> You have to purchase a Commercial License at the official website.
But one developer can build an app used by many users. So I suppose you are oddly pressured into buying the more expensive license because you probably have more than one "user"?
Generally, I feel uncomfortable investing in source-available tools. That said, if I needed a PDF viewer in a React app in a pinch, I'd probably reach for this and pay for the full license.
More details on the license found here: https://react-pdf-viewer.dev/license/
This is the part that would freak out most lawyers: "You may combine the Item with other works and make a derivative work from it. The resulting works are subject to the terms of this license."
It clearly says "Use in multiple websites" under both licenses, so it's talking about devs not users (like most such licenses).
for example, if a thing has three pricing options (free, paid, and enterprise), it is always the second option (paid, but not enterprise) that has the "most popular" badge. which seems suspicious to me in cases where the free version is sufficient for most users and as a result there isn't really much of an incentive to switch to a paid plan.
The idea behind these callouts is to direct people away from the lowest tiers. According to theory, some buyers will always go for the priciest plan because they want "the best of the best" but most will try to get the best value for their needs. A common trick is to have a slight price increment between the bottom and middle tier and then a large increment between that one and the top tier because this suggests that you're leaving money on the table by going for the cheapest option. As an approachable example consider McDonald's McNuggets sizes where the smallest size has a noticeably higher cost per nugget than the next one up.
It's a bit silly in this case as an organization plan has a different target audience from a personal plan but to me this suggests the license works in such a way many organization end up buying only a single personal plan because the organization plan doesn't provide any added value beyond allowing multiple developers to work with it.
A common pricing strategy is to either only have two plans (free/paid or personal/organization) with easily distinguishable value propositions or to have multiple pricing tiers (e.g. basic/premium/professional plus a de-emphasized free/minimal "trial" plan and an option to get a custom offer for enterprise) with only the latter strategy normally having these callouts.
If a company does use "most popular" based on actual popularity, they'll likely only do so when the most popular option is the one they actually want you to pick anyway.
[0]: To be fair, a few years back I once came across a pricing page that had tons of plans and did distinguish between "most popular", "best value" and such. But this is a rare exception and I still don't think they actually measured that one.
I thought for a few minutes about the reason that units of currency are different and come before the number, determined there must be an obvious logical one. But, if there is, I can't think of it!
I suppose it's also possible it needs to sometimes be used (although, again, I have never seen this) in certain cases in more 'formal' situations - accounting, contracts and so on. I guess the format, with the symbols wrapping the numbers so as to make them easier to parse, does make sense.
Similar rationale, though, because it's easier to modify a number (say, change a 7 to a 9) than to change a full word.
#$105.90#
Is this just local to me?
From the same source, "an R-value expressed in I-P (inch-pound) units[13] is about 5.68 times larger than when expressed in SI units"; the latter being measured in K⋅m2/W.