Livecode Create - thoughts?

Anything beyond the basics in using the LiveCode language. Share your handlers, functions and magic here.

Moderators: FourthWorld, heatherlaine, Klaus, kevinmiller, robinmiller

Post Reply
stam
Posts: 3060
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 9:39 pm

Re: Livecode Create - thoughts?

Post by stam » Mon Jul 29, 2024 2:30 am

FourthWorld wrote:
Mon Jul 29, 2024 1:38 am
See "nearly".
Ah, so how many options would qualify a as not nearly then? 20? 40?
FourthWorld wrote:
Mon Jul 29, 2024 1:38 am
And see that you're here despite those.
Yes Richard.
No one is disputing this is what we here feel is the best option.
I also recently paid a non-trivial renewal fee not so long ago, so I have a valid licence through next year.
So yes I am here for now.
Patronising as it can be.
FourthWorld wrote:
Mon Jul 29, 2024 1:38 am
And see the integrated IDE experience, which has led us to a world where Python is the most popular language in the world but there are likely more LC apps in the app stores than Python.
1. That is a bold claim indeed. Do you have any insight into what these numbers may be? But are numbers really that important? Why not look at which apps are made with python on the mobile App Store of example: https://djangostars.com/blog/top-seven- ... lt-python/

2. I have repeatedly said the sales pricing is fair - it's the internal users pricing that is not.
FourthWorld wrote:
Mon Jul 29, 2024 1:38 am
Nothing is without competition, but multiplatform native app deployment is the asset they have.
No one is disputing LC delivers mulltiplatform apps. But so do the examples I gave above. And because many of these are competitive, the prices reflect the competition.



The old maxim that if you don't value your product no one else will very much holds
Which is why I've repeatedly said (but clearly to deaf ears), that the licensing and royalty fees are fair.

The issue is the "internal users" pricing.

If you say sell an app for $500 (which no app on the App Store costs), and say you sell to 5 people: that's $125 to LC and that's it. Fair.
If you distribute the same app within an organisation that's $440 for the developer licence and $440 for the user licence PER YEAR. 5 users = $2200 PER YEAR on top of your developer licence.

You can be the best product in the world but you can still price yourself out of the market...

FourthWorld
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 10043
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 7:05 am
Contact:

Re: Livecode Create - thoughts?

Post by FourthWorld » Mon Jul 29, 2024 2:50 am

My comment was based on a talk from a senior Python dev lead at their annual summit bemoaning the state of packaging. But it was more than a year ago, and it wouldn't be surprising if the most popular language in the world eventually attracted good packaging tools. I use a lot of tools but have no need for Python, so I'm not invested in notch-counting details in that ecosystem.

Here my aim was to discuss ways the company's position may not need to be as dire as Andy and others have suggested. One feature competitors don't display as proudly is a backdrop of frequent drama. My focus in these forums is to seek options which may reduce that.

Enjoy Python. The world is full of options...
Richard Gaskin
LiveCode development, training, and consulting services: Fourth World Systems
LiveCode Group on Facebook
LiveCode Group on LinkedIn

AndyP
Posts: 634
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 12:57 pm
Contact:

Re: Livecode Create - thoughts?

Post by AndyP » Mon Jul 29, 2024 9:04 am

Here my aim was to discuss ways the company's position may not need to be as dire as Andy and others have suggested.
I didn't use 'dire' but a better term may be 'damaging '. I feel that the new Internal licencing policy is damaging to LiveCode. It certainly is to those who it would apply .

LiveCode in my opinion has one of the best and easiest to use IDE's out there. One of it's many strengths is non destructive gui layout. What I mean by this is that say changing the position or properties of a control does not result in a new generated gui text file as is employed by for example Python gui generators. If code has been manually added to a Python gui file, then this is lost at the next gui code generation.
In LiveCode all gui changes are stored internal to your application...fantastic!

I'm not touting Python as a replacement for LiveCode, it definitely is not. The software
I have build for the company I work for has become an important part of their business and it is only prudent that I have a contingency plan in place if LiveCode becomes an option that has to be dropped.
Andy .... LC CLASSIC ROCKS!

stam
Posts: 3060
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 9:39 pm

Re: Livecode Create - thoughts?

Post by stam » Mon Jul 29, 2024 1:03 pm

Many years ago, during my clinical research, I invented a new quantification for 3-dimensional echocardiography. This was a profound development and and as our ultrasound machines were from Philips and Philips wanted to have this on their systems, we invited their engineers to work with us at King's College Hospital in London and they were with us for a few months.

We really wanted this to work on their system, but the software they created just did not work. We fed back all the issues with the intent that this would improve their platform and it would be in everyone's interest that this did work.

Instead of taking on board our feedback and improving their product, they (Philips' software arm) immediately launched into an aggressive counter - effectively treating us as we were somehow set out to harm them. Every single contact with them became aggressively polemic with them basically implying we were trying to denigrate and demean their efforts and that "they knew their market best".

Which is weird because a) we invited them to work with us and b) there was literally no competition as no other ultrasound company had a platform for 3D echo (as opposed to the views held in this thread about 'no competition').

The final result was that they ploughed on with a faulty app and sold it to the world as if it was a godsend.

It was so poor that cardiac departments around the world completely lost faith in 3-dimensional ECHO (what should have been state of the art was then considered a dangerously faulty gimmick) all because the CEO in charge of their app had aspirations of grandeur and Philips were more than happy to try and milk it for what they could.

As a result 3D ECHO languished for nearly 20 years with only now new software being more solid and widespread helping this come to the forefront again and today, nearly 1/4 of a century later, it's considered state of the art again. Of course, now other 3D ECHO platforms are available and Philips has much stronger competition and lower profit margins, while other modalities such as cardiac MRI have taken over much of this space even though 3D ECHO is superior when done properly.
We sold my invention to be patented by another company and I'm listed on this patent as the inventor of a world-wide patent - but Philips lost out and even though in the last 5 years they've released a completely different software that does actually work, they've permanently lost market share to competing companies.

My point being that politics and short term financial aspirations of both a CEO and the larger corporation backing it nearly ruined what would have been the state of the art approach to measuring cardiac function and quantifying 3D deformation of various aspects to the heart, which is very much clinically relevant. At best you could say they delayed adoption by 20+ years by trying to maximise profits and milk it for what they could only to result in a drop sales and making everyone's ability to measure cardiac function worse.

I can't help but feel there is an analogy here.

No one responding on these forums wants to see LC diminished in any way - quite the opposite.
Everyone here wants to see wider adoption of this platform because we all know how good it is. And more users is good for everyone.
But not everyone here apparently sees the problem with setting out to gouge developers from the outset.

If I employ Richard to write an app for my workplace, I would expect to pay a fee for a scoping exercise, a development fee and a maintenance fee for ongoing care (or some other equivalent process).
However now, I and whoever else uses this app, will have to pay developer licences. Suddenly Richard's cost will spiral and what would be maintenance costs will increase by $10K - $25K per year. Knowing this, I would be looking elsewhere to get this done cheaper so that maintenance costs are manageable.

There is no "win-win" with the internal users cost structure as it stands.

dunbarx
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 10305
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 2:28 pm

Re: Livecode Create - thoughts?

Post by dunbarx » Mon Jul 29, 2024 3:00 pm

I spend time every day coding and tinkering with LC. I have always supported it in every way, even though I do not make any money from it. That said, one particular standalone that I update and maintain constantly and distribute internally to a few engineers in my company is invaluable to us. I am happy to pay for such wholly "internal" benefit.

I think I am representative of a certain class of LCoder. When I spoke with Kevin and Heather, who I am sure understand my "position" among the wide range of users, they told me that my upcoming costs would be relatively low, though I did not, and as yet still do not know exactly what those costs will be.

But if I find that such costs will be many thousands of dollars per year as opposed to many hundreds. I may leave the fold, find a version of LC that flies under the radar and live on. I can do what I do forever with any version that supports a multi-character itemDelimiter.

I will still be here annoying everyone.

Craig

wsamples
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 264
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 4:12 am

Re: Livecode Create - thoughts?

Post by wsamples » Mon Jul 29, 2024 5:31 pm

LiveCode has implemented a wide variety of licensing schemes in the years I've been a user. Since I believe v2.7. And I cannot recall a single one that has not been the subject of controversy. I've seen people seemingly go out of their way to generate confusion and doubt where things were really not difficult to understand, and clamor for another license model which when subsequently implemented had them calling for something that sounded quite like the one they were just complaining about. All the while Kevin and Heather have always shown saintly patience and generosity towards us.

I've seen a few people here generate hypothetical edge cases and ask questions which strike me as disingenuous and obtuse. Maybe it's bad manners for me to say this, but I don't believe that's very helpful. I've also seen a couple of developers whose use cases seem clear but also unsustainable under the proposed new model. You know who you are, there's no need for me to mention names. But in the release announcements and licensing terms laid out, Kevin has made clear offers to entertain such use cases on an individual basis. That can only happen in private conversation, not in these forums. Only be explaining directly with LiveCode your use case and the questions and concerns you have and what you envision as viable solutions do you have any hope of resolution.

For each and any of you who have a clearly definable use case which presents a problem and for which you can propose a viable solution, directly approaching LiveCode is the only real hope for resolution. It is possible that through the discussion of real problems and real solutions for them that refinements to the licensing models and terms may also occur which could benefit other users and the company moving forward.

tellboy
Livecode Opensource Backer
Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:31 pm

Re: Livecode Create - thoughts?

Post by tellboy » Mon Jul 29, 2024 8:25 pm

My only observation to this debate, even though I have moved on from Livecode to SwiftUI as I am Mac only, is that there appears to be people commenting who have shares in Livecode and as such probably have a vested interest in increasing the cost of using Livecode to a point that does not lose users.
It would be helpful to those trying to make their mind up if those with shares clarified their position when posting either here or on the use list.

Regards

Terry

dunbarx
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 10305
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 2:28 pm

Re: Livecode Create - thoughts?

Post by dunbarx » Mon Jul 29, 2024 11:26 pm

Shares? In Livecode?

Anyone know anything about this?

Craig

FourthWorld
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 10043
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 7:05 am
Contact:

Re: Livecode Create - thoughts?

Post by FourthWorld » Tue Jul 30, 2024 12:43 am

dunbarx wrote:
Mon Jul 29, 2024 11:26 pm
Shares? In Livecode?

Anyone know anything about this?
Many companies have investors, where investment is apportioned in shares. It would seem reasonable if LC Ltd has investors.

FWIW, I do not own shares in LC Ltd, though I used to own shares in Allegiant Technologies back when they were the owners of SuperCard.
Richard Gaskin
LiveCode development, training, and consulting services: Fourth World Systems
LiveCode Group on Facebook
LiveCode Group on LinkedIn

tellboy
Livecode Opensource Backer
Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:31 pm

Re: Livecode Create - thoughts?

Post by tellboy » Tue Jul 30, 2024 7:05 am

Clearly a limited company like Livecode has shareholders.

The list of shareholders as of the 31 March 2024 is available as submitted to Companies House here in the UK is available for anyone to have a look at.

I believe it's a legal requirement to submit a Confirmation Statement annually here in the UK.

Regards

Terry

dunbarx
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 10305
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 2:28 pm

Re: Livecode Create - thoughts?

Post by dunbarx » Tue Jul 30, 2024 3:23 pm

Ah.

I did not know LC was a public company. In the US, such information is also open to anyone.

My previous post was poorly worded. What I meant was that it never occurred to me that any agenda other than raw user cost or the health/future of the company itself was being discussed.

So what would such shareholders agenda be? Not the above two items that really matter, I guess, but rather maximizing profit from a rising stock price?

Craig

Simon Knight
Posts: 919
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 11:41 am

Re: Livecode Create - thoughts?

Post by Simon Knight » Tue Jul 30, 2024 5:12 pm

#Stam
The wider point to make is if LiveCode/RunRev Ltd will consider government run organisations as business or commercial organisations? Is the Army either of these for example?


But apart from this one point I agree with you - the loss of freedoms is enough to consider a change and I have just under a year left to decide (until my current licence runs out.
Apologies, my previous post was unclear and rest assured I am well aware of how both the NHS and the UK MOD function beginning married to a retired G.P. and also writing as a UK veteran . I am in agreement with all your points.
best wishes
Skids

kevinmiller
Livecode Staff Member
Livecode Staff Member
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 7:57 pm

Re: Livecode Create - thoughts?

Post by kevinmiller » Wed Jul 31, 2024 4:12 pm

stam wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2024 12:17 pm
How will LC ascertain who is using the app? Will there be a mandatory login process? is it bound to a PC? Number of concurrent users? If IP based, does that mean than customers within the same IP will not able to run? Is this honour-based?
We are creating an API where a developer can register a user. This comes with a simple dashboard allowing you to see app usage. We'll build some app analytics into that over time so it's generally useful.

We will not be mandating you use this system. If you have an offline or air gapped use case then you'll be able to disable the tracking system at build point. To enable this feature you will first need to talk to us so that we can establish that you are a legitimate company and have done a reasonable and considered job of estimating the number of users.

Obviously if your app is offline you wouldn't be able to access the Cloud features.
stam wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2024 12:17 pm
As I mentioned at our meeting, my predominant use for LC is to create bespoke apps that fill various gaps at my work place. Up to now, I have created standalones and asked users to download these from my website, free of charge. I take on the fiscal and development cost myself. Neither the department nor the users will pay (even in a trust as well known as ours, financial restraints are considerable and even we are a hair's breath from being put under special measures due to chronic underfunding of the NHS).

Now if I also have to pay a licence for each user (anywhere between 6 and 25 users per app), that would become unsustainable.
As a result of conversations with you and other users in this position we have created an FAQ where we clarify this. If you own the license and do the work in your own time we won't be charging the per user fees. The new FAQ is below. Perhaps it will answer more questions than create new ones, we will see :)

https://future.livecode.com/which-license-do-i-need/
Kevin Miller ~ kevin@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Build Amazing Things

kevinmiller
Livecode Staff Member
Livecode Staff Member
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 7:57 pm

Re: Livecode Create - thoughts?

Post by kevinmiller » Wed Jul 31, 2024 4:15 pm

mblackman wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2024 1:02 pm
I can see the need for change. No, I was not surprised to hear from KM that the product side of the business runs at a loss.
But I reckon you really need to consider a grandfathering scheme for your loyal existing customers !
One where internal apps and utilities are Free to distribute.
Additional options are now available for legacy customers in good standing who have more than 10 internal users and are having budget constraint issues. You will need to contact us directly as the details are not going to be made public.
Kevin Miller ~ kevin@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Build Amazing Things

kevinmiller
Livecode Staff Member
Livecode Staff Member
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 7:57 pm

Re: Livecode Create - thoughts?

Post by kevinmiller » Wed Jul 31, 2024 4:26 pm

stam wrote:
Sat Jul 27, 2024 12:05 am
1. What is the logic behind requiring a subscription ($440/year) for each user within my organisation who uses a standalone I create, when realistically the cost to each user if they were actually purchasing the standalone would hardly be a fraction of that?

I really don't understand the logic here:
If I sell my app for $100 then at most LC will get $5 from me (very fair). Assuming this is a one-off sale and not a subscription service I'm offering, and I sell to 20 users, that's a total 1-off payment of $100 to LC Ltd. However with internal users policy this would translate to $8,800 per year if I share an app with colleagues at work. Or have I completely misunderstood this?
The price you sell the app at will vary greatly depending on what sort of app it is. So for example, we have some users who sell apps with a $20 in app purchase and others selling an app for $10,000+.

In the case of Internal Users, there is no buyer and seller of the app. So we place a value on that use which starts out at the $440 per user mark and very quickly comes down as you add volume. At the base level you're looking at just under $37 per user per month. So the question really is does the app (taking into account all things such as the added value of building it fast or with a non-professional programmer in LiveCode vs coding it in something else) provide more or less value to that user at that price? We have LiveCode apps that run entire organizations or provide savings that amount to hours a day or week for their users. So it's a reasonable place to peg the value. It also compares well with many other SaaS platforms. In the context of a corporate customer, if you have 20 staff members and you're paying $75K to each of them annually, you don't have to save very much time per app to make money.
stam wrote:
Sat Jul 27, 2024 12:05 am
2. As the developer, if I am the sole user of the app I create, do I then need to purchase a second subscription to use my own standalone for myself? (i.e. will I need to be both the developer and the 'internal user'?)
We count humans, not your usage. You can be a developer or not be a developer. You can use one standalone or 10. You're one user.
stam wrote:
Sat Jul 27, 2024 12:05 am
3. As a doctor working on a number of wards, I will frequently log into multiple locations. If I have logged into multiple locations and used my standalone app that I created for myself, will that cause issues (ie will it log as multiple users if I haven't specifically shut down the app?)
You can log in as many times as you like. Our Cloud based system will include some user management - which you don't need to use but can be a time saver when wanting to access only records that relate to a particular type of user.
Kevin Miller ~ kevin@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Build Amazing Things

Post Reply