfalls, issues and costs to this approach as there are to all others which I am sure CCS well understands....

I personally appreciate their product and hope they stay around for a long time!

My two cents worth again,
A relatively happy CCS customer

[Peter Mayhew]

Well hopefully my humble views will not drive CCS into changing their business structure into catastrophic failure within this niche market.

I totally agree with your comments, CCS is a business and is naturally here to make money from their service.

I can see you view; CCS would have to raise their software prices to compensate for the free updates, to cover the overheads. But I still feel that if there is a serious flaw within the package, it should be fixed free, after all you wouldn't expect a garage to charge you if the engine suddenly stopped working. If you pay for something you surely would expect it to work!.

For business customers CCS’s prices will not be an issue, but for people like myself, their prices are somewhat concern.

I guess it’s hard for us to understand and appreciate at times, when we are so frequently 'wrapped up in cotton wool' with (for example) Microsoft products, hence having free updates. Somehow Microsoft must make their money some other way (thinking about it MS do charge for consultancy, and if I’m right CCS provide this free?) So when thinking about this, CCS is providing us with a good deal.

Although a modestly experienced in software development, (but relatively new to PIC's) it would be rather frustrating for me to develop software, and 'banging my head against a brick wall' when the software doesn't work, just to find it’s a compiler fault. Something I hope doesn't happen to me.

It would be nice if the PCM software was at discount for students (myself being one, hence being biased) I have seen some discounts on the CCS website for academic studies but not anything for the (most popular product?) PCM software.

Well I’ll make do with my purchase, and try not to grumble too much when I receive e-mail notifications of “bugs now fixed” in my software. I'm sure they do it just to tease us! (joke)

Hopefully CCS will read these views and take them on board. Any business needs feedback, and I'm sure what ever decision they make, or the decisions they have made, have been in the best interest of us...the customers. On the whole, well done CCS on a great compilier.

[PCM programmer]

They do have a $50 student version here. It's limited to 16F876/877A
PICs only.
http://www.ccsinfo.com/education.shtml

[Peter Mayhew]

Is that a new thing? I'm sure I didn't see that when I purchased the software mid december last year?

[arga]

I don't question CCS charging for maintenance fee for updates. And surely, no one can *fully* guarantee a totally bug-free software.

However, CCS just has to be extra careful before releasing any updates, whether it's to do with adding more features or to fix bugs.

And perhaps, in one of the threads here that I've read, CCS be more detailed in what they have done on each version update rather than be vague about it.

[dbotkin]

I agree that CCS' maintenance fees are a little high. The annual maintenance is basically buying the product new every year. If it were half that I'd renew every year, instead of only when I absolutely have to. I honestly think they could cut their maintenance in half and increase revenue.

I've been using CCS for four years now, maybe five. In that time I have run into only a couple of cases where the compiler actually did not work the way it should. In both cases I emailed CCS tech support and we worked it out. All in all, I've been using this compiler for four years and have STILL not spent the $800 that HT would have cost, let alone the $2500+ for IAR. I'm happy with it. I do however strongly believe that CCS should offer updates for a year after initial purchase, not just 30 or 90 days or whatever it is. That would be my only real gripe.

Dale

[Peter Mayhew]

This is a little off topic, but I wanted to make this information available online to hopefully prevent other students having a simular problem.

I contacted CCS regarding the student version, this was their response

[Vector Research]

Well i don't know what the solution is, but i can tell you, as someone who has been using the ccs compilers since the very beginning, It has allways been a problem.
I think what needs to happen is that rather than adding new chips, each version of the compiler should focus on supporting a certain groups of parts. all releases in that major version number should focus on bug fixes and compiler optimizations. This is the model that is used with linux kernels and it does work well. Eventually you wind up with a kernel (or compiler in this case) that is fairly rock solid. Any new parts and features should go into a new Major version, and then the cycle repeats.
Users rather than being charged per year for maintance, would purchase maintance for a givin Major release and if they want more features they must pay for an upgrade.

vince

[water_river]

hi,
I also met this prolem. Is it due to the CCS compiler??
Thanks a lot