@Charles: Nothing wrong with paying for software, but I personally feel it's pretty uncool because of the spirit in which Reflector was made and originally released to the community. Lutz Roeder made it and never asked for a cent. IIRC, he was the first .NET MVP because of it (correct me if I'm wrong).
If he had of charged for it later on, I would have no problem with it, because it's useful and he deserves to be paid; but he didn't, probably because he thought it would be taking advantage of the community who became dependent on it. It feels like one of the "conditions" of transfer of ownership, implied or otherwise (I'm not saying it was) was that there would always be the base, free edition. When RedGate took it over and just asked for payment for the pro version (and the pro edition does have many nice features ... I should have bought a copy long ago, to support the development and I didn't ... my bad), while maintaining the original for free, I felt that was good for everyone.
I guess it's just not enough money, but I still feel like they'd be better off continuing to add to the pro edition and keeping the base product free because all .NET developers use it. Although, $35 isn't too much to ask from my perspective, for a perpetual license, some devs will balk at it, and it will just be a pain point in the working environment, simply because I can't just say to anyone, "crack open that assembly with Reflector and find out", instead many people will complain that they have to pay for it and are less likely to just use it. It's something that should be in VS. I wish MS would have picked it up from Lutz instead of RedGate.
Anyhow, it's not that I won't pay for it; I probably will, I just hope RedGate includes all the professional features for that price too. Eventually I will get over it.