The Old Chestnut - Again
So, at least part of my Beef about the end of the 'FREE' 10-lines-of-code may be partly justified . . . see Frank R's points/moans. I also understand the arguments put forward by Richard Gaskin and Co. I also know that working with the old RR 2 'Free' version can get extremely frustrating - and the only way out of this (short of giving up) is to acquire a liceense. Might it not be an idea to break RR up into modules: not as daft as it seems - 1. A really extremely basic version of RR for FREE . . . 2. Add on modules at various prices based on how valuable their perceived capabilities are. The BASIC FREE version could be crippled to the old 10-line setting, The first module could be one that removes that limitation, Other modules would allow PRINTING, SOUND, NETWORKING, INTERNET ACCESS, DATABASE INTERFACING and so on . . . For instance, in my own case - I need SOUND and PRINTING for the tyoe of work I concentrate on; but I am a modest sort of chap making modest sums. But the Princes of the Church and Co. would pay more for more advanced capabilities that their work required. sincerely, Richmond __ See Mathewson's software at: http://members.maclaunch.com/richmond/default.html ___ --- The Think Different Store http://www.thinkdifferentstore.com/ For All Your Mac Gear --- ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: The Old Chestnut - Again
As someone who has been playing in the software universe for far, far too long, I can tell you that: (a) your basic idea is attractive and workable (b) it is an economic disaster for the publisher Why? Because of something called SKUs. That stands for Stock Keeping Unit and it's the number by which wholesalers, distributors and retailers identify a specific product uniquely for inventory tracking and sales monitoring purposes. There is a fundamental business principle that says the more SKUs you try to put into the channel of distribution, the greater will be the resistance to your entire line. Large companies can overcome that resistance. Small companies are hard-pressed to do so. On Nov 26, 2005, at 6:13 AM, Mathewson wrote: Might it not be an idea to break RR up into modules: ~~ Dan Shafer, Information Product Consultant and Author http://www.shafermedia.com Get my book, Revolution: Software at the Speed of Thought From http://www.shafermediastore.com/tech_main.html ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: The Old Chestnut - Again
On 26 Nov 2005, at 21:14, Dan Shafer wrote: As someone who has been playing in the software universe for far, far too long, I can tell you that: (a) your basic idea is attractive and workable (b) it is an economic disaster for the publisher Why? Because of something called SKUs. That stands for Stock Keeping Unit and it's the number by which wholesalers, distributors and retailers identify a specific product uniquely for inventory tracking and sales monitoring purposes. There is a fundamental business principle that says the more SKUs you try to put into the channel of distribution, the greater will be the resistance to your entire line. Large companies can overcome that resistance. Small companies are hard-pressed to do so. This is very true - with one qualification: If the price of adding an extra item (and maintaining it) to your inventory falls below a certain threshold the economics get substantially reversed. Amazon is a case-study here. Most publishers make 80% or more of their money from the big sellers making virtually all of the rest of their inventory useless in terms of a hard bottom- line. This goes for music and video too. However recent analysis of Amazon sales has shown that they manage to generate a substantial part of their profits from the bottom end of their stock (in terms of sales) - from memory some 30%. This is because of the very low cost to them of adding (and maintaining) new SKU's to their inventory - this combined with their reseller programme greatly facilitated by the REST based web services which allow just about anybody to offer selections of Amazon books for sale on their own custom sites. No-one has managed to do this with software components yet. My view is that due to the technology and community involved in the Revolution environment - RunRev are uniquely placed to pull such a trick off. Whether anyone agrees with me on that is another question. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: The Old Chestnut - Again
David... Good response. I agree that new markets can turn into wonderful exceptions. On Nov 26, 2005, at 12:34 PM, David Bovill wrote: No-one has managed to do this with software components yet. My view is that due to the technology and community involved in the Revolution environment - RunRev are uniquely placed to pull such a trick off. Whether anyone agrees with me on that is another question. I have given up on this dream. In the 70's and 80's, several companies tried -- with true object-oriented platforms such as Smalltalk and Java -- to create viable third-party marketplaces for software components, to no avail. I think it's an unattainable objective, for reasons that are far too complex to go into on this forum. ~~ Dan Shafer, Information Product Consultant and Author http://www.shafermedia.com Get my book, Revolution: Software at the Speed of Thought From http://www.shafermediastore.com/tech_main.html ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: The Old Chestnut - Again
Dan Shafer wrote: On Nov 26, 2005, at 12:34 PM, David Bovill wrote: No-one has managed to do this with software components yet. My view is that due to the technology and community involved in the Revolution environment - RunRev are uniquely placed to pull such a trick off. Whether anyone agrees with me on that is another question. I have given up on this dream. In the 70's and 80's, several companies tried -- with true object-oriented platforms such as Smalltalk and Java -- to create viable third-party marketplaces for software components, to no avail. I think it's an unattainable objective, for reasons that are far too complex to go into on this forum. There is one exception: components for Microsoft's Visual Basic. As of five years ago the aftermarket for VB was estimated at more than $400 million. Of course, anyone intimately familiar with Microsoft can describe the underhanded shennanigans Microsoft pulled to get that market going (oh, the stories I've heard). Among companies operating in any above-board fashion, there are indeed few examples. Once upon a time Fourth World was the leading externals distributor for SuperCard -- even before SuperCard's troubles under Allegiant, selling components is just not an easy business to be in. It's a low-margin, high-support proposition. -- Richard Gaskin Managing Editor, revJournal ___ Rev tips, tutorials and more: http://www.revJournal.com ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: The Old Chestnut - Again
On 26 Nov 2005, at 22:02, Dan Shafer wrote: I have given up on this dream. In the 70's and 80's, several companies tried -- with true object-oriented platforms such as Smalltalk and Java -- to create viable third-party marketplaces for software components, to no avail. I know what you mean. I remain an optimist, partly because I never remotely thought the previous efforts would work, and partly because a number of things have moved on: 1) Open source cryptography and built upon this online eCommerce 2) Social software and an understanding of how to build shared communities of value. 3) Greatly simplified, robust and easy to deploy and maintain components that developers can both use - and some are willing to pay for (web services form part of that admittedly new equation, Revolution could fill another part). ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
