Recently we've been investing ....[SOLVED?]

[ChrisM]

Livecode isn't the only software going subscription model, just look at Adobe, and Microsoft Office 365 - everyone is starting to move to the model for the recurring revenue, its also good for business in that you get to remove the limitation on the price of software and can lease it instead which lets you put the rest of the money to work generating income for your business, I don't see anyone complaining that they need to pay annually for their Antivirus (unless your breaching terms and conditions and using a free one)

I don't have a complaint about the subscription model, it is what it is, take it or leave it - but I do have a problem with the price, fair enough for a business that makes its living from it - but what about the businesses who want to have it there on standby for the odd time it might be needed or individuals who want to be able to support the product and community and have access to the training materials, with the new model its quite pricey to do so for the hobbyist - and some people might subscribe for a month, release the program the cancel the subscription so Livecode ends up loosing out

All that being said, I just purchased the $499 deal, and have never release any commercial software or sold anything from it, but am looking to use it to put a GUI onto scripts to make them look nice for clients, and as its just part of the service with no additional charge - worth the money in my opinion, but without this deal locking the price, I would not be paying the new subscription price, its just not worth it to me.

[sritcp]

........ with the new model its quite pricey to do so for the hobbyist ........

There does seem to be a need for a price tier between the free community-edition users and the professional coders ($499/$299 if locked-in) --- "hobbyists" who may want to produce small niche products now and again, and sell them in the (say) iOS app store. They don't make a living on it but would like to charge a small price to justify the hours put in. I am unwilling to speculate on the size of this segment but LiveCode is the kind of language that would attract this segment.

I wonder if LC could be offered at (say) 50% of the full price but with the limitation on the number of lines any app could contain (say, 5000 non-empty lines, not including any purchased libraries).

Just an idea.

Regards,
Sri

[kajongaBUSDgsq]

Late to the party and slightly confused. Am I to understand that after an annual subscription expires, the tool will not function as it did prior to the expiration? Don't most other dev tools simply freeze updates and support after the subscription expires. No new functionality or bug fixes. If you want to support Apple Watch, for example, then you are forced to update your license to get the build that supports that functionality (maybe soon). The desktop and especially mobile OS environments are too dynamic NOT to upgrade; that is the driving factor. To supply new functionality available on a platform or get the bug fix that has been causing migraines, you have to maintain the subscription. On RR side, charging the higher subscription fee puts the onus on them to maintain a product that supports the current platform SDK(s) without too much lag; otherwise, a subscription is a waste of money.

[Cliff Richardson]

I am a long time user of LiveCode and Runtime Revolution, as it was known in the past. I have been a paying licensee was more years than I can remember. I have supported the crowdfunding to make LiveCode open source. I have paid for the Create It with LiveCode course. Most recently, I’ve purchased a 2 year Indy license to lock in the $299/year license fee. I have done all of this because I believe in and enjoy using LiveCode. I have licensed it so that I could support the development of LiveCode and make it thrive, now and in the future. I am more of a hobbyist and I also wanted to keep my options open for the future. But, in reality, I could have just as well used the open source version of LiveCode.

I am disappointed that the folks at LiveCode felt it was necessary to point out to its paid licensed users that “money does not grow on trees” and “there is not a pot of it at the end of the rainbow”. I hope to think that most, if not all, LiveCode licensees are aware of this. The tone was very condescending.

Additionally, it seems you feel that we are asking for something in exchange for nothing. In addition to those things that separate the Indy license from the open source license, I thought that my license fees were paid so that LiveCode could move forward and compete with other platforms. Here are a couple of quotes from emails from LiveCode earlier this year when you were marketing the new Indy license and were explaining the general change in the license structures:

06/29/2015
“…we are adding even more value to the product as well as continuing to provide high levels of customer support…”

07/09/2015
“When you purchase an Indy License, you take a step closer to your own app dream and you make it possible for us to keep creating the product you love so that other people can create it with LiveCode.”

I understand that there is a fine line between critical updates to LiveCode and “nice-to-have” additional features. I would have thought that some of the things listed in the Feature Exchange program are critical to the future survival of LiveCode as a platform (especially for the Mac version). I will give you one example: Mac 64­-bit Support - In the description you state: “In order that LiveCode keep pace with Mac development, it is important that the engine be transitioned to 64-bit on Mac”. I think that this would be one of those things that you would work on as a part of your overall plan for LiveCode. I am assuming the while you feel this is important, it is not important enough. Also, I am not sure if LiveCode Indy and Business licensees who Mac users are a large enough group for you to do this or not.

Sorry, but I could go on with this for a longer time so I’ll just add some final thoughts: 1 - I am not opposed to the Feature Exchange as a method to help fund “nice-to-have” additional features. 2 - I have always received great, prompt service for LiveCode whenever I have encountered issues with my account, etc. 3 - I want LiveCode to succeed as a platform. 4 - I don’t expect you to do for free.

[snowfun]

Despite having reservations about the funding model (mac64 is surely core functionality not merely a nice-to-have extra?) and significant concerns for the long term viability of the language (particularly in my case within the academic community with Python being the language of choice apparently), I felt motivated to contribute to the 64 campaign. My contribution was embarrassingly trivial. But what was even more embarrassing is just how few individuals contributed. I thought there was a lively and enthused community...

Can Livecode only succeed by being carried by the few?

Tim

[FourthWorld]

Can Livecode only succeed by being carried by the few?

The most recent crowdfunding campaign was the smallest of the three to date. From your Kickstarter badge it seems you're familiar with the first two, having raised ~US$720,000 and ~US$500,000 respectively. The company also has quite a number of ongoing commercial licensees, with additional revenue streams from training and custom development.

Additionally, there are many ways to contribute to LiveCode beyond cash. Within the community we're building Documentation, Translation, and Educational Outreach teams, and even though LC has been open source for a couple years we've already had many dozens of new features and fixes contributed by community members to the engine and IDE code bases.

While the most recent crowdfunding campaign was well supported with only two of the four initiatives presented in that round, by itself it's not a reflection of the size of the community or the value the community derives from LiveCode.

[Dixie]

While the most recent crowdfunding campaign was well supported with only two of the four initiatives presented in that round, by itself it's not a reflection of the size of the community or the value the community derives from LiveCode.

Then what is it a reflection of ?

[FourthWorld]

While the most recent crowdfunding campaign was well supported with only two of the four initiatives presented in that round, by itself it's not a reflection of the size of the community or the value the community derives from LiveCode.

Then what is it a reflection of ?

It seems to me a reflection of current level of interest in those specific features among the current audience minus the significant amounts already invested in many other ways.