Let’s get this conundrum worked out:
1. If I have Mac or Windows machine
2. If I download “Livecode 9.6.4 Standard ”
3. And I pay $300.00 for an annual license
4. I can build for Desktop for Windows, Linux, iOS iPhone, Android
5. Minus Premium features
6. For one year + plus the upgrades that
I must admit, that i totally agree with you.
> Am 05.09.2021 um 17:35 schrieb Bernard Devlin via use-livecode
> :
>
> .
>
> Largest user demographic? Free-loaders who contributed no money but plenty
> of baseless whining?
>
> So many protest poverty but I'm 100% certain they spend more
Over on the Forum I've seen several of the whiners criticising the lifetime
licenses - people who have paid a tiny fraction of what we've paid (if
they've paid anything at all)! I suspect their baseless criticisms have
cost more than any of the whiners have paid in license fees. If I ran the
Hi Dan,
So you want the company to break more promises, even to the lifetimers?
A lot of the lifetimers have spent a lot of money on licenses before
deciding to invest in lifetime licenses. I don’t think you want to be
ticking off what is probably the company's most loyal base.
It’s a recipe
On the flip side, if there's only a small demographic then the loss of that
revenue would be minimal and the company would retain its honorable reputation.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
On September 5, 2021 8:57:33 AM
I'm sure Kevin etc. doesn't share my view on this. But here it is. Get your
popcorn.
On Sun, Sep 5, 2021 at 2:56 PM Dan Brown via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>
> It can't be any more harmful than abruptly pulling the rug from under the
> feet of your largest user
> I'd also get rid of any existing lifetime
> and lock in licenses (sorry, time to clean house)
That would clean house all right! Hand grenade style.
We'd be getting to the point of serious self-harm.
It can't be any more harmful than abruptly pulling the rug from under the
feet of your
Worse still...
Dan:
> Introduce breaking changes when it's necessary
> to move the language forward
We tried "cut off the old hair" memes already, remember?
I would argue that retaining legacy functionality and behaviours whilst
trying to modernise or improve a language introduces bugs and
Hi Folks,
This seems headed for trouble again if we're not careful.
We must avoid repeating the same history:
1. Added work for LC Ltd without compensation*
2. Buggy struggling main product due to #1
3. Overcomplicating things
4. Burdening those who pay with the extra expense
5. *Added work
Dreamweaver, RevMedia . . . absolutely no need to do any thinking
whatsoever . . . it has all happened before.
On 5.09.21 10:42, Terry Judd via use-livecode wrote:
Not sure how this would work - but what if only licensed versions of LC could
produce and run distributable/shareable stacks while
There will always be a subset of people that will circumvent paying for
software. I'm not convinced an endless battle trying to prevent misuse is
worth the cost of hampering the onboarding experience for new customers.
Unless you've cornered the market you really can't afford to be user
hostile.
Not sure how this would work - but what if only licensed versions of LC could
produce and run distributable/shareable stacks while the free version could
only run stacks produced by that particular instance of the app?
On 5/9/21, 3:57 pm, "use-livecode on behalf of J. Landman Gay via
12 matches
Mail list logo
