CheersnGears Posted March 22, 2014 Share Posted March 22, 2014 When I get bored with the "When is IPB4?" thread, I wander over to the xenforo and drupal forums and read about conversions... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rimi Posted March 22, 2014 Share Posted March 22, 2014 When I get bored with the "When is IPB4?" thread, I wander over to the xenforo and drupal forums and read about conversions...Let us know how that works out for you. Could do with a laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASTRAPI Posted March 22, 2014 Share Posted March 22, 2014 Relax it will be ready at the end of April :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We are Borg Posted March 22, 2014 Share Posted March 22, 2014 Relax it will be ready at the end of April :smile: And if its not relax even more then it will be end of May. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheersnGears Posted March 22, 2014 Share Posted March 22, 2014 Let us know how that works out for you. Could do with a laugh. yeah... because IP.Content (my main platform) has no competition out there... I've already said that forums will be of a reduced importance for my site. I don't see any technical reason why Xenforo wouldn't work to replace just the forums for me. You're attitude towards IPS customers who are displeased is actually worse than IPS's.... which is quite an achievement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misi Posted March 22, 2014 Share Posted March 22, 2014 Relax it will be ready at the end of April :smile: I have a strong feeling that it will be announced on the very beginning of April. 1st of April Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Modding Posted March 22, 2014 Share Posted March 22, 2014 stoo, I don't know how that was relevant, because as of years ago they changed the structure and posted a blog saying you have full access to marketplace (as a developer) if your license is expired. I didn't read through that topic other than a post or two, but I see it's from 2014 so I don't know why he posted about the irony, when we are already still allowed to make money with expired licenses, as detailed in the blog entry by IPS. So it's a given we can already do that. My concern is why I can do that, yet not even see the list of who bought my apps! That is not full access. It said in the blog that the reason they changed the structure was that it makes things better for the community as a whole, and it sure doesn't make things good for the process if we can't even see contributor center info. Also, Ips already makes their money.... from commission, so there really is no irony, anyway, unless someone is asking for commission to not be taken. Support costs should be for support. Perpetuals are worthless if you pay for support. Also, again, I only lost access a few days ago, yet have not renewed support in years, thus why it's very confusing. Related to 4.0, as well, because, as I said, they've made a big deal about how they will have an area for us to work together to get things ready and with me suddenly having no access to contributor areas, who knows if they won't even let me do this 4.0 help forum thing, either. But my main concern is still in regard to seeing who purchased, or we can't even know who to support! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jυra Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 They should take their bitter sweet time so they can make up their mind on how they want to have their default layout. That way they won't flip flop on how it should look and break custom skins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DustinRyan Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 They should take their bitter sweet time so they can make up their mind on how they want to have their default layout. That way they won't flip flop on how it should look and break custom skins. Even if the default look and feel did not change, skins would not work. There are far better ways to code skins, and methods, trends, etc. have evolved in ways to make code more condensed, efficient, and responsive. IPS could easily keep the actual placement of things the same as always, but that does not fare well for marketing purposes when people can't see a difference. Plus, Rikki's personal tastes may have evolved, and there may be far more intuitive layouts for parts of the board. Short answer: Even if everything stayed looking exactly the same, custom skins would not work on massively upgraded versions of IPB. They barely work on small upgrades to IPB (for logical reasons). As a skinner, we would all love skins to forever be compatible with every version of IPB. But nothing is entirely future-proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Modding Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Not always does improving something or changing methods mean developers can't make it compatible with something done previously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hexsplosions Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Please install a Windows 95 theme on Windows 7. :smile:Technology moves on and backwards compatibility must eventually take a lower priority. I'm glad stuff is not backwards compatible. It's a fresh start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davyc Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 I have to say that I find the whole debacle surrounding contributors to the marketplace shocking. Why do they need an active support licence to IPS software, which is current, to provide support in the marketplace for their contributions? I can understand a 'buyer' requiring an active licence, but a contributor who is required to provide support for their contributions being 'locked out' is unbelievable. If I purchased an add-on from the market place and I couldn't get support for it because the contributor is 'locked out' by IPS, I'd up sticks and move elsewhere. If, as it has been mentioned, IPS receive a commission off contributors for sales through their market place then that should off-set any costs for maintaining it. Contributors are an essential attraction for IPS and their clients and this addition should be seen as a real positive and plus, yet IPS seem hell bent on negating this positive to their software; it's like cutting the string on your bow and still expecting it to fire arrows. If I had the ability to code I'd be looking elsewhere to ply my ideas. I'm afraid IPS has gone down another notch in my estimation. :sad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSP Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 I have to say that I find the whole debacle surrounding contributors to the marketplace shocking. Why do they need an active support licence to IPS software, which is current, to provide support in the marketplace for their contributions? You are not required to provide support, and you could use other methods of contacting the author.We have changed the Marketplace terms so you are not required to provide technical support for your submissions.There is an input field where you can describe how to get support for your file (topic, email, PM, etc.) or, if you wish, you can indicate that no support is provided.If you choose to not offer support note that we will delete files that we get complaints on.Of course we still encourage you to offer support but we hope this change will make life easier for those of you with very simple files or files that you know work just fine to eliminate some annoyance. Especially true for free files I'm sure.Either way, I don't think it's entirely unreasonable that contributors have an active support license. Contributors depend on Invision Power Servies to have a product. IPS can't deliver a product if everyone goes on and tries to constantly optimize their savings by not renewing their license for the longer periods where no updates are delivered, due to the larger updates being made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davyc Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 When you buy something you expect a level of support and what better place to provide that support than the market place you bought the item from. Not allowing Contributors to support their products through this medium makes no sense. Just because you're not required, by IPS, to provide support that doesn't mean you don't want to provide support. There is a Catch 22 in what Charles is quoted as stating, in that you don't have to provide support but if you choose not to and complaints are received (which will undoubtedly come fast and furious if you don't provide support) then the files will be deleted; meaning that anyone who purchased an item will be left dead in the water. No one has given any 'reasonable' (note the operative word) explanation why a 'support licence' for IPS software is required by contributors to support their own contributions. If IPS are paid a commission for sales made through the market place, then asking for an additional payment for a 'support licence' is like wanting your cake and eating it. Contributors add value to the IPS product and make it more attractive to those in the market for forum based software - they already pay for the privilege via commission for adding value to something that would be the poorer if they did not add their contributions; penalising contributors for this added value makes no sense to me at all. As for wanting 'something for nothing' - that also does not hold true; many contributors spend hours on end beefing up shortfalls in the feature set that people desire; in the UK there is a minimum wage per hour and if Contributors were to add up the hours they spend creating something that benefits others and charge for the work 'value' they have expended on their contributions they could easily outreach the cost of the IPS software itself. I'm not a contributor, so I'm looking from the outside in, but as someone who runs their own business I would most certainly not penalise anyone who added value to my feature set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Management Charles Posted March 23, 2014 Management Share Posted March 23, 2014 Apple makes you specifically pay a fee just to have access to their AppStore. We don't do that. We just require you have an active license to the software that you are making addons for. I think that's quite reasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davyc Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Apple makes you specifically pay a fee just to have access to their AppStore. We don't do that. We just require you have an active license to the software that you are making addons for. I think that's quite reasonable. I'm astounded that you even make comparisons with another company that offers a completely different set of products - you don't have to 'copy' others; be innovative and lead rather than following. As for you not requiring, specifically, a fee is also not realistic as it 'costs' to have an active licence which is a 'specific fee'. I've also discovered that this is not something new having been discussed previously elsewhere. Going back two years someone else pointed out the short-comings of not allowing Contributors access. See here >>> http://www.theadminzone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=629449&postcount=83 read the last paragraph of the comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We are Borg Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Apple makes you specifically pay a fee just to have access to their AppStore. We don't do that. We just require you have an active license to the software that you are making addons for. I think that's quite reasonable. Sorry to say but your doing exactly the same. Apple: Fee + Commision = Access IPB: License Fee + Commision = Access IPB is the same as Apple in that regarde you'll need to pay two times to gain access to the system. The solution that might work is as follows allow people to give support but do not allow them to upload new versions or redraw the cash in their account. @Davyc Following is cheaper then making your own rules, especially when the system your trying to copy is giving high interest on the long term. This is Web 2.0 at the moment where Web 1.0 was innovating by making new stuff Web 2.0 is copying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Management Charles Posted March 23, 2014 Management Share Posted March 23, 2014 I hear what you're saying but we think it's very reasonable to require that Contributors have an active license. For them to submit work they also need the latest version of our software and of course need an active license to get this. You are not a Contributor and I can say it's not something I have ever seen a topic on in the private Contributors forum so clearly they do not seem overly concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Management Charles Posted March 23, 2014 Management Share Posted March 23, 2014 Sorry to say but your doing exactly the same. Apple: Fee + Commision = Access IPB: License Fee + Commision = Access IPB is the same as Apple in that regarde you'll need to pay two times to gain access to the system. @Davyc Following is cheaper then making your own rules, especially when the system your trying to copy is giving high interest on the long term. This is Web 2.0 at the moment where Web 1.0 was innovating by making new stuff Web 2.0 is copying. Does that mean we can raise our commission to 30%? :smile: Let's not derail this topic more than it has already derailed. If you want to talk about the Marketplace start a topic about the Marketplace but as I said the Contributors, who all this impacts, have a private forum in which they can speak to us and none have raised a topic about this so I really think you are creating something out of nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adriano Faria Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 You are not a Contributor and I can say it's not something I have ever seen a topic on in the private Contributors forum so clearly they do not seem overly concerned. The fact that a topic does not exist, does not mean that we do not care or agree with all the rules. I also think it should have more integration between IPS and contributors. See this example: http://community.invisionpower.com/topic/370529-topic-password-protection/?p=2465395 It is a client from IPS using my resource, downloaded in a warez site. The official IPS response (via staff) on the reported post, summarizing: we can't do anything. The user hasn't broken any IPS rules. So I have to pay for the license, I pay 15% in every purchase and I feel it is like, "you're on your own". That's not right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Management Charles Posted March 23, 2014 Management Share Posted March 23, 2014 The fact that a topic does not exist, does not mean that we do not care or agree with all the rules. I also think it should have more integration between IPS and contributors. See this example: http://community.invisionpower.com/topic/370529-topic-password-protection/?p=2465395 It is a client from IPS using my resource, downloaded in a warez site. The official IPS response (via staff) on the reported post, summarizing: we can't do anything. The user hasn't broken any IPS rules. So I have to pay for the license, I pay 15% in every purchase and I feel it is like, "you're on your own". That's not right! If you have issues then start a topic, contact me (my email is in my signature and has been for years), or email marketplace@invisionpower.com. It's not like we make this hard to do :smile: and we have over the years constantly made changes based on feedback. Moving on: what you just said about how we handle piracy is just flat out wrong and shocking. If someone is downloading stuff from the Marketplace and then pirating it we ban their entire account here (both Marketplace and client access). We have done it before and will do it again. I am shocked you would say that. IPS spends a lot of time and money fighting piracy and takes it very seriously. It impacts us all the time. Beyond that I find it personally abhorrent. When people I know joke about downloading a song or software illegally they get quite a speech from me. So for you to act like we encourage piracy is beyond my comprehension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.