Where are the newbies?

[dunbarx]

What, if any, is the policy for a trial? Wouldn't a one (or two) month free trial do a lot to bring newbies into the fold? I just checked the website and do not see that sort of thing offered. It seems to be that this would cost virtually nothing, and it should come with a big notice that there is a forum available for questions.

Craig

[Emily-Elizabeth]

The trial version is 10 days for your account, not for each release, so I managed to burn through mine by installing LiveCode and never using it in those 10 days. I am curious about the LiveCode 10 release and wanted to give it a try but am left out in the cold.

[stam]

You make an important feedback point - Trial really should be time used, not time elapsed IMHO (or at least number of non-consecutive days used).

Have you emailed support at livecode dot com?
It’s possible/probable they would renew a trial period for you. Just be aware that v10’is still a “developer preview”.

As Richard said, LC would only benefit from retaining developers such as yourself..

[richmond62]

LC would only benefit from retaining quite a few of the people who 'evaporated' with the open source version.

A 'community' that seems to be dwindling will, by its nature, stagnate.

3 years ago these forums were quite different to what they are now.

[dunbarx]

Ten days is valueless. As Emily says, not everyone downloads the trial and then locks themselves into the attic without food or water for a marathon.

A month at least. Who do I yell at?

Craig

[stam]

10 days would be minimum required if it was time used, not just time elapsed since first launch.

People are busy and have other priorities, they can’t be expected to drop everything just to evaluate LiveCode. So a 10 day elapsed time trial will very likely just mean 2-3 days’ use - maximally. Probably less.

But ideally yeah, a longer trial of 21 or 28 days would be more likely to increase retention I would have thought…

[dunbarx]

Richmond.

LC would only benefit from retaining quite a few of the people who 'evaporated' with the open source version.

I wonder how many open source users bought a license. In other words, how many active users are still out there with their perfectly satisfactory open-source versions. I had several paid-for licenses when I got my first open source version. I updated those as they evolved, up to the last one, whichever that was. Then I got on the paying program, just to support LC.

But I could go back at any time, since what I use LC for is fully supported with most of the open source offerings. The only thing in recent memory I will not give up is the enhanced itemDelimiter property, that can use a string of any length. I would pay for that alone, never mind widgets, LCB and "Create".

Shows how low I am in the hierarchy of users...

Craig

[FourthWorld]

You make an important feedback point - Trial really should be time used, not time elapsed IMHO (or at least number of non-consecutive days used).

The original version of this engine, MetaCard, took that notion even further: it wasn't limited by time at all, but by number of lines of executable code per script.

At just 10 lines, with limitations on the number of frontscipts, backscripts, and libraries, you were limited with what you could do.

And that was the model that brought all of us ol' timers here, with its dual enticement:

First, it embraced the reality of busy schedules, and the time needed to evaluate something as nuanced and committal as a scripting language. We could experiment as long as we liked, and explore the joys of this language which elude mere description.

And second, there were some who spent considerable time poking and prodding at the edges of those limits to even ship finished works. Brilliant: they had become quite expert with the tool, and in each case that I know of they eventually found the script limits too cumbersome and purchased a subscription. And having acquired an uncommon expertise, they became some of the most helpful people on the MC mailing list.

Every hour spent with a dev tool is not only an opportunity to create a customer, but also an evangelist.


Word-of-mouth is best sales tool: more effective than any messaging that could come from a vendor, a virtual sales staff that not only doesn't consume payroll, they pay the vendor.

A healthy growing community is also a powerful sales tool in itself. Prospects need to see that before committing their business to a platform. And every third party add-on dev or consultant is one more person deeply vested in the company's success, an alignment that becomes a multiplier for sales throughout the funnel, while reducing support costs along the way.

The most successful companies devote considerable resources to cultivating and supporting third party developer consultants. No matter how much invested, it costs less and delivers more than anything that can be done with sales and marketing payroll.

[dunbarx]

Richard.

You know, I had forgotten about the old script line limit.

That is much better a solution; no monitoring, and it gives a casual user satisfaction and a sense of corporate friendliness. If and when 100 lines is too few for their purposes, any reasonable person would not feel slighted or taken advantage of at all of if they were then required to purchase the full version. Such a cost would seem natural.

Richmond. I think you would agree that this is the right compromise given that the open source pathway must be ended.

Who do I yell at?

Craig

[richmond62]

Hey, I developed a whole interactive CD for a Scots c5ompany, 'Listen Hear', to introduce high school kids to different types of music, with the 10-line version of RunRev 1.1.1.

Still have a 'jewel' (as in rhinestone) case with the thing in one of my bookcases here in Bulgaria . . .

Bloody marvellous, and ,'Yes', I know that the open source version did not do what the people in Edinburgh hoped it would.

A rebirth of the 10-line version, might, just, possibly be the magic bullet that has eluded LC for a very long time . . .

Oh, and sorting out their way crap, totally passive website.

[dunbarx]

Ten lines is enough to get an answer dialog with "Hello World", along with changing the button backColor to green, adding two beeps and maybe one other cute but trivial gizmo.

That will be enough to entice some, but I would permit more lines. Let's get a newbie well into a little project, and run up against a wall. The exercise to constantly winnow the code down to a value under the limit is a pretty good teaching tool in its own right.

I could make a cute gadget with 50 lines, but maybe that is too many, in that it would delay the changeover to a subscription. But recall that a newbie will make VERY verbose code, and this in a language that encourages verbosity.

The point is to decide how many lines are enough to make a satisfying stack, but not so many that a newbie can stay a newbie forever. But if such a person can live with that few number of lines, they would never be the sort of person to subscribe in any case. However, having a million freebie newbies will guarantee a steady flow of subscriptions, because human beings always want more of what they like.

I vote 25 to 50. Scotland?

Craig

[dunbarx]

Richard.

It occurs to me to ask "How did the limit work?"

Was it ten lines in any particular object, or ten lines overall in the stack and all its children everywhere?

Craig

[dunbarx]

The reason I ask is because if it is ten lines in any single object, not that it would be fun to do, but one could kludge their way to as many lines as necessary, and become an expert in calling short handlers and functions elsewhere.

Craig

[stam]

I must say, my preference would for a Panorama-style pricing structure, as in: https://www.provue.com/#pricing

After a short free trial period you pay for months of use (the months you don't use don't count against this, so you can take your time), with a significant discount the more months you buy (I think it works out as a 67% discount if you buy 5 years). Keeping in mind: the 'transient' users will probably buy a small number of months and sit on them but then you probably extract more payment from them than just having a free trial; the 'heavy' users will probably buy longer periods and use them all, or near enough. And the monthly payments seem reasonable without having to commit to a longer period unless you want the deep discounts.

Of note: you don't have to create an account to use the free trial. The trial is 7 days, but it's 7 non-consecutive days that can be spread across an infinite amount of time.

Panorama is not too dissimilar in scope - although it's probably more comparable to FileMaker Pro than LC - and has been in business since the 90s, so this model has obviously worked for them.

I like this model because it engenders trust - with a 'pay for what you use' attitude that doesn't seem overly greedy. Had I not been a high level FMP user/dev, I probably would have invested in this - as it is I'm so at home with FMP I can do things extremely quickly that between FMP and LC, learning another database doesn't appeal - but the pricing structure is very enticing.
And as far as I know, unique.