Ashley,

These were good comments and a good read.  Thanks for your efforts in giving
us this information.

Paul Tretter

----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 8:33 PM
Subject: [REBOL] Re: Licensing, components


>
> Just caught up on 5 days of mail, so I'll comment on a few posts at once
;)
>
> > The only reason people will use REBOL these days is because they have
> fallen in love with the language and love to explore.
>
> RAD. The ability to develop a [relatively] complex GUI-based application
> without being forced to use a database component from company B, an
imaging
> module from company C, etc is a godsend. Everything can be done in REBOL
> and it can be done quickly.
>
> UI. The user-interface can be made to look exactly the way you choose. In
> my case, it allows me to deploy apps across Win95, 98, ME, 2000 and XP
> without worrying about the subtle API and UI changes.
>
> Consistency. Even on just one platform, windoze, most software has at
least
> a "Win95, 98, ME" and a "Win2000/XP" install / usage section in the
manual.
> Because REBOL apps use REBOL building blocks as opposed to API building
> blocks, this is not an issue for REBOL apps. My documentation can use the
> one set of screen shots and instructions to cover all flavours of windoze.
>
> > I believe that if more people knew of real-world ENCAP uses, they would
> be more willing to trust and buy it without trial. I have no idea who uses
> it, how well it works, what's really involved and cannot even read the
docs
> on it. I can find no examples 'Made with Encap'.
>
> Could not be simpler to use. Just run the encap program, enter the source
> script name (eg. test.r), the target name (eg. test.exe) and hey presto
you
> have a 550K standalone executable. This executable is in fact the REBOL
> interpreter with your script(s) tacked on the end.
>
> As for "made with encap", here we get interesting. In the niche industry I
> am targeting the UI is *the* selling point of my app and I do *not* want
my
> VB and C based competitors to know "how it was done and how so quick".
> Encap, for me, is not only the means by which the source code is protected
> but also the means by which the "production process" is protected.
>
> This *commercial* consideration may conflict with my *hobbyist* instincts
> to tell the world about REBOL, but I figure that spending time trying to
> sell REBOL-based applications is more beneficial to RT (and me) than
> talking to end-users about a particular deployment technology. Folks are
> interested in what your application can do, not what it is written in.
> Competitors *are* interested in what it is written in as they can then
> market against it (eg. "that REBOL app over there is really just an
> interpreted script, while our app is a highly optimised C executable",
> etc). Sales prospects are rather taken with the concept of a single,
> "optimised" 550K executable and no supporting DLL's.
>
> > ftpgadget is the only application that I am aware of that is encapped.
>
> There are others, like mine, that are sold via channels other than the
> internet. I have just come back from a 5-day trade fair where my encap'ed
> demo was seen by hundreds of sales prospects, many of whom do not even
have
> an email address let alone buy software over the internet.
>
> > I'd recommend it for software projects of all sizes.  Last time I
> checked, it was $499 plus 10% commission on all sales of products where
> Encap was used (or something like that).
>
> Note that this fee is a yearly fee and is applied against the 10% owed.
ie.
> if I sell $8,000 worth of software in a year then I owe RT $800 less $499.
> While I don't suggest the royalty scheme is the best way to gain large
> developer support, it does have the advantage of a low entry cost ($499)
> and like any franchise (eg. Macdonald's) if the franchise does well then
RT
> does well and the developer still retains 90%.
>
> > What improvements/changes do you recommend for Encap?
>
> Ability to change icons (it comes embedded with the standard "R" icons at
> 16x16, 32x32 and 48x48) and "Version" text. While other tools can be used
> to [interactively] modify the encapped executable, it would be better if
> encap excepted scripted parameters to do this (ie. a simple and complete
> build process).
>
> Sample install / uninstall scripts that handle pathing, icons, registry
> entries, etc. While I don't expect the likes of "Install Shield", I do
> expect an installer that prompts for an installation directory and places
> an icon on the user's desktop.
>
> -Does Encap work across platforms?
> Each platform requires it's own version of encap.
>
> -How do you control that?
> Purchase encap for each platform you intend to market for. Note that
higher
> sales will effectively let you obtain encap on other platforms "for free".
> eg. $10,000 in sales covers the cost of encap for two platforms, even if
> most sales occurred on only one platform.
>
> -Any issues with /View
> None.
>
> -Does Encap work with all versions of REBOL?
> Encap "contains" the REBOL interpreter. Latest encap includes latest
> release and beta versions. It is not encap itself that is beta, but the
> "interpreter" instance it binds to your script(s).
>
> -How big is the minimum executable?
> 550K on windows. After adding 160K of scripts, this went to 554K. I was
> suitably impressed!
>
> -Can you generate Encapped dynamically under Rebol script control?
> Yes. Roll your own.
>
> -Does Encap have any built-in icon features for GUIs?
> No. DIY.
>
> -Double click starting from icon on Win32 and MacOS?
> No. DIY.
>
> -What control for time limiting, password or license key control of
> executables?
> DIY.
>
> -What sort of docs, examples do you get?
> Installation and usage manual of about 4 pages, plus a test / sample
script
> to encap.
>
> -Does 10% commission apply to non-profit, non-commercial or educational
> projects?
> 10% of nothing is nothing. If you charge something, 10% goes to RT.
>
> -How is licensing/commission managed?
> See above.
>
> -Is that 10% of the final product price?
> REBOL based component only (if structured correctly).
>
> -What happens if your product is free?
> You pay $499 per year for Royalty membership.
>
> -If you are a developer for a client with end-user customers, is just one
> Encap
> license needed?
> Yes. Encap is a development licence, not a runtime licence.
>
> -Who is responsible for the Commission in that case, and how is it
assigned
> and
> tracked?
> The seller of the encap'ed program is responsible.
>
> -Have you used it with PayPal closely in any way?
> No.
>
> -Does Encap help promote REBOL or is that left entirely up to the
> developer?
> Unless modified, the encapped executable retains the REBOL icons and
> version text.
>
> - What have you built with it?
> Image Management software for the medical industry.
>
> - Client and end-user reactions to the product?
> They love the UI of the application and don't know [or care] that it was
> written with REBOL.
>
> - Client [and end-user] reactions to the license commission?
> Not their problem. They pay an RRP that includes all third party licence
> fees, etc. Again, the 10% royalty fee is the concern of the *seller* only.
>
> > Anything else?
>
> Don't go into business without a good accountant and lawyer, and operate
> out of a company structure. ;)
>
>
> Regards,
>
>      Ashley
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the
> subject, without the quotes.
>

-- 
To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the 
subject, without the quotes.

Reply via email to