Recent Posts
If you truly do have an innovative technology you've developed, expect to either be bought out by one of the big companies - or sued out of existence.Thanks 40. I'll have to reconsider my stance on all of this.
This issue has been discussed so often that it's not necessary to say much more about it than that.
-----------
And it's for those reasons that I say Apple's game can't be duplicated.
IMHO Apple is largely irrelevant to any technical or business discussion in that the sociological factors surrounding it have a far more significant a bearing on its success than any of it's claims to creativity or technical excellence.Hmmm....food for thought! Dammit 40! My gut response is to ask, "Why can't it be duplicated?!"
So beyond being the central subject in what might be a fascinating study of group dynamics and psychology (i.e. herd behaviors) and shared culture and belief systems (i.e. cult meme formation) I find studying Apple - as a business - is a largely useless exercise.
Apple is a one-off.
It was in the right place, at the right time, and took significant risks - many of which paid off. And it created a unique and highly motivated entourage in the process.
It routinely gets commended for behaviors which would not be forgiven, let alone tolerated, were any other company to do the same.
Apple holds a uncommonly privileged status in the eyes of the world. Perhaps it's the only company in the world that does hold such status.
It's not the sort of thing you can plan for in business.
Or duplicate...
-40hz (September 22, 2011, 06:47 PM)
To each his own I guess. I do feel you're a bit selling me short (and in turn selling your own point short) by taking my post as if I've only posted a video in reply but you have made your point previously and I have made mine so I don't think there's any need to quibble about it.I am actually.-Paul Keith (September 22, 2011, 05:43 PM)
Sorry. It's just too long for me right now. I'm trying to avoid these discussions because I always end up sounding like a condescending douchebag.If they need it they will willingly pay isn't necessarily true, either. Many people have a need for software that fills a niche, but they make do with other alternatives (of which there are always several) for the simple reason that people don't want to pay.I would politely disagree with this based on the definition of the term "need". If there are alternatives that are free, then it's not really a need. Financially speaking, a need is something you will HAVE to pay for if you want that thing. Or else you will not be able to fulfill your need. If you can fulfill your need with a free alternative, then that thing that costs something is not a need anymore, it's a want.-wraith808 (September 22, 2011, 03:53 PM)
So I think this could solve the issue of scaring away the no-nonsense-just-want-to-click-buy people, which would help a lot.I would consider being a part of any software development team whose goal was to provide NEEDED software. I have the resources for everything other than the programmers: funding, marketing, time, resources. I also have a soft spot for programmers. I'm very much for the idea providing profitable opportunities for young programmers either in school or freshly out and struggling with finding jobs. I admire their talent and skills, and I hate it when they are turned down for opportunities simply because they lack a certain number of years of experience or some BS certificates or degrees. I am very good at the business stuff, and I wouldn't screw you because I don't care for that, plus I have other things going on. So please consider if you are interested.
I think this still leaves the most difficult nut to crack -- which is how do you deal with the problem where it takes 10x as much effort (and perceived risk) to donate vs clicking the button that says "i can't/won't donate".
I talk about the approach of trying to fix this in my essay as "work equalization" -- making sure that it's not so much easier to not donate compared to donating.
Right now this principle is used to give people free license keys so they don't have to pay for our software or see any nags -- by giving out a license key after you sign up and register. But this does create some inconvenience and ill-will.
It's not an ideal solution because it annoys people. It would be nice to find an alternative approach that wasn't so annoying to people but still achieved the goal of having some way to make people not choose the path of least resistance of not donating.-mouser (September 13, 2011, 11:00 AM)
It is an interesting approach. But I still think it's largely preaching to the choir.i agree, especially with that last part. On one hand, I want the developers to be successful, on the other hand, I know this strategy doesn't work (if the end goal is financial success).
From my experience, the general software using public doesn't care how much work or effort has gone into something. They generally expect to be charged for software. And, if given the opportunity, they'll often try to find a way to "borrow" a copy rather than pay for it. Which is why the so-called "honor system" doesn't work very well. This is something the Association of Shareware Professionals learned back in the 80s: If you don't REQUIRE a payment, you'd best not expect to be paid.
The Free Software crowd got around it by basically saying: Screw it! Here's some software. Use it..
There was a certain subtext in there that also that said: It would be really cool if those of you people who are using it could throw some dollars our way so we can continue to develop and refine this thing. But after that, they stopped worrying about it. And if enough people didn't help support their efforts, they stopped developing. It was pure Darwinism: Software which filled a genuine need got supported and survived. Software which didn't (or was of limited or special interest) either continued on as the self-supported 'hobby' project it was - or shut down.
At the core of this was the realization of a simple truth: People (mostly) only pay for what they need. They're far less likely (and willing) to pay for stuff they merely want. And, if given the opportunity to avoid paying at all, about 98% of the people out there won't. Which is why Microsoft developed Genuine Advantage - and we get to live with all the nonsense various other DRM mechanisms put us through.
What Fairware boils down to is yet another form of crowd-sourced project financing. But this time with a fairly interesting and complex (and IMO slightly self-righteous) allocation system for distributing whatever funding is received.
If experience is anything to go by, there won't be much to distribute for most projects.
I personally think Fairware is a great idea. Smacks a little bit of "old wine in a new bottle" but so what? I wish them all the luck in the world getting it to fly.
But I also personally believe it's doomed.
(And I sincerely hope I'm wrong about that.)
(see attachment in previous post)-40hz (September 09, 2011, 07:48 PM)
I'm not scared. The grey dudes said they'd kill me first if I ever say anything....whoops!
Still, here's the weird thing: NASA has changed their logo over the years, yet they always retain that red thing. Why?-superboyac (September 22, 2011, 10:55 AM)
Because it's the symbol of the homeworld of those little grey "saucer guys" they're working with at Area 51. That's why.
(And now they have to kill you cuz you know too much.)-40hz (September 22, 2011, 11:15 AM)
The NASA Insignia (more commonly referred to as the "meatball") reflects the history and tradition of the Agency and is used in all of the Agency's day-to-day communications materials. Designed in 1959 by former NASA employee James Modarelli, the NASA Insignia contains the following elements:eh...thought it would have been more interesting.
The sphere represents a planet
The stars represent space
The vector represents aeronautics
The orbit represents space travel
FWIW, I think the "hide-stuff-until-mouseover" is a terrible UI design idea.That's fine, I'm not commited to that. How about just the grid layout gallery ability? Forget the peek a boo effects.-skwire (September 20, 2011, 04:01 PM)
It is one of my favorites also - but DOpus 10 is still a major pain, especially given all the time they had to get it ready. DOpus 10 was released more than four years after DOpus 9, yet it has not much in the way of new features; mostly improvements in its existing features.Interesting. Well, at least they are active with bug fixes. I've only noticed one glitch (which has remained from v9), an it's this:
Now I actually appreciate the fact that the last major upgrade, DO9, was good for four years with plenty of great and useful "minor" updates over those years. I read people's complaints about the cost of DOpus all the time but four years?!?! It is worth every cent I have ever spent on it! And though I also have lifetime licenses for both Total Commander and XYPlorer, DOpus is light years ahead of them IMO (and I do realize my opinion is mine alone and that many may disagree with me on that point). I use TC and XY at times for special tasks, but DOpus is a true Windows Explorer replacement for me.
However the number of bugs in DOpus 10 - and I am speaking of more than just my own recent rants here - seems disproportionate with the time they had to get this version ready. I don’t know, maybe the timing of Windows 7 messed them up. All I know is that this version is still giving me fits and taking up hours on some days to try and get something done, and I purchased and installed the DO10 upgrade on 1-May-2011! That's almost five months and for the most part the advice I get is "try installing the newest beta and see if that helps". Grrr...
Thanks for listening!
Jim-J-Mac (September 19, 2011, 01:33 PM)
- Looking at your spec you're more inline with a custom Theme then you are with a Plugin. Plugin is to modify existing functionality that works into a theme, a custom theme is what changes the look and feel of the website.I would prefer a plugin because then I can convert any page, no matter what theme I'm using, to do the thing I described. Wouldn't that be a desirable thing? It's something I would really put to use on multiple websites and pages. Please let me know if I'm overlooking something.
- File Upload: You should use the Media Manager that comes with Wordpress. I wouldn't recommending disconnecting any part from Wordpress as it would make interacting, from a code standpoint, more difficultThis is something I do intentionally. I upload all my files into a simple folder. It's very easy for me. I can use an ftp server and just drop files in. I strongly prefer it this way. I don't really want to upload through the browser, and click around whatever internal galleries wordpress does in the admin section. This is one area where I am really old school: I like having direct access to my files and folders...it means I have ultimate control. I don't feel this should make coding any more difficult because all the plugins and stuff I've done so far work very easily with the folder addresses that I use to link to whatever I need. When it comes to the posts and pages, I don't like the gui. I prefer to do everything and see all the codes and shortcodes. The most I would ask for is a button where some parameters are entered, and it spits out the shortcode onto the post. But again, if I'm overlooking something please let me know. I struggle sometimes with understanding the usage of page templates vs. plugins vs widgets.
