Quantcast

Download LC Community: trapped.

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Download LC Community: trapped.

Mark Talluto via use-livecode
Until a few days ago, if you went via the OBSCURE green button right at
the bottom-left of the LiveCode
landing page [ www.livecode.com ] to the Open Source page [
www.livecode.org ] you could, by clicking
on the "Download" text at the top of that page go to the download page
[ www.downloads.livecode.com/livecode/ ].

But now you end up here: http://livecode.org/download-member-offer/

If you don't want a membership you end up here:
https://livecode,org/download-with-donation/

If you decide you don't wish to donate right now you still have to
specify a name and an e-mail
address.

So: NO anonymous download unless you happen to have previously bookmarked:

downloads.livecode.com/livecode/

Not good.

Richmond.
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Download LC Community: trapped.

Mark Talluto via use-livecode
Richmond Mathewson wrote:

 > Until a few days ago, if you went via the OBSCURE green button right
 > at the bottom-left of the LiveCode landing page [ www.livecode.com ]
 > to the Open Source page [ www.livecode.org ] you could, by clicking
 > on the "Download" text at the top of that page go to the download page
 > [ www.downloads.livecode.com/livecode/ ].
 >
 > But now you end up here: http://livecode.org/download-member-offer/
 >
 > If you don't want a membership you end up here:
 > https://livecode,org/download-with-donation/
 >
 > If you decide you don't wish to donate right now you still have to
 > specify a name and an e-mail
 > address.
 >
 > So: NO anonymous download unless you happen to have previously
 > bookmarked:
 >
 > downloads.livecode.com/livecode/
 >
 > Not good.


Agreed.  We all recognize the value of building a mailing list, but the
only emails worth sending are to those who want to receive them.

Optional sign-up is excellent.  Requiring personal information just to
download a binary, not so much.

People are increasingly concerned about privacy, and for good reason.
The open source community in particular is keenly sensitive to this
issue; they consider protecting privacy a critical priority.

If we are to expand LC's audience, we want it to be as easy as possible
for everyone to install it and start building great apps with it.

Anything that impedes that goal should be reviewed.

I've had discussions with the web team on related issues, and will
encourage them to return to offering unfettered access.

All of us want everyone to enjoy LiveCode, and if we're going to build a
growing ecosystem we have to remain mindful of details like this along
the way.

--
  Richard Gaskin
  LiveCode Community Manager
  [hidden email]



_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Download LC Community: trapped.

Mark Talluto via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Mark Talluto via use-livecode
On 3/9/2017 1:02 PM, Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode wrote:

> If you decide you don't wish to donate right now you still have to
> specify a name and an e-mail
> address.
>
> So: NO anonymous download unless you happen to have previously
> bookmarked:
>
> downloads.livecode.com/livecode/
>
> Not good.


In this age of massive invasion of privacy by governments, corporations,
and unpleasant groups and individuals, I can respect not wanting to
provide a name and email address for all sorts of reasons.

However, on the flip side, LiveCode Open Source (which I backed) may
have been a mistake. I backed the Open Source kickstarter for 2 reasons:
(1) in hopes more people would develop for LiveCode; and (2) so the
source would be there in the worst case scenario that LiveCode, Ltd went
kaput. The cost to switch our products to another language would be the
end of our business.

With 75% of downloads being Community, only 25% of the user base is
paying for 100% of the development. The idea being that those that get
LiveCode for free would, in some part, contribute back to the Open
Source effort that, in turn, expands the commercial offerings. The
statistics show that is only minimally happening and not in any way to
support the cost of giving LiveCode to 75% of the user base free. I hope
this changes.

In this context, asking for a email address in an attempt to market to
the people free access to LiveCode is a small thing to ask for.  If the
open source side of the house doesn't add more capabilities to LiveCode
or self-support itself through voluntary contributions to a greater
degree over time, then the practical reality is that it will ultimately
fail.

I hope that it does not fail.



_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Download LC Community: trapped.

Mark Talluto via use-livecode
Asking for an e-mail address is a small thing to ask for.

But _forcing_, rather than _asking_, isn't quite the same thing.

-------- Personal blether starts now -------

I don't feel capable in a big way to contribute to LiveCode development,
so I do try to send bug reports in when I fall over 'bugs'.

I am still wondering about trying to make a simplified interface for
some sort of
cut-down version of LiveCode using block-programming [ c.f. Scratch and
so on ].

I was wondering about having a script-editor with blocks . . .

Whether that would actually constitute devloping FOR Livecode is a moot
point.
One of my motives for considering it is that it might fuel greater
uptake at the child-teenage-educational
end of the spectrum working on the theory that children who start with
Livecode via block-programming
might progress to "proper" Livecode programming after a while.

Unfortunately I suspect that my idea is, like the ideas of many would-be
contributors, quite far
down the list of my day-to-day priorities: running a school, teaching,
developing my Devawriter Pro,
Professional Development, being a husband and a father, and so on and so
forth . . . I do hope that
in June/Jult/August I will find both the time and the energy to get
started on this . . . and, who knows,
some folk may deide to join in the "fun", although I haven't noticed
much "communal'" stuff going
on in this "community" to be honest.

------ Personal blether ends ----

And it is, indeed a gae richt scunner anent maist fowk's glisk til the
free version, but I for yin
amnae ma brither's keeper nor dictator forbye.

Richmond.

On 3/9/17 11:32 pm, Paul Dupuis via use-livecode wrote:

> On 3/9/2017 1:02 PM, Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode wrote:
>> If you decide you don't wish to donate right now you still have to
>> specify a name and an e-mail
>> address.
>>
>> So: NO anonymous download unless you happen to have previously
>> bookmarked:
>>
>> downloads.livecode.com/livecode/
>>
>> Not good.
>
> In this age of massive invasion of privacy by governments, corporations,
> and unpleasant groups and individuals, I can respect not wanting to
> provide a name and email address for all sorts of reasons.
>
> However, on the flip side, LiveCode Open Source (which I backed) may
> have been a mistake. I backed the Open Source kickstarter for 2 reasons:
> (1) in hopes more people would develop for LiveCode; and (2) so the
> source would be there in the worst case scenario that LiveCode, Ltd went
> kaput. The cost to switch our products to another language would be the
> end of our business.
>
> With 75% of downloads being Community, only 25% of the user base is
> paying for 100% of the development. The idea being that those that get
> LiveCode for free would, in some part, contribute back to the Open
> Source effort that, in turn, expands the commercial offerings. The
> statistics show that is only minimally happening and not in any way to
> support the cost of giving LiveCode to 75% of the user base free. I hope
> this changes.
>
> In this context, asking for a email address in an attempt to market to
> the people free access to LiveCode is a small thing to ask for.  If the
> open source side of the house doesn't add more capabilities to LiveCode
> or self-support itself through voluntary contributions to a greater
> degree over time, then the practical reality is that it will ultimately
> fail.
>
> I hope that it does not fail.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Download LC Community: trapped.

Mark Talluto via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Mark Talluto via use-livecode
Paul Dupuis wrote:

 > With 75% of downloads being Community, only 25% of the user base is
 > paying for 100% of the development. The idea being that those that get
 > LiveCode for free would, in some part, contribute back to the Open
 > Source effort that, in turn, expands the commercial offerings. The
 > statistics show that is only minimally happening and not in any way to
 > support the cost of giving LiveCode to 75% of the user base free. I
 > hope this changes.

The value of an open source edition is more than direct contributions,
and even contribution comes in many forms.

Code contributions are minimal at this time, but that's a function of
ecosystem size.  With any FOSS project only a percentage of users will
have the intersection of skills, interest, and time to contribute code.

Beyond code we have larger percentages of contribution to docs, and even
now a majority of technical support is covered outside company expense,
through forums and other online sources and many in-person volunteers.

In short, a slow start but far beyond where we were when v6 was the
first open source edition.

But of course we'll want to improve on that going forward.

And the best part there is that the path to success for both
proprietary-license revenue and open source contribution is the same:

Growing the platform's audience.

LiveCode is a great technology.  The biggest thing holding it back has
nothing to do with the product itself, it's that few have ever heard of it.

The most valuable user engagement we can pursue, more valuable than
emailing them a solicitation for money, is first getting them to use
LiveCode.

As many as possible.

And to do that it must be as easy as possible to get it.

Anything that lengthens the distance between "What is LiveCode?" and
"Hey, I'm having a great time with LiveCode!" is holding the platform back.



 > In this context, asking for a email address in an attempt to market to
 > the people free access to LiveCode is a small thing to ask for.

For the proprietary trial edition, I wholeheartedly agree.

The issue here is specific to the open source Community Edition, and I
believe it's worth taking the time to explore why the dynamics and
expectations are so different:


The only value in email is a conversion to a sale.  Everything else
related to email marketing is expense.

Conversion rates for email aren't zero, but they are commonly understood
to be low.  In fact, if the hard cost of email marketing wasn't as low
as it is no one would bother with it at all.  It's that low.

Most SEO brings people to the .com site, so those on the .org site are
the subset who specifically went there to get the open source edition of
LiveCode.  The conversion rate there is understandably much lower than
on the .com site.

After all, someone at the .com site is there to look for a proprietary
product.  Their interests are very different from the subset who move on
to .org.  The visitors at .com expect that if they like what they see in
LiveCode they'll pay.  They're predisposed to conversion.

But open source folks use software for a wide range of reasons, and the
percentage likely to convert to a proprietary license is *much* smaller.

So while it's difficult to estimate exactly how low the value of an
email address is to the company, there's little question how
increasingly valuable maintaining privacy is the many people. And open
source communities tend to be unusually well educated in matters of
privacy and security.


Everyone here, proprietary and open source devs alike, wants to see
LiveCode adoption expand far beyond where it is today.

That is the primary objective of all activities at this time.  Every
other goal pales by comparison in importance.

Ecosystem size is the driver of both contributions and proprietary
licenses, and the current small size is the most-cited reason I hear for
choosing something else.

We need to see teachers using LiveCode, and students, and hobbyists, and
many other categories who will not pay for a proprietary product, and
most won't ever contribute code to the project either.

But what they will contribute is credibility for the platform.

Every person using LiveCode reduces the "I've never heard of it" factor.


As Geoff Moore reminds us in Crossing the Chasm, in early stages of
growth adopters will tend to be the more adventurous personality types,
those willing to try something new.

Among them will be influencers, the people their friends turn to for
advice about what software they should use.

When we look at popular development tools today, with a handful of
exceptions made possible only through historical circumstances that
cannot be repeated, all of them are open source.

An open source edition is necessary in the 21st century.

And if it's going to serve the dev team at all, it must be pursued
earnestly.

We can't afford to lose credibility with the audience most sensitive to
privacy concerns.

And best of all, it's unnecessary:

The value of an email address is only non-zero when it's given freely.

So have sign-up as an option, rather than a requirement, and the problem
is very easily solved.

--
  Richard Gaskin
  LiveCode Community Liaison
  [hidden email]


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Download LC Community: trapped.

Mark Talluto via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Mark Talluto via use-livecode
On Mar 9, 2017 5:26 PM, "Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode" <
[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Asking for an e-mail address is a small thing to ask for.
>
> But _forcing_, rather than _asking_, isn't quite the same thing.
>
> -------- Personal blether starts now -------
>
> I don't feel capable in a big way to contribute to LiveCode development,
> so I do try to send bug reports in when I fall over 'bugs'.
>
> I am still wondering about trying to make a simplified interface for some
sort of
> cut-down version of LiveCode using block-programming [ c.f. Scratch and
so on ].
>
> I was wondering about having a script-editor with blocks . . .

Things of the past could easily be new again.  Authoring environments come
to mind.  Amiga Vision was a favorite of mine for stringing together
multimedia with timers, synchronized narration, and even simple button
logic.  I could see kids in a beginners LiveCode class using blocks to at
least design app concepts, and simple logic structures.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqywIVs2S4w

>
> Richmond.

~Roger
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Download LC Community: trapped.

Mark Talluto via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Mark Talluto via use-livecode
On 3/9/2017 6:18 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:
> Growing the platform's audience.


You make a good point here.

I wish i knew whether the open Source effort significantly grew the
userbase over whatever trend it was on before the OSS effort and whether
the actual number of paying customers shrunk (in real numbers, not a
percentage), or remained on a constant trend, or grew after the OSS release?

If 75% of downloads are Community and 25% paid (approximate figures
LiveCode has stated in the last year) but real numbers for both have
increased since the OSS launch, that would paint a more favorable picture.

In a way, my musings are a moot point. I have confidence in Kevin and
LiveCode, Ltd to keep the company viable and moving forward so time will
work all these questions out.



_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Download LC Community: trapped.

Mark Talluto via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Mark Talluto via use-livecode
Richard wrote:
> Most SEO brings people to the .com site, so those on the .org site are
> the subset who specifically went there to get the open source edition of
> LiveCode.  The conversion rate there is understandably much lower than
> on the .com site.
>
> After all, someone at the .com site is there to look for a proprietary
> product.  Their interests are very different from the subset who move on
> to .org.  The visitors at .com expect that if they like what they see in
> LiveCode they'll pay.  They're predisposed to conversion.

I still don't understand why this distinction was made.
Although my professional buying was in the tertiary sector I always went to  a .com sites unless it didn't exist. Many of the solutions we investigated over the years were both open source and no cost to education as well as proprietary for commercial use (which may include education depending on the context of usage.) None that I can remember had two websites. Indeed it was always of value to be able to directly compare the no-cost to cost versions to see if the propriety offer was more suitable.
This is no longer possible on the LC .com site. It used to be.
The last time I looked at the .org site it was very much a poor cousin to the .com site.
None of the resource pages were to be seen, just a list of the community communication channels.

The membership option is new. (Well recycled) and a great idea.
Although I did notice one component being access to nightly builds.
????!!!
Is this true?

James

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Download LC Community: trapped.

Mark Talluto via use-livecode
James Hale wrote:

> Richard wrote:
>> Most SEO brings people to the .com site, so those on the .org
>> site are the subset who specifically went there the get the
>> open source edition of LiveCode.
>
> I still don't understand why this distinction was made.

That was an idea I pitched to the team, and as we thought it through it
seemed a good fit for what LiveCode Ltd. is doing.  Over time we may
find a unified site is better, but at the moment I like where things are
potentially headed.

Many open source projects have a .org domain for their community
efforts, including drupal.org, apache.org, r-project.org, python.org,
wordpress.org, getfedora.org, etc.

By splitting .org from .com, we have the opportunity to allow the
company to hone their messaging for developers of proprietary apps at
.com, while providing a portal at .org for not only the software itself,
but also resources for community projects, contribution assistance, EDU
tools and support, and more.

We're still early days with the .org site, and they haven't set set up
the facilities to allow a community web team to augment that domain with
relevant community info.

But we'll get there, hopefully soon.

--
  Richard Gaskin
  LiveCode Community Liaison
  [hidden email]

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Loading...