On Jan 11, 2014, at 4:33 PM, Aparajita Fishman <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 1. Recently, there was a NUG thread "New Web project, what to use". I was >> somewhat shocked that Active4D wasn't more prominently mentioned. I believe >> that is something you/we could improve on. > > I'm not surprised. The alternatives may be better for a beginner. Active4D is > the Rolls Royce of web tools, it isn't for everyone. I agree A4D is the best tool, but any developer who works on a web project more than a week (and especially those who uses 4D tags) can justify using Active4D. I wish there was a way to determine how many such developers there are out there. > > >> 2. Your current pricing structure is fair value, but with a 4D web server >> license, adds over $1000 per deployment to any 4D app. This limits you to a >> certain subclass of 4D's installed base, and that is a smaller and smaller >> pond. > > Agreed. I know I will probably have to change the pricing structure to get to > a different market. I originally priced it so high to scare off all but the > serious web developers, to reduce my support burden. There are schemes where support generates some revenue. You probably also could find experienced power users that you could outsource some of this to if there was cash flow to support it. > > >> My understanding is that it is possible to create a stack using a 4D single >> user executable and NTK with only developer licensing costs, providing >> unlimited deployment at no additional cost. > > Correct. > > >> If you were willing to consider alternate OEM contracts with a higher >> initial or annual fee, but no deployment costs, I think that might unlock a >> whole new world of smaller, simpler apps that do cool things. > > How does this fit in with the $50-$100 price point you mentioned below? I meant the price point of the resulting apps, not your per deployment fee. It would open up A4D use to anyone who can come up with an idea that can generate annual revenue of $5-10K or more, at ANY given price. The range of possibilities grows exponentially. Right now, an app needs to be $2000 or more, and those apps are hard to write and even harder to sell. > > >> I know I have a few ideas on what could sell quite a few units at a $50-$100 >> price point. I think you could encourage quite a few such apps with the >> right pricing structure. > > I have worked out OEM deals with pricing like that, so I'm open to any > offers. But I obviously can't sell the one-off license at that price. That's more than fair > > >> 3. I don't know how you feel about it, but I think embedded scripting is no >> longer a best practice. A simpler product that just supported scripting for >> AJAX and sessions would be appealing. > > That's actually all I use it for myself at this point, thus the move to > native JSON support in v6.1. I use Cappuccino on the front end, Active4D on > the back end. > > Regards, > > Aparajita > > _______________________________________________ > Active4D-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://list.aparajitaworld.com/listinfo/active4d-dev > Archives: http://active4d-nabble.aparajitaworld.com/ > > _______________________________________________ Active4D-dev mailing list [email protected] http://list.aparajitaworld.com/listinfo/active4d-dev Archives: http://active4d-nabble.aparajitaworld.com/
