subject:"Revenue and the Open Source edition"


Kevin Miller wrote:

> Almost right. We were aiming for complete parity for the heavier
> weight browser renderer in the widget to provide perfect cross
> platform compatibility and for exactly these sorts of reasons but
> it wasn't possible due to some platform specific issues we found
> integrating the framework.
>
> However PDF should still work on all platforms because:
>
> Windows & Linux are CEF (Chromium)
> Mac is WebView (WebKit based)
> iOS is UIWebView (WebKit based)
> Android is Android WebView
>
> Mac & iOS WebKit can handle it (we had originally planned to use
> Chromium on everything to get a completely consistent experience
> but had to withdraw it due to Mac specific CEF bugs).
>
> On Android there is an extra step:
>
> If your PDF is at:
> http://livecode.com/mydoc.pdf
>
> You need to wrap it with the Google doc viewer by setting the widget
> URL on Android to:
> 
http://docs.google.com/gview?embedded=true&url=http://livecode.com/mydoc.pdf

>
> Chromium should be able to handle PDF on Windows/Linux. That said I
> did just see a crash when trying it just now on Windows (avoidable
> for now by using the same method as for Android). Panos has filed a
> bug :)

Way cool - thanks.

Good news for everyone who's been clamoring for PDF rendering in the 
Indy and Community versions of LC.


--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
 
 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

2016-05-05 Thread Todd Fabacher

Actually Kevin, sorry but...

users need to be aware about Android. The statement "Bear in mind however
that basic display is already possible with the browser included in all
editions of LC." is not 100% accurate. A PDF does NOT display within the
web browser in Android. We ended up having to use the Android mergExt
external to display a PDF. This is an Android issue, not LiveCode, but this
is all the more reason the community should band together and get a PDF
viewer created. I will be happy to contribute some resources!!!

But I agree with Kevin. Everyone shouts Open Source, but few are willing to
put in the time and efforts it takes to make it happen. Send me an email if
you are interested in the PDF viewer. I will get one of my C guys to start
looking into it. We just need to learn LiveCode Builder.

--Todd
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

2016-05-05 Thread Kevin Miller

Almost right. We were aiming for complete parity for the heavier weight
browser renderer in the widget to provide perfect cross platform
compatibility and for exactly these sorts of reasons but it wasn't
possible due to some platform specific issues we found integrating the
framework.

However PDF should still work on all platforms because:

Windows & Linux are CEF (Chromium)
Mac is WebView (WebKit based)
iOS is UIWebView (WebKit based)
Android is Android WebView


Mac & iOS WebKit can handle it (we had originally planned to use Chromium
on everything to get a completely consistent experience but had to
withdraw it due to Mac specific CEF bugs).

On Android there is an extra step:

If your PDF is at:
http://livecode.com/mydoc.pdf


You need to wrap it with the Google doc viewer by setting the widget URL
on Android to:
http://docs.google.com/gview?embedded=true&url=http://livecode.com/mydoc.pd
f


Chromium should be able to handle PDF on Windows/Linux. That said I did
just see a crash when trying it just now on Windows (avoidable for now by
using the same method as for Android). Panos has filed a bug :)


Kind regards,

Kevin

Kevin Miller ~ ke...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Everyone can create apps




On 05/05/2016, 16:56, "use-livecode on behalf of Richard Gaskin"
 wrote:

>Kevin Miller wrote:
>
> > On 05/05/2016, 16:10, Richard Gaskin wrote:
> >
> >>Kevin Miller wrote:
> >>
> >> > ...basic display is already possible with the
> >> > browser included in all editions of LC.
> >>
> >> That's kind of a big deal. I'm not sure how so many of us missed
> >> that, but basic display on a card is all most people have been
> >> asking for. Super cool.
> >>
> >> Anyone here using that? Working well on the platforms you're
> >> deploying to?
> >
> > I am, and have been for some time as it happens!
>
>Seems most missed that in whatever Release Notes that was mentioned in.
>
>It never would have occurred to me that a browser engine would also
>include its own embedded PDF renderer, separate from any that might be
>included in the OS (and IIRC Windows doesn't include one out of the box).
>
>Providing a PDF renderer along with the rest of the HTML rendering with
>that browser engine is definitely something work noting in a bullet
>point somewhere.
>
>-- 
>  Richard Gaskin
>  Fourth World Systems
>  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
>  
>  ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com
>
>
>___
>use-livecode mailing list
>use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>subscription preferences:
>http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)


Roger Eller wrote:

> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
>> It never would have occurred to me that a browser engine would also
>> include its own embedded PDF renderer, separate from any that might
>> be included in the OS (and IIRC Windows doesn't include one out of
>> the box).
>>
>> Providing a PDF renderer along with the rest of the HTML rendering
>> with that browser engine is definitely something work noting in a
>> bullet point somewhere.
>
> Android is still in need of an in-stack PDF display feature.
> The default behavior is to pass it to a user-installed PDF
> viewer app.

Was that using the CEF browser object?  I wonder if there's something we 
can use in our scripts to make use of its embedded PDF renderer.



Jim MacConnell wrote:
> I do and it's great!
> I am serving PDF formatted industrial machine setup sheets to
> operators.
> I have a user preference setting to either display PDF as a separate
> window in Adobe Reader or in an "embedded" viewer (Browser window).
> Operators prefer the browser based display since it's "part of the
> system".
> All they really want/need is to move and zoom in a document.
> WIN only to date cuz that's what we use.

Super-cool.  Thanks for noting that you've had good success on Windows.

That bodes well for the potential to be able to make use of the embedded 
PDF renderer on Android.  Fingers crossed...


--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
 
 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

RE: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

2016-05-05 Thread Jim MacConnell

I do and it's great! 
I am serving PDF formatted industrial machine setup sheets to operators.
I have a user preference setting to either display PDF as a separate window
in Adobe Reader or in an "embedded" viewer (Browser window). 
Operators prefer the browser based display since it's "part of the system".
All they really want/need is to move and zoom in a document.
WIN only to date cuz that's what we use.
Jim

-Original Message-
From: Richard Gaskin [mailto:ambassa...@fourthworld.com] 
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2016 8:10 AM
To: use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Subject: Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

Kevin Miller wrote:

 > ...basic display is already possible with the  > browser included in all
editions of LC.

That's kind of a big deal.  I'm not sure how so many of us missed that, but
basic display on a card is all most people have been asking for. 
Super cool.

Anyone here using that?  Working well on the platforms you're deploying to?

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Systems
  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
  
  ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

2016-05-05 Thread Roger Eller

Android is still in need of an in-stack PDF display feature.  The default
behavior is to pass it to a user-installed PDF viewer app.

~Roger


On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Richard Gaskin 
wrote:

> Kevin Miller wrote:
>
> > On 05/05/2016, 16:10, Richard Gaskin wrote:
> >
> >>Kevin Miller wrote:
> >>
> >> > ...basic display is already possible with the
> >> > browser included in all editions of LC.
> >>
> >> That's kind of a big deal. I'm not sure how so many of us missed
> >> that, but basic display on a card is all most people have been
> >> asking for. Super cool.
> >>
> >> Anyone here using that? Working well on the platforms you're
> >> deploying to?
> >
> > I am, and have been for some time as it happens!
>
> Seems most missed that in whatever Release Notes that was mentioned in.
>
> It never would have occurred to me that a browser engine would also
> include its own embedded PDF renderer, separate from any that might be
> included in the OS (and IIRC Windows doesn't include one out of the box).
>
> Providing a PDF renderer along with the rest of the HTML rendering with
> that browser engine is definitely something work noting in a bullet point
> somewhere.
>
>
> --
>  Richard Gaskin
>  Fourth World Systems
>  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
>  
>  ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com
>
>
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

Kevin Miller wrote:

> On 05/05/2016, 16:10, Richard Gaskin wrote:
>
>>Kevin Miller wrote:
>>
>> > ...basic display is already possible with the
>> > browser included in all editions of LC.
>>
>> That's kind of a big deal. I'm not sure how so many of us missed
>> that, but basic display on a card is all most people have been
>> asking for. Super cool.
>>
>> Anyone here using that? Working well on the platforms you're
>> deploying to?
>
> I am, and have been for some time as it happens!

Seems most missed that in whatever Release Notes that was mentioned in.

It never would have occurred to me that a browser engine would also 
include its own embedded PDF renderer, separate from any that might be 
included in the OS (and IIRC Windows doesn't include one out of the box).

Providing a PDF renderer along with the rest of the HTML rendering with 
that browser engine is definitely something work noting in a bullet 
point somewhere.

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web

 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

2016-05-05 Thread Kevin Miller

I am, and have been for some time as it happens!

Kind regards,

Kevin

Kevin Miller ~ ke...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Everyone can create apps




On 05/05/2016, 16:10, "use-livecode on behalf of Richard Gaskin"
 wrote:

>Kevin Miller wrote:
>
> > ...basic display is already possible with the
> > browser included in all editions of LC.
>
>That's kind of a big deal.  I'm not sure how so many of us missed that,
>but basic display on a card is all most people have been asking for.
>Super cool.
>
>Anyone here using that?  Working well on the platforms you're deploying
>to?
>
>-- 
>  Richard Gaskin
>  Fourth World Systems
>  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
>  
>  ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com
>
>
>___
>use-livecode mailing list
>use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>subscription preferences:
>http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

Kevin Miller wrote:

> ...basic display is already possible with the
> browser included in all editions of LC.

That's kind of a big deal.  I'm not sure how so many of us missed that, 
but basic display on a card is all most people have been asking for. 
Super cool.

Anyone here using that?  Working well on the platforms you're deploying to?

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web

 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

2016-05-05 Thread Kevin Miller

I think its worth a quick chime in here. The total development costs for
XPDF ran into the tens of thousands of dollars. Our acquisition/trade cost
for them was not cheap either. It is unlikely we could recoup that
investment or invest in them further (as we plan to do) selling these as
low cost add ons. They need to within the Business license. That isn¹t to
say that from time to time some features might trickle down but we have no
immediate plans to do that at the moment.

Of course we¹d welcome a community project to display PDF and if you want
support and pointers on how to do that with a widget we¹ll be happy to
help. Bear in mind however that basic display is already possible with the
browser included in all editions of LC.

Kind regards,

Kevin

Kevin Miller ~ ke...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Everyone can create apps




On 04/05/2016, 18:28, "use-livecode on behalf of Paul Dupuis"

wrote:

>On 5/4/2016 12:13 PM, RM wrote:
>> I would suppose the ideal thing would be both something that allows
>> one to render a PDF document,
>> and extract all or part of an embedded text layer (if one exists in
>> the original PDF).
>
>The XPDF external from LiveCode for OSX and Win is based on Google's
>PDFium library. I can say this because I know something about the
>details of XPDF. Researchware (my company) development XPDF and recently
>transferred the rights to LiveCode.
>
>Richard is correct in that the XPDF external not only opens and displays
>a PDF, but allows zooming, navigation, layout, hyperlinks, selection of
>text (for PDFs with editable text) or any potion of any page as an image
>selection, and allows you to extract text or images. It also supports
>password protected PDFs and more. Therefore, if ALL you want is just to
>display pages from a PDF it is certainly more than you may need. The
>same could be said about the feature set of LiveCode itself.
>
>Richmond just showed that some people want more - in his case,
>extraction of all of part of the text. If you ONLY want to do that under
>script control, then that would be an incremental effort over just
>displaying a PDF.
>
>If you want the USER to be able to select text (or images), then that is
>a significant chunk of work beyond just displaying a PDF as the PDFium
>library contains NO APIs for user selection and that must be original
>code added by the external. A large amount of effort went into making
>sure user selection of text was as good as Adobe or Preview or Foxit's
>PDF viewers, which was definitely not as easy as one might expect (or
>hope)!
>
>I can tell you that a LOT of developer time (i.e money) went into the
>creation, QA testing, and refinement of XPDF.
>
>Obviously, since Google PDFium is open source, anyone can create an
>alternative to XPDF, perhaps an even better version. If people want to
>build one, I encourage it. A competitive market of LiveCode PDF widgets
>just gives me more choice for my company's PDF needs ;-) However,  I
>offer the caution of experience that there are a lot more little
>"gotchas" in working with PDFium that anyone may realize, even after
>reading the APIs, and making another from scratch may be much more work
>than people might expect.
>
>I think those interested in PDF might be better off continuing to lobby
>for LiveCode to offer XPDF as an add-on (like so many other excellent LC
>add-ons from Chartmaker to Wordlib to RRP Spell) for a appropriate
>price. It seems only logical that eventually they would convert it to an
>LC8 Widget as well.
>
>
>___
>use-livecode mailing list
>use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>subscription preferences:
>http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

That will help tremendously!

Thank you, Monty

JB

1
> On May 4, 2016, at 5:19 PM, Monte Goulding  wrote:
> 
> BTW I have a some Xcode templates that can help make things easier available 
> at https://github.com/montegoulding/livecode-external-templates
> 
>> On 5 May 2016, at 9:25 AM, JB  wrote:
>> 
>> Thanks Monty.
>> I will give it a try.
>> 
>> JB
>> 
>> 
>>> On May 4, 2016, at 4:09 PM, Monte Goulding  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
 On 5 May 2016, at 8:39 AM, JB  wrote:
 
 I am trying to compile a external using xCode 7.  Is it possible in anyway 
 to
 make that external work or a way to use any version of Xcode on El Capitan
 and make the external work?
>>> 
>>> Yes
 Do you compile externals on a Mac with new
 OS X systems like El Capitan and if you do what are you doing to make it
 work?  
>>> 
>>> Yes I use El Capitan and the latest Xcode.
 So I am looking for anyway to make the external work.
>>> 
>>> Ok so where exactly are you getting stuck? Perhaps it would help you to 
>>> look at one of my externals on GitHub like mergJson? 
>>> https://github.com/montegoulding/mergJSON
 
 JB
 
 
 
> On May 4, 2016, at 3:21 PM, Monte Goulding  wrote:
> 
> A patch for what precisely?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On 5 May 2016, at 8:12 AM, JB  wrote:
>> 
>> What I am trying to do is compile a external
>> for Revolution.  Is there a way to compile a
>> external for Revolution on Mac that is using
>> El Capitan?  A patch or anything to make it
>> work?
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
 
 
 ___
 use-livecode mailing list
 use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
 Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
 subscription preferences:
 http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> use-livecode mailing list
>>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
>>> subscription preferences:
>>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
>> preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> 
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> 


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

BTW I have a some Xcode templates that can help make things easier available at 
https://github.com/montegoulding/livecode-external-templates
 
> On 5 May 2016, at 9:25 AM, JB  wrote:
> 
> Thanks Monty.
> I will give it a try.
> 
> JB
> 
> 
>> On May 4, 2016, at 4:09 PM, Monte Goulding  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On 5 May 2016, at 8:39 AM, JB  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I am trying to compile a external using xCode 7.  Is it possible in anyway 
>>> to
>>> make that external work or a way to use any version of Xcode on El Capitan
>>> and make the external work?
>> 
>> Yes
>>> Do you compile externals on a Mac with new
>>> OS X systems like El Capitan and if you do what are you doing to make it
>>> work?  
>> 
>> Yes I use El Capitan and the latest Xcode.
>>> So I am looking for anyway to make the external work.
>> 
>> Ok so where exactly are you getting stuck? Perhaps it would help you to look 
>> at one of my externals on GitHub like mergJson? 
>> https://github.com/montegoulding/mergJSON
>>> 
>>> JB
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 On May 4, 2016, at 3:21 PM, Monte Goulding  wrote:
 
 A patch for what precisely?
 
 Sent from my iPhone
 
> On 5 May 2016, at 8:12 AM, JB  wrote:
> 
> What I am trying to do is compile a external
> for Revolution.  Is there a way to compile a
> external for Revolution on Mac that is using
> El Capitan?  A patch or anything to make it
> work?
 
 ___
 use-livecode mailing list
 use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
 Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
 subscription preferences:
 http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> use-livecode mailing list
>>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
>>> subscription preferences:
>>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
>> preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>> 
> 
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

Thanks Monty.
I will give it a try.

JB


> On May 4, 2016, at 4:09 PM, Monte Goulding  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 5 May 2016, at 8:39 AM, JB  wrote:
>> 
>> I am trying to compile a external using xCode 7.  Is it possible in anyway to
>> make that external work or a way to use any version of Xcode on El Capitan
>> and make the external work?
> 
> Yes
>> Do you compile externals on a Mac with new
>> OS X systems like El Capitan and if you do what are you doing to make it
>> work?  
> 
> Yes I use El Capitan and the latest Xcode.
>> So I am looking for anyway to make the external work.
> 
> Ok so where exactly are you getting stuck? Perhaps it would help you to look 
> at one of my externals on GitHub like mergJson? 
> https://github.com/montegoulding/mergJSON
>> 
>> JB
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On May 4, 2016, at 3:21 PM, Monte Goulding  wrote:
>>> 
>>> A patch for what precisely?
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
 On 5 May 2016, at 8:12 AM, JB  wrote:
 
 What I am trying to do is compile a external
 for Revolution.  Is there a way to compile a
 external for Revolution on Mac that is using
 El Capitan?  A patch or anything to make it
 work?
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> use-livecode mailing list
>>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
>>> subscription preferences:
>>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
>> preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> 
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> 


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

Thank you,  I won’t use XPDF for older
versions.  That is good to know.


q

JB


> On May 4, 2016, at 4:04 PM, Paul Dupuis  wrote:
> 
> On 5/4/2016 6:39 PM, JB wrote:
>> I am trying to compile a external using xCode 7.  Is it possible in anyway to
>> make that external work or a way to use any version of Xcode on El Capitan
>> and make the external work?  Do you compile externals on a Mac with new
>> OS X systems like El Capitan and if you do what are you doing to make it
>> work?  So I am looking for anyway to make the external work.
>> 
>> JB
> 
> I am confused. If the 'external' you are referring to is XPDF, you do
> not need Xcode or anything like that. However XPDF will not work on any
> version of LiveCode below LC 6.7.x, so if you are trying to use XPDF
> with an ancient version of "Revolution" (like 2.x or something) you are
> out of luck.
> 
> If you have some 'external' you are trying to build, what is it? And
> what version of "Revolution" (vs LiveCode" are you trying to build it
> for? I am surprised any version of Revolution even runs under El Capitan
> - I think you need at least LiveCode 4.5 or maybe 4.6.4 or higher to run
> on El Capitan
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> 


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

Do you know of a good emulator that will work or is it possible
to make it work by compiling from the commond line tools or
another way?

thank you,
JB


> On May 4, 2016, at 3:21 PM, Monte Goulding  wrote:
> 
> A patch for what precisely?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On 5 May 2016, at 8:12 AM, JB  wrote:
>> 
>> What I am trying to do is compile a external
>> for Revolution.  Is there a way to compile a
>> external for Revolution on Mac that is using
>> El Capitan?  A patch or anything to make it
>> work?
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> 


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)


> On 5 May 2016, at 8:39 AM, JB  wrote:
> 
> I am trying to compile a external using xCode 7.  Is it possible in anyway to
> make that external work or a way to use any version of Xcode on El Capitan
> and make the external work?

Yes
>  Do you compile externals on a Mac with new
> OS X systems like El Capitan and if you do what are you doing to make it
> work?  

Yes I use El Capitan and the latest Xcode.
> So I am looking for anyway to make the external work.

Ok so where exactly are you getting stuck? Perhaps it would help you to look at 
one of my externals on GitHub like mergJson? 
https://github.com/montegoulding/mergJSON
> 
> JB
> 
> 
> 
>> On May 4, 2016, at 3:21 PM, Monte Goulding  wrote:
>> 
>> A patch for what precisely?
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On 5 May 2016, at 8:12 AM, JB  wrote:
>>> 
>>> What I am trying to do is compile a external
>>> for Revolution.  Is there a way to compile a
>>> external for Revolution on Mac that is using
>>> El Capitan?  A patch or anything to make it
>>> work?
>> 
>> ___
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
>> preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> 
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

On 5/4/2016 6:39 PM, JB wrote:
> I am trying to compile a external using xCode 7.  Is it possible in anyway to
> make that external work or a way to use any version of Xcode on El Capitan
> and make the external work?  Do you compile externals on a Mac with new
> OS X systems like El Capitan and if you do what are you doing to make it
> work?  So I am looking for anyway to make the external work.
>
> JB

I am confused. If the 'external' you are referring to is XPDF, you do
not need Xcode or anything like that. However XPDF will not work on any
version of LiveCode below LC 6.7.x, so if you are trying to use XPDF
with an ancient version of "Revolution" (like 2.x or something) you are
out of luck.

If you have some 'external' you are trying to build, what is it? And
what version of "Revolution" (vs LiveCode" are you trying to build it
for? I am surprised any version of Revolution even runs under El Capitan
- I think you need at least LiveCode 4.5 or maybe 4.6.4 or higher to run
on El Capitan

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

I am trying to compile a external using xCode 7.  Is it possible in anyway to
make that external work or a way to use any version of Xcode on El Capitan
and make the external work?  Do you compile externals on a Mac with new
OS X systems like El Capitan and if you do what are you doing to make it
work?  So I am looking for anyway to make the external work.

JB

> On May 4, 2016, at 3:21 PM, Monte Goulding  wrote:
> 
> A patch for what precisely?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On 5 May 2016, at 8:12 AM, JB  wrote:
>> 
>> What I am trying to do is compile a external
>> for Revolution.  Is there a way to compile a
>> external for Revolution on Mac that is using
>> El Capitan?  A patch or anything to make it
>> work?
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> 

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

A patch for what precisely?

Sent from my iPhone

> On 5 May 2016, at 8:12 AM, JB  wrote:
> 
> What I am trying to do is compile a external
> for Revolution.  Is there a way to compile a
> external for Revolution on Mac that is using
> El Capitan?  A patch or anything to make it
> work?

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

What I am trying to do is compile a external
for Revolution.  Is there a way to compile a
external for Revolution on Mac that is using
El Capitan?  A patch or anything to make it
work?

JB

> On May 4, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Monte Goulding  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 5 May 2016, at 7:23 AM, JB  wrote:
>> 
>> Anyone know how to make xCode 7 externals work
>> with Revolution? The latest version of xCode it will
>> take is 2.4 and I do not have that on my current Mac.
>> Or is there a way to install the older version on a mac
>> with El Capitan?
> 
> I think you need to clarify what you are trying to do with which versions of 
> what in order for someone to help you here. Xcode 2.4 definitely won’t work 
> on El Capitan.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Monte
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)


> On 5 May 2016, at 7:23 AM, JB  wrote:
> 
> Anyone know how to make xCode 7 externals work
> with Revolution? The latest version of xCode it will
> take is 2.4 and I do not have that on my current Mac.
> Or is there a way to install the older version on a mac
> with El Capitan?

I think you need to clarify what you are trying to do with which versions of 
what in order for someone to help you here. Xcode 2.4 definitely won’t work on 
El Capitan.

Cheers

Monte
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

Anyone know how to make xCode 7 externals work
with Revolution?  The latest version of xCode it will
take is 2.4 and I do not have that on my current Mac.
Or is there a way to install the older version on a mac
with El Capitan?


JB



> On May 4, 2016, at 1:37 PM, Paul Dupuis  wrote:
> 
> On 5/4/2016 4:12 PM, JB wrote:
>> A number of years ago I installed a external
>> using Trevor’s info but this is good too.
>> proper code to access the embeded binary;
>> I downloaded some info from Apple on how
>> to install binaries but if I do install them right
>> I need to know how to call them.  If I figure
>> how to call a few of the binaries it would open
>> the door for the others.
> 
> Once you have installed XPDF per:
> http://lessons.livecode.com/m/4071/l/6347-how-to-install-3rd-party-externals-for-use-in-the-ide-and-standalone-builder
> 
> The documentation on how to use it is at a button at the bottom of this
> page: https://livecode.com/products/livecode-platform/pdf-viewer/
> 
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

That sounds like exactly
what I need.

Thank you!

JB



> On May 4, 2016, at 1:37 PM, Paul Dupuis  wrote:
> 
> On 5/4/2016 4:12 PM, JB wrote:
>> A number of years ago I installed a external
>> using Trevor’s info but this is good too.
>> proper code to access the embeded binary;
>> I downloaded some info from Apple on how
>> to install binaries but if I do install them right
>> I need to know how to call them.  If I figure
>> how to call a few of the binaries it would open
>> the door for the others.
> 
> Once you have installed XPDF per:
> http://lessons.livecode.com/m/4071/l/6347-how-to-install-3rd-party-externals-for-use-in-the-ide-and-standalone-builder
> 
> The documentation on how to use it is at a button at the bottom of this
> page: https://livecode.com/products/livecode-platform/pdf-viewer/
> 
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

On 5/4/2016 4:12 PM, JB wrote:
> A number of years ago I installed a external
> using Trevor’s info but this is good too.
> proper code to access the embeded binary;
> I downloaded some info from Apple on how
> to install binaries but if I do install them right
> I need to know how to call them.  If I figure
> how to call a few of the binaries it would open
> the door for the others.

Once you have installed XPDF per:
http://lessons.livecode.com/m/4071/l/6347-how-to-install-3rd-party-externals-for-use-in-the-ide-and-standalone-builder

The documentation on how to use it is at a button at the bottom of this
page: https://livecode.com/products/livecode-platform/pdf-viewer/


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

A number of years ago I installed a external
using Trevor’s info but this is good too.
proper code to access the embeded binary;
I downloaded some info from Apple on how
to install binaries but if I do install them right
I need to know how to call them.  If I figure
how to call a few of the binaries it would open
the door for the others.

JB



What I really meant was installing binaries
in the xCode project and then writing the

> On May 4, 2016, at 12:42 PM, Paul Dupuis  wrote:
> 
> On 5/4/2016 3:38 PM, JB wrote:
>> I just downloaded the mac version of
>> XPDF as binaries.  It looks like they
>> would be easier to install than code
>> files but I have never embedded any
>> binaries before and do not know the
>> correct method to call them.  It would
>> be nice to make at least a basic pdf
>> reader external and then it can be
>> improved.  It would be a good lesson.
>> 
>> JB
>> 
> http://lessons.livecode.com/m/4071/l/6347-how-to-install-3rd-party-externals-for-use-in-the-ide-and-standalone-builder
> 
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> 


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

Thank you.

JB


> On May 4, 2016, at 12:42 PM, Paul Dupuis  wrote:
> 
> On 5/4/2016 3:38 PM, JB wrote:
>> I just downloaded the mac version of
>> XPDF as binaries.  It looks like they
>> would be easier to install than code
>> files but I have never embedded any
>> binaries before and do not know the
>> correct method to call them.  It would
>> be nice to make at least a basic pdf
>> reader external and then it can be
>> improved.  It would be a good lesson.
>> 
>> JB
>> 
> http://lessons.livecode.com/m/4071/l/6347-how-to-install-3rd-party-externals-for-use-in-the-ide-and-standalone-builder
> 
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> 


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

On 5/4/2016 3:38 PM, JB wrote:
> I just downloaded the mac version of
> XPDF as binaries.  It looks like they
> would be easier to install than code
> files but I have never embedded any
> binaries before and do not know the
> correct method to call them.  It would
> be nice to make at least a basic pdf
> reader external and then it can be
> improved.  It would be a good lesson.
>
> JB
>
http://lessons.livecode.com/m/4071/l/6347-how-to-install-3rd-party-externals-for-use-in-the-ide-and-standalone-builder


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

I just downloaded the mac version of
XPDF as binaries.  It looks like they
would be easier to install than code
files but I have never embedded any
binaries before and do not know the
correct method to call them.  It would
be nice to make at least a basic pdf
reader external and then it can be
improved.  It would be a good lesson.

JB



> On May 4, 2016, at 10:28 AM, Paul Dupuis  wrote:
> 
> On 5/4/2016 12:13 PM, RM wrote:
>> I would suppose the ideal thing would be both something that allows
>> one to render a PDF document,
>> and extract all or part of an embedded text layer (if one exists in
>> the original PDF).
> 
> The XPDF external from LiveCode for OSX and Win is based on Google's
> PDFium library. I can say this because I know something about the
> details of XPDF. Researchware (my company) development XPDF and recently
> transferred the rights to LiveCode.
> 
> Richard is correct in that the XPDF external not only opens and displays
> a PDF, but allows zooming, navigation, layout, hyperlinks, selection of
> text (for PDFs with editable text) or any potion of any page as an image
> selection, and allows you to extract text or images. It also supports
> password protected PDFs and more. Therefore, if ALL you want is just to
> display pages from a PDF it is certainly more than you may need. The
> same could be said about the feature set of LiveCode itself.
> 
> Richmond just showed that some people want more - in his case,
> extraction of all of part of the text. If you ONLY want to do that under
> script control, then that would be an incremental effort over just
> displaying a PDF.
> 
> If you want the USER to be able to select text (or images), then that is
> a significant chunk of work beyond just displaying a PDF as the PDFium
> library contains NO APIs for user selection and that must be original
> code added by the external. A large amount of effort went into making
> sure user selection of text was as good as Adobe or Preview or Foxit's
> PDF viewers, which was definitely not as easy as one might expect (or hope)!
> 
> I can tell you that a LOT of developer time (i.e money) went into the
> creation, QA testing, and refinement of XPDF.
> 
> Obviously, since Google PDFium is open source, anyone can create an
> alternative to XPDF, perhaps an even better version. If people want to
> build one, I encourage it. A competitive market of LiveCode PDF widgets
> just gives me more choice for my company's PDF needs ;-) However,  I
> offer the caution of experience that there are a lot more little
> "gotchas" in working with PDFium that anyone may realize, even after
> reading the APIs, and making another from scratch may be much more work
> than people might expect.
> 
> I think those interested in PDF might be better off continuing to lobby
> for LiveCode to offer XPDF as an add-on (like so many other excellent LC
> add-ons from Chartmaker to Wordlib to RRP Spell) for a appropriate
> price. It seems only logical that eventually they would convert it to an
> LC8 Widget as well.
> 
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> 


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

2016-05-04 Thread Robert Mann

>> That lengthy thread explored possible ways to attempt to circumvent 
LiveCode Community's downstream GPL requirements.  

That exploration was an attempt to understand and clarify some tricky issues
in the new FOSS licensing situation.

Some members who participated to that effort of clarification, might not
appreciate that kind of moral interpretaion !

Particularly today, being a special LC8 happy day! Let's celebrate rather
than tance.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@.runrev
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode





--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Revenue-and-the-Open-Source-edition-tp4704079p4704253.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

2016-05-04 Thread Richard Gaskin

Robert Mann wrote:

> In a former, not so old, enormous thread dealing with the FOSS
> license and trying to understand what it meant in practice, one
> of the conclusion was that *only Livecode can dual license*.
> Nobody else can do that. And Kevin Miller really pushed hard on
> that point.

That lengthy thread explored possible ways to attempt to circumvent 
LiveCode Community's downstream GPL requirements.  Kevin's comments were 
about attempting to use the GPL version to make non-GPL works.

My proposal here was for a possible dual-license option for those with 
an appropriate license.  Proprietary works can be created with the 
proprietary-licensed editions of LiveCode.

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web

 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

2016-05-04 Thread Mark Wilcox

> In a former, not so old, enormous thread dealing with the FOSS license
> and
> trying to understand what it meant in practice, one of the conclusion was
> that *only Livecode can dual license*. Nobody else can do that. And Kevin
> Miller really pushed hard on that point.

Only Livecode can dual license the engine. I think they actually
encourage external/widget/library builders to also dual license.

The argument Livecode have been making is that someone with a community
license only cannot dual license - that basically anything you make with
or for Livecode is a derivative work and you need a commercial license
of some kind if you want to distribute it under anything other than the
GPL. I think they're wrong in this both legally and from a community
building perspective but it's not completely black and white.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

2016-05-04 Thread RM


I don't quite know where you got that idea from.

I would be very much surprised if Kevin Miller had actually stated that; 
it might
be that you concluded that on the basis of something he said; which is 
not the

same thing at all.

I would be extremely interested if you could post a link to that thread.

There are plenty of software packages offered under a variety of licences:
yesterday I downloaded a version of Draftsight which let me have a copy for
personal use for nothing, but charges architects lots of money.

Richmond.

On 4.05.2016 20:14, Robert Mann wrote:

Just a precision though :

In a former, not so old, enormous thread dealing with the FOSS license and
trying to understand what it meant in practice, one of the conclusion was
that *only Livecode can dual license*. Nobody else can do that. And Kevin
Miller really pushed hard on that point.





--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Revenue-and-the-Open-Source-edition-tp4704079p4704244.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

2016-05-04 Thread Robert Mann

Just a precision though : 

In a former, not so old, enormous thread dealing with the FOSS license and
trying to understand what it meant in practice, one of the conclusion was
that *only Livecode can dual license*. Nobody else can do that. And Kevin
Miller really pushed hard on that point.





--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Revenue-and-the-Open-Source-edition-tp4704079p4704244.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

On 5/4/2016 12:13 PM, RM wrote:
> I would suppose the ideal thing would be both something that allows
> one to render a PDF document,
> and extract all or part of an embedded text layer (if one exists in
> the original PDF).

The XPDF external from LiveCode for OSX and Win is based on Google's
PDFium library. I can say this because I know something about the
details of XPDF. Researchware (my company) development XPDF and recently
transferred the rights to LiveCode.

Richard is correct in that the XPDF external not only opens and displays
a PDF, but allows zooming, navigation, layout, hyperlinks, selection of
text (for PDFs with editable text) or any potion of any page as an image
selection, and allows you to extract text or images. It also supports
password protected PDFs and more. Therefore, if ALL you want is just to
display pages from a PDF it is certainly more than you may need. The
same could be said about the feature set of LiveCode itself.

Richmond just showed that some people want more - in his case,
extraction of all of part of the text. If you ONLY want to do that under
script control, then that would be an incremental effort over just
displaying a PDF.

If you want the USER to be able to select text (or images), then that is
a significant chunk of work beyond just displaying a PDF as the PDFium
library contains NO APIs for user selection and that must be original
code added by the external. A large amount of effort went into making
sure user selection of text was as good as Adobe or Preview or Foxit's
PDF viewers, which was definitely not as easy as one might expect (or hope)!

I can tell you that a LOT of developer time (i.e money) went into the
creation, QA testing, and refinement of XPDF.

Obviously, since Google PDFium is open source, anyone can create an
alternative to XPDF, perhaps an even better version. If people want to
build one, I encourage it. A competitive market of LiveCode PDF widgets
just gives me more choice for my company's PDF needs ;-) However,  I
offer the caution of experience that there are a lot more little
"gotchas" in working with PDFium that anyone may realize, even after
reading the APIs, and making another from scratch may be much more work
than people might expect.

I think those interested in PDF might be better off continuing to lobby
for LiveCode to offer XPDF as an add-on (like so many other excellent LC
add-ons from Chartmaker to Wordlib to RRP Spell) for a appropriate
price. It seems only logical that eventually they would convert it to an
LC8 Widget as well.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

What about the code Money has from Adobe?
Can that be put in a external?  It would be nice
to start adding externals and something like
that as open source might be the thing to show
people how to write externals.

I know a little Xcode, C and objective-C and
am willing to learn by helping but a person
who can do it probably does not need help.

JB

















'



> On May 4, 2016, at 9:13 AM, RM  wrote:
> 
> I would suppose the ideal thing would be both something that allows one to 
> render a PDF document,
> and extract all or part of an embedded text layer (if one exists in the 
> original PDF).
> 
> Richmond.
> 
> On 4.05.2016 17:22, Richard Gaskin wrote:
>> Tim Bleiler wrote:
>> 
>> > The Livecode PDF viewer is an example of something that might do
>> > well as a separate option.
>> 
>> It might.
>> 
>> It would be helpful if more folks read the specs for the PDF external 
>> LiveCode is including with their Business Edition.  It's very specialized, 
>> with extensive features for getting and setting selections far beyond the 
>> needs of most projects.
>> 
>> What I'm hearing from most Indy and Community devs is that they merely want 
>> to render a PDF within LiveCode.
>> 
>> Given the PDFium library available for that, and that LiveCode Builder 
>> supports binary APIs such as those in that library, if this is a lucrative 
>> opportunity it would seem worth pursuing for those who want it.
>> 
>> The developer could sell it as proprietary, or even dual-license it with a 
>> GPL version.
>> 
>> Anyone sufficiently convinced of the business opportunity here to take this 
>> on?
>> 
> 
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> 


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

2016-05-04 Thread RM

I would suppose the ideal thing would be both something that allows one 
to render a PDF document,
and extract all or part of an embedded text layer (if one exists in the 
original PDF).

Richmond.

On 4.05.2016 17:22, Richard Gaskin wrote:

Tim Bleiler wrote:

> The Livecode PDF viewer is an example of something that might do
> well as a separate option.

It might.

It would be helpful if more folks read the specs for the PDF external 
LiveCode is including with their Business Edition.  It's very 
specialized, with extensive features for getting and setting 
selections far beyond the needs of most projects.

What I'm hearing from most Indy and Community devs is that they merely 
want to render a PDF within LiveCode.

Given the PDFium library available for that, and that LiveCode Builder 
supports binary APIs such as those in that library, if this is a 
lucrative opportunity it would seem worth pursuing for those who want it.

The developer could sell it as proprietary, or even dual-license it 
with a GPL version.

Anyone sufficiently convinced of the business opportunity here to take 
this on?

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-04 Thread Tim Bleiler

> On May 4, 2016, at 10:19 AM, Mike Kerner  wrote:
> 
> Tim,
> I would hope that they would do that, too, because that seems like a good
> compromise, but I am not sure they will be able to do it for Community
> because of the FOSS issues.

Right, the community edition probably can’t be used with that kind of product. 
My thought was that they could determine a fair price to offer separately to 
other paid license holders. Since it’s already developed it seems that any way 
they can increase sales, the better. This would also be true for future 
widgets. I expect they’ll eventually offer a basic paid license and a variety 
of packages of widgets and services combined with funding community projects 
through the Feature Exchange. Hopefully, the widget feature and Livecode 
Builder will generate contributions from the company and the community of both 
free and paid enhancements to Livecode. For example, Richard mentioned the 
opportunity for a simpler pdf viewer in his response (Community PDF Project 
quoted below). 

Tim Bleiler, Ph.D.
Instructional Designer, HSIT
University at Buffalo

> On May 4, 2016, at 10:22 AM, Richard Gaskin  
> wrote:

> Given the PDFium library available for that, and that LiveCode Builder 
> supports binary APIs such as those in that library, if this is a lucrative 
> opportunity it would seem worth pursuing for those who want it.
> 
> The developer could sell it as proprietary, or even dual-license it with a 
> GPL version.
> 
> Anyone sufficiently convinced of the business opportunity here to take this 
> on?

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-04 Thread Mike Kerner

Tim,
I would hope that they would do that, too, because that seems like a good
compromise, but I am not sure they will be able to do it for Community
because of the FOSS issues.

Kevin,
Good to hear on value of the Business edition.  On LCB, yes, we all want
more of us to be more involved.

On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 9:37 AM, Tim Bleiler  wrote:

>
> > On May 4, 2016, at 8:48 AM, Kevin Miller  wrote:
> >
> >> It also bears repeating that I have told Kevin, and others, that I think
> >> there is not enough bang for the buck for the Business edition, so we
> >> don't
> >> buy it.
> >
> > That will be changing very fast now that 8 is done.
>
>
> I hope that some or most of the add-on widgets that are offered in the
> business edition are also offered a la carte for those of us with more
> limited needs and budgets. The Livecode PDF viewer is an example of
> something that might do well as a separate option.
>
> Tim Bleiler, Ph.D.
> Instructional Designer, HSIT
> University at Buffalo
>
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>



-- 
On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth
On the second day, God created the oceans.
On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours,
   and did a little diving.
And God said, "This is good."
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)

2016-05-04 Thread Richard Gaskin

Tim Bleiler wrote:

> The Livecode PDF viewer is an example of something that might do
> well as a separate option.

It might.

It would be helpful if more folks read the specs for the PDF external 
LiveCode is including with their Business Edition.  It's very 
specialized, with extensive features for getting and setting selections 
far beyond the needs of most projects.

What I'm hearing from most Indy and Community devs is that they merely 
want to render a PDF within LiveCode.

Given the PDFium library available for that, and that LiveCode Builder 
supports binary APIs such as those in that library, if this is a 
lucrative opportunity it would seem worth pursuing for those who want it.

The developer could sell it as proprietary, or even dual-license it with 
a GPL version.

Anyone sufficiently convinced of the business opportunity here to take 
this on?

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web

 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.c

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-04 Thread Tim Bleiler

> On May 4, 2016, at 8:48 AM, Kevin Miller  wrote:
> 
>> It also bears repeating that I have told Kevin, and others, that I think
>> there is not enough bang for the buck for the Business edition, so we
>> don't
>> buy it.
> 
> That will be changing very fast now that 8 is done.

I hope that some or most of the add-on widgets that are offered in the business 
edition are also offered a la carte for those of us with more limited needs and 
budgets. The Livecode PDF viewer is an example of something that might do well 
as a separate option.

Tim Bleiler, Ph.D.
Instructional Designer, HSIT
University at Buffalo

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-04 Thread Kevin Miller

On 04/05/2016, 13:38, "use-livecode on behalf of Mike Kerner"
 wrote:


>It also bears repeating that I have told Kevin, and others, that I think
>there is not enough bang for the buck for the Business edition, so we
>don't
>buy it.

That will be changing very fast now that 8 is done.

>LCC is FOSS.  Take it, fork it, run with it.  Hell, there is nothing
>stopping me from fixing the things in the SE that I want fixed, or added.
>We paid whatever it was into the KS because we wanted the security of
>knowing that in the event that LC ever dies, the code will still be there,
>should we, or someone else, choose to pick it up and go with it, without
>having to go through all the hogwash of Administration to get it.

Absolutely. I¹m sure we would all love to see more contributions, whether
that be to the core, the IDE or the documentation.

Kind regards,

Kevin

Kevin Miller ~ ke...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Everyone can create apps



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-04 Thread Mike Kerner

Exactly, Kevin, Monte,

The "priority bug fixes" is nothing more than a way for all of us to say
"me, first", and that is totally sensible and reasonable.  How important is
that bug that you reported, vs. all the other bugs that are in the DB?  Do
you really think that LC is going to hold some bug hostage until someone
ponies up to fix it?  Of course not.  That would kill the "recurring
subscription" model, that they and so many other software and development
tool firms have gone to, because all of us would just pay for the bugs we
want fixed, instead of paying an annual subscription.  I also completely
disagree that LC has tried to keep people from writing their own
externals.  Monte wasn't a member of the LC team until recently.  Before
that, he was a prolific writer of externals and a prolific adapter of C
libraries to LC externals.  How to do it is documented.  When I had
something I wanted, I just chose to pay Monte to do it, rather than do it
myself.  I get it if you can't afford to, but you can learn to do it.

LCB is in its absolute infancy, but it is a first attempt to push the LC
inyards up toward LCS, so that more of us will work on it and add features
to it.

It also bears repeating that I have told Kevin, and others, that I think
there is not enough bang for the buck for the Business edition, so we don't
buy it.

LCC is FOSS.  Take it, fork it, run with it.  Hell, there is nothing
stopping me from fixing the things in the SE that I want fixed, or added.
We paid whatever it was into the KS because we wanted the security of
knowing that in the event that LC ever dies, the code will still be there,
should we, or someone else, choose to pick it up and go with it, without
having to go through all the hogwash of Administration to get it.

On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 7:57 AM, Kevin Miller  wrote:

> We can either prioritize bug fixes for the good of the user base as a
> whole, or we can prioritize a bug that affects your project today. The
> former we do automatically, the latter has a cost for us and a benefit for
> you, thus the service. We¹ve had great feedback from our commercial
> customers who have chosen to use that service periodically.
>
> I do appreciate the input on licensing. It is never possible to please
> everyone. We will do what works for the majority and provides sufficient
> resource for us to continue to work on this platform we all rely on. Lets
> move on.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Kevin
>
> Kevin Miller ~ ke...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
> LiveCode: Everyone can create apps
>
>
>
>
> On 04/05/2016, 11:12, "use-livecode on behalf of Kaveh Bazargan"
>  ka...@rivervalleytechnologies.com> wrote:
>
> >It's all getting too complicated...
> >
> >On 4 May 2016 at 10:39, RM  wrote:
> >
> >> To this I would just like to point out that in my "other" email I have
> >>been
> >> offered the chance to PAY Livecode to fix THEIR bugs:
> >>
> >> https://livecode.com/services/priority-bug-fixes/
> >>
> >> That seems a bit odd.
> >>
> >> Richmond.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4.05.2016 09:53, Terence Heaford wrote:
> >>
> >>> It seems to me as a ³community² user that there is no community.
> >>>
> >>> There only appears to be those that want to pay, those that can¹t
> >>>afford
> >>> to pay and those that don¹t want to pay for ideological reasons.
> >>>
> >>> I, personally do not feel part of a community.
> >>>
> >>> When I read the discussions (not just this thread) the majority seem to
> >>> revolve around how to monetise the ³community² for the benefit of LC
> >>>and
> >>> how can we convert a ³community² user to a paid user.
> >>>
> >>> It seems to me that there are a number of people who subscribe to this
> >>> mailing list who want to own the product (rather than rent) and that is
> >>> understandable (I am probably one of those).
> >>>
> >>> But, to put it quite simply, I cannot afford it, it is to expensive for
> >>> me ( a loss for me and a loss for live code).
> >>>
> >>> If I were to produce a fantastic product that I thought would be useful
> >>> to a great many people, I may want to give it away for free but under
> >>>the
> >>> present arrangement I would not
> >>>
> >>> bother because I would not want to give away my coding effort.
> >>>
> >>> Could probably go on forever but I think that¹s enough.
> >>>
> >>> The end of my 2 pence worth.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> All the best
> >>>
> >>> Terry
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ___
> >>> use-livecode mailing list
> >>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> >>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> >>> subscription preferences:
> >>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> use-livecode mailing list
> >> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> >> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> >> subscription preferences:
> >> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> >>
>

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-04 Thread Kevin Miller

We can either prioritize bug fixes for the good of the user base as a
whole, or we can prioritize a bug that affects your project today. The
former we do automatically, the latter has a cost for us and a benefit for
you, thus the service. We¹ve had great feedback from our commercial
customers who have chosen to use that service periodically.

I do appreciate the input on licensing. It is never possible to please
everyone. We will do what works for the majority and provides sufficient
resource for us to continue to work on this platform we all rely on. Lets
move on.

Kind regards,

Kevin

Kevin Miller ~ ke...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Everyone can create apps




On 04/05/2016, 11:12, "use-livecode on behalf of Kaveh Bazargan"
 wrote:

>It's all getting too complicated...
>
>On 4 May 2016 at 10:39, RM  wrote:
>
>> To this I would just like to point out that in my "other" email I have
>>been
>> offered the chance to PAY Livecode to fix THEIR bugs:
>>
>> https://livecode.com/services/priority-bug-fixes/
>>
>> That seems a bit odd.
>>
>> Richmond.
>>
>>
>> On 4.05.2016 09:53, Terence Heaford wrote:
>>
>>> It seems to me as a ³community² user that there is no community.
>>>
>>> There only appears to be those that want to pay, those that can¹t
>>>afford
>>> to pay and those that don¹t want to pay for ideological reasons.
>>>
>>> I, personally do not feel part of a community.
>>>
>>> When I read the discussions (not just this thread) the majority seem to
>>> revolve around how to monetise the ³community² for the benefit of LC
>>>and
>>> how can we convert a ³community² user to a paid user.
>>>
>>> It seems to me that there are a number of people who subscribe to this
>>> mailing list who want to own the product (rather than rent) and that is
>>> understandable (I am probably one of those).
>>>
>>> But, to put it quite simply, I cannot afford it, it is to expensive for
>>> me ( a loss for me and a loss for live code).
>>>
>>> If I were to produce a fantastic product that I thought would be useful
>>> to a great many people, I may want to give it away for free but under
>>>the
>>> present arrangement I would not
>>>
>>> bother because I would not want to give away my coding effort.
>>>
>>> Could probably go on forever but I think that¹s enough.
>>>
>>> The end of my 2 pence worth.
>>>
>>>
>>> All the best
>>>
>>> Terry
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> use-livecode mailing list
>>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>>> subscription preferences:
>>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>> subscription preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>
>
>
>
>-- 
>Kaveh Bazargan
>Director
>River Valley Technologies
>@kaveh1000
>+44 7771 824 111
>www.rivervalleytechnologies.com
>___
>use-livecode mailing list
>use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>subscription preferences:
>http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-04 Thread Kaveh Bazargan

It's all getting too complicated...

On 4 May 2016 at 10:39, RM  wrote:

> To this I would just like to point out that in my "other" email I have been
> offered the chance to PAY Livecode to fix THEIR bugs:
>
> https://livecode.com/services/priority-bug-fixes/
>
> That seems a bit odd.
>
> Richmond.
>
>
> On 4.05.2016 09:53, Terence Heaford wrote:
>
>> It seems to me as a “community” user that there is no community.
>>
>> There only appears to be those that want to pay, those that can’t afford
>> to pay and those that don’t want to pay for ideological reasons.
>>
>> I, personally do not feel part of a community.
>>
>> When I read the discussions (not just this thread) the majority seem to
>> revolve around how to monetise the “community” for the benefit of LC and
>> how can we convert a “community” user to a paid user.
>>
>> It seems to me that there are a number of people who subscribe to this
>> mailing list who want to own the product (rather than rent) and that is
>> understandable (I am probably one of those).
>>
>> But, to put it quite simply, I cannot afford it, it is to expensive for
>> me ( a loss for me and a loss for live code).
>>
>> If I were to produce a fantastic product that I thought would be useful
>> to a great many people, I may want to give it away for free but under the
>> present arrangement I would not
>>
>> bother because I would not want to give away my coding effort.
>>
>> Could probably go on forever but I think that’s enough.
>>
>> The end of my 2 pence worth.
>>
>>
>> All the best
>>
>> Terry
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>> subscription preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>
>
>
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>



-- 
Kaveh Bazargan
Director
River Valley Technologies
@kaveh1000
+44 7771 824 111
www.rivervalleytechnologies.com
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-04 Thread RM


To this I would just like to point out that in my "other" email I have been
offered the chance to PAY Livecode to fix THEIR bugs:

https://livecode.com/services/priority-bug-fixes/

That seems a bit odd.

Richmond.

On 4.05.2016 09:53, Terence Heaford wrote:

It seems to me as a “community” user that there is no community.

There only appears to be those that want to pay, those that can’t afford to pay 
and those that don’t want to pay for ideological reasons.

I, personally do not feel part of a community.

When I read the discussions (not just this thread) the majority seem to revolve 
around how to monetise the “community” for the benefit of LC and how can we 
convert a “community” user to a paid user.

It seems to me that there are a number of people who subscribe to this mailing 
list who want to own the product (rather than rent) and that is understandable 
(I am probably one of those).

But, to put it quite simply, I cannot afford it, it is to expensive for me ( a 
loss for me and a loss for live code).

If I were to produce a fantastic product that I thought would be useful to a 
great many people, I may want to give it away for free but under the present 
arrangement I would not

bother because I would not want to give away my coding effort.

Could probably go on forever but I think that’s enough.

The end of my 2 pence worth.


All the best

Terry





___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-03 Thread Terence Heaford

It seems to me as a “community” user that there is no community.

There only appears to be those that want to pay, those that can’t afford to pay 
and those that don’t want to pay for ideological reasons.

I, personally do not feel part of a community.

When I read the discussions (not just this thread) the majority seem to revolve 
around how to monetise the “community” for the benefit of LC and how can we 
convert a “community” user to a paid user.

It seems to me that there are a number of people who subscribe to this mailing 
list who want to own the product (rather than rent) and that is understandable 
(I am probably one of those).

But, to put it quite simply, I cannot afford it, it is to expensive for me ( a 
loss for me and a loss for live code).

If I were to produce a fantastic product that I thought would be useful to a 
great many people, I may want to give it away for free but under the present 
arrangement I would not

bother because I would not want to give away my coding effort.

Could probably go on forever but I think that’s enough.

The end of my 2 pence worth.


All the best

Terry





___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-03 Thread Peter W A Wood

Monte

> On 4 May 2016, at 13:20, Monte Goulding  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 4 May 2016, at 3:12 PM, Peter W A Wood  wrote:
>> 
>> I think that you have missed out one way to contribute that would be very 
>> valuable to both the community and LiveCode. That is writing automatically 
>> runnable tests.
> 
> I did miss that!
> 
>> There is an automated test suite but it is kept under lock and key by 
>> LiveCode so that community members cannot contribute by submitting 
>> meaningful tests.
> 
> Actually this is not true. The tests and test runners are on GitHub and 
> therefore contributable (probably not a word???):
> - IDE https://github.com/livecode/livecode-ide/tree/develop/tests (this is 
> - LCB, LCS https://github.com/livecode/livecode/tree/develop/tests

And I missed them! It’s been some time since I last looked though.

Regards

Peter
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-03 Thread Monte Goulding


> On 4 May 2016, at 3:12 PM, Peter W A Wood  wrote:
> 
> I think that you have missed out one way to contribute that would be very 
> valuable to both the community and LiveCode. That is writing automatically 
> runnable tests.

I did miss that!

> There is an automated test suite but it is kept under lock and key by 
> LiveCode so that community members cannot contribute by submitting meaningful 
> tests.

Actually this is not true. The tests and test runners are on GitHub and 
therefore contributable (probably not a word???):
 - IDE https://github.com/livecode/livecode-ide/tree/develop/tests (this is 
 - LCB, LCS https://github.com/livecode/livecode/tree/develop/tests

Cheers

Monte
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-03 Thread Peter W A Wood

Monte

I think that you have missed out one way to contribute that would be very 
valuable to both the community and LiveCode. That is writing automatically 
runnable tests. There is an automated test suite but it is kept under lock and 
key by LiveCode so that community members cannot contribute by submitting 
meaningful tests.

I built my own simple testing framework 
(https://github.com/PeterWAWood/LiveCode-MiniTest 
) and have a handful of tests 
(https://github.com/PeterWAWood/LiveCode-Tests 
). (If you run 
the tests, you will see that some of them fail.).

A set of community developed automated tests would be a great resource that 
could be grown over time.

Regards

Peter

> On 4 May 2016, at 12:47, Monte Goulding  wrote:

> There are many ways we can get involved with the development of the platform. 
> All of these have been done by contributors since going open source although 
> I doubt this is a complete list:
> - C/C++/Objective-C/Java
>   - Contribute to the engine code by fixing bugs or adding features
>   - Contribute to the externals that come with LiveCode
>   - Contribute to or implement your own externals and release under a FOSS 
> license
> - LiveCode Builder
>   - Contribute to widgets and libraries that come with LiveCode
>   - Contribute to or implement your own widgets and libraries and release 
> under a FOSS license
> - LiveCode Script
>   - Contribute to the script only stack portions of the IDE (most of the code 
> in LC8)
>   - Contribute to or implement script libraries, frameworks and custom 
> controls and release under a FOSS license
> - Documentation
>   - Edit the dictionary entries and guides
>   - Create new guides and contribute
>   - Create learning resources and release under a FOSS license
>   - Answer questions on stackoverflow, the lists and forums, facebook etc
> - Testing
>   - Write good quality bug reports
>   - Find old reports, test in the latest version and comment with your results
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Monte
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-03 Thread Monte Goulding


> On 4 May 2016, at 2:20 PM, JB  wrote:
> And so it is obvious everyone cannot be
> involved in programming the open source
> version for many different reasons.  That
> leaves people little chance to participate
> by adding code.  Use it, point out bugs
> and pay money.  That is not what I was
> hoping for.

There are many ways we can get involved with the development of the platform. 
All of these have been done by contributors since going open source although I 
doubt this is a complete list:
- C/C++/Objective-C/Java
   - Contribute to the engine code by fixing bugs or adding features
   - Contribute to the externals that come with LiveCode
   - Contribute to or implement your own externals and release under a FOSS 
license
- LiveCode Builder
   - Contribute to widgets and libraries that come with LiveCode
   - Contribute to or implement your own widgets and libraries and release 
under a FOSS license
- LiveCode Script
   - Contribute to the script only stack portions of the IDE (most of the code 
in LC8)
   - Contribute to or implement script libraries, frameworks and custom 
controls and release under a FOSS license
- Documentation
   - Edit the dictionary entries and guides
   - Create new guides and contribute
   - Create learning resources and release under a FOSS license
   - Answer questions on stackoverflow, the lists and forums, facebook etc
- Testing
   - Write good quality bug reports
   - Find old reports, test in the latest version and comment with your results
   
Cheers

Monte
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-03 Thread Kaveh Bazargan

The fact that is so much discussion about the licenses shows there is a
problem. LiveCode's pricing has been complex as long as I can remember.
Most software you pay once, it's yours, you get free updates, and if there
is a major upgrade, you pay for upgrade. Big, terrible companies like Adobe
are entrenched in the market and can charge what they want. LiveCode is no
Adobe yet!

On 4 May 2016 at 09:50, JB  wrote:

> I think the community version would have
> more community involvement if they gave
> people more externals to show them how
> to create externals.
>
> I get the feeling tje mothership does not
> want community advancement externals.
>
> And so it is obvious everyone cannot be
> involved in programming the open source
> version for many different reasons.  That
> leaves people little chance to participate
> by adding code.  Use it, point out bugs
> and pay money.  That is not what I was
> hoping for.
>
> JB
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 3, 2016, at 7:56 PM, Robert Mann  wrote:
> >
> > I goes one of the central issue of a community version.. is.. community!?
> >
> > How to make people feel member of the community? get them involved?
> >
> > One way of doing that is to let people buy something maybe not much, but
> > something. That was the idea of the pay once upgrade when you feel which
> was
> > tried before.
> >
> > Paradoxically, with the community version, the more we move ahead from
> the
> > great community foundation kickstart, the less there may be a feel of
> > community!!?? what do you think?
> >
> > So maybe the question about Open source Edition and revenue? could be
> > rephrased to something different like :: Open source edition and BENEFITS
> > (of all kinds to the livecode ecosystem) ???
> >
> > As an example, I'm pretty sure that many of us really like that
> > language/tool and would take some time to promote it e.g. at schools.
> That
> > would need organization and incentives, like.. the benefit of more
> > affordable  commercial license schemes that could even be traded to help
> out
> > people start up something. And that would cost nothing and could be an
> > important medium term benefit.
> >
> > On the whole, i feel mothership is kind of into  shyzophrenic situation
> ::
> > the move to open source certainly was a generous move, event though at
> that
> > time it may just have been death and exit otherwise. And the other hand
> we
> > feel a commercial pressure with prices going up and up for the little
> rock
> > of commercial folks.
> >
> > I was surprised to see that the "community" developments fundings were
> not
> > so successful. it was a way of carrying forward the initial kickstart
> move.
> > Maybe that should be tried agin, possibly with a different organization :
> > would it change the results if the community participated to selection of
> > developments proposed? or even.. drove them!? well hum, that would be
> > revolution that would imp lie seeing up some kind of representation of
> that
> > community.
> >
> > Livecode Community could be well used for a lot of "community" actions in
> > our societies. I though personally of attending the "units debuts comity
> of
> > computing" in Paris just to talk to them about livecode because they
> need to
> > build a set of tools and livecode community would be just right. and that
> > would greatly expose livecode (they gather 250 geeks from Paris..
> > imagine..).
> >
> > Now that mothership has embarked on the community track, the next step
> could
> > well be to get together some kind of representation of the group to
> > exchange, meet, discuss and relay etc with the objective to establish
> such a
> > community feeling??
> >
> > And that could have a huge potential to motivate, generate many actions
> that
> > bring those many benefits, that are hard to see yet with a close view to
> > revenues.
> > My cents!
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Revenue-and-the-Open-Source-edition-tp4704079p4704180.html
> > Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
> > ___
> > use-livecode mailing list
> > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> >
>
>
> __

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-03 Thread JB

I think the community version would have
more community involvement if they gave
people more externals to show them how
to create externals.

I get the feeling tje mothership does not
want community advancement externals.

And so it is obvious everyone cannot be
involved in programming the open source
version for many different reasons.  That
leaves people little chance to participate
by adding code.  Use it, point out bugs
and pay money.  That is not what I was
hoping for.

JB





> On May 3, 2016, at 7:56 PM, Robert Mann  wrote:
> 
> I goes one of the central issue of a community version.. is.. community!?
> 
> How to make people feel member of the community? get them involved?
> 
> One way of doing that is to let people buy something maybe not much, but
> something. That was the idea of the pay once upgrade when you feel which was
> tried before. 
> 
> Paradoxically, with the community version, the more we move ahead from the
> great community foundation kickstart, the less there may be a feel of
> community!!?? what do you think?
> 
> So maybe the question about Open source Edition and revenue? could be
> rephrased to something different like :: Open source edition and BENEFITS
> (of all kinds to the livecode ecosystem) ???
> 
> As an example, I'm pretty sure that many of us really like that
> language/tool and would take some time to promote it e.g. at schools. That
> would need organization and incentives, like.. the benefit of more
> affordable  commercial license schemes that could even be traded to help out
> people start up something. And that would cost nothing and could be an
> important medium term benefit.
> 
> On the whole, i feel mothership is kind of into  shyzophrenic situation ::
> the move to open source certainly was a generous move, event though at that
> time it may just have been death and exit otherwise. And the other hand we
> feel a commercial pressure with prices going up and up for the little rock
> of commercial folks.
> 
> I was surprised to see that the "community" developments fundings were not
> so successful. it was a way of carrying forward the initial kickstart move.
> Maybe that should be tried agin, possibly with a different organization :
> would it change the results if the community participated to selection of
> developments proposed? or even.. drove them!? well hum, that would be
> revolution that would imp lie seeing up some kind of representation of that
> community.
> 
> Livecode Community could be well used for a lot of "community" actions in
> our societies. I though personally of attending the "units debuts comity of
> computing" in Paris just to talk to them about livecode because they need to
> build a set of tools and livecode community would be just right. and that
> would greatly expose livecode (they gather 250 geeks from Paris..
> imagine..). 
> 
> Now that mothership has embarked on the community track, the next step could
> well be to get together some kind of representation of the group to
> exchange, meet, discuss and relay etc with the objective to establish such a
> community feeling??
> 
> And that could have a huge potential to motivate, generate many actions that
> bring those many benefits, that are hard to see yet with a close view to
> revenues.
> My cents!
> 
> 
> 
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Revenue-and-the-Open-Source-edition-tp4704079p4704180.html
> Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> 


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-03 Thread Robert Mann

I goes one of the central issue of a community version.. is.. community!?

How to make people feel member of the community? get them involved?

One way of doing that is to let people buy something maybe not much, but
something. That was the idea of the pay once upgrade when you feel which was
tried before.

Paradoxically, with the community version, the more we move ahead from the
great community foundation kickstart, the less there may be a feel of
community!!?? what do you think?

So maybe the question about Open source Edition and revenue? could be
rephrased to something different like :: Open source edition and BENEFITS
(of all kinds to the livecode ecosystem) ???

As an example, I'm pretty sure that many of us really like that
language/tool and would take some time to promote it e.g. at schools. That
would need organization and incentives, like.. the benefit of more
affordable commercial license schemes that could even be traded to help out
people start up something. And that would cost nothing and could be an
important medium term benefit.

On the whole, i feel mothership is kind of into shyzophrenic situation ::
the move to open source certainly was a generous move, event though at that
time it may just have been death and exit otherwise. And the other hand we
feel a commercial pressure with prices going up and up for the little rock
of commercial folks.

I was surprised to see that the "community" developments fundings were not
so successful. it was a way of carrying forward the initial kickstart move.
Maybe that should be tried agin, possibly with a different organization :
would it change the results if the community participated to selection of
developments proposed? or even.. drove them!? well hum, that would be
revolution that would imp lie seeing up some kind of representation of that
community.

Livecode Community could be well used for a lot of "community" actions in
our societies. I though personally of attending the "units debuts comity of
computing" in Paris just to talk to them about livecode because they need to
build a set of tools and livecode community would be just right. and that
would greatly expose livecode (they gather 250 geeks from Paris..
imagine..).

Now that mothership has embarked on the community track, the next step could
well be to get together some kind of representation of the group to
exchange, meet, discuss and relay etc with the objective to establish such a
community feeling??

And that could have a huge potential to motivate, generate many actions that
bring those many benefits, that are hard to see yet with a close view to
revenues.
My cents!

--
View this message in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Revenue-and-the-Open-Source-edition-tp4704079p4704180.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-03 Thread JB

You are correct!

I helped fund the open source and never
made any complaints about it and am not
complaining now.

JB



> On May 3, 2016, at 5:13 AM, Monte Goulding  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 3 May 2016, at 10:07 PM, JB  wrote:
>> 
>> We paid for the code and we were given
>> a link to download the code to be used as
>> open source code.  We did not make any
>> agreement to fund its development.
> 
> My point was different people may have contributed to the Kickstarter for 
> different reasons as the open source version wasn’t the only thing on offer. 
> Either way it sounds like you are happy you got what you paid for so that’s 
> great!
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Monte
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-03 Thread Monte Goulding

> On 3 May 2016, at 10:07 PM, JB  wrote:
> 
> We paid for the code and we were given
> a link to download the code to be used as
> open source code.  We did not make any
> agreement to fund its development.

My point was different people may have contributed to the Kickstarter for 
different reasons as the open source version wasn’t the only thing on offer. 
Either way it sounds like you are happy you got what you paid for so that’s 
great!

Cheers

Monte
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-03 Thread JB

We paid for the code and we were given
a link to download the code to be used as
open source code.  We did not make any
agreement to fund its development.

JB



> On May 2, 2016, at 3:35 PM, Monte Goulding  wrote:
> 
> Aha... Was the Kickstarter for open source or for the refactor? When you 
> consider that the vast majority of Kickstarter funding came from discounted 
> licenses were we finding development or taking advantage of discounts? I 
> personally made one of the highest contributions of everyone to the 
> Kickstarter (US$5000) and believe that has been repaid many times over. It is 
> an incredibly generous thing to release your hard earned intellectual 
> property under an open source licence and I don't think that should be taken 
> for granted.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On 3 May 2016, at 8:15 AM, JB  wrote:
>> 
>> If I remember correctly we paid around
>> one million dollars for it.
> 
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> 


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-03 Thread RM

From a purely selfish point of view (what, me, surely not?) I stated I 
wanted to PAY for something
PERMANENT because I develop ONLY for desktop (and possibly HTML%) 
deployment.


This is where we might need to discuss the sort of folowing scenario:

1. Permanent version that deploys standalones only for desktops (and 
HTML5 ?).


2. "Rentable" version that deploys standalones only to tablets (iOS, 
Android).


3. All-singing-all-dancing version at a high price (and there's room for 
a rent/buy fight there).


"a software tool which is maintained and upgraded regularly, even if 
that means that i have to pay for it."


If there were a reasonable price for a permanent version, and upgrades 
were then offered at, let's say, 20% of the price
of the permanent version to those who ALREADY HAD PURCHASED the 
permanent version . . . ?


Then the end-user can decide whether the new features enabled in an 
upgrade are worth upgrading to

or not just yet.

This is a model used by very many software vendors.

 Richmond.

On 3.05.2016 10:56, Matthias Rebbe wrote:

I am stuck between a rock and a hard place.

On one hand i would prefer a pay once use for ever license model.
On the other i want a software tool which is maintained  and upgraded 
regularly, even if that means that i have to pay for it.

I remember discussions when the old “pay once use that version forever, but you 
can pay for updates” license model were active.
The people were moaning that the tool they just  had purchased some months or 
weeks ago, was upgraded and the upgrade was not free.
I remember discussions about the price for the yearly upgrade fee of Revolution 
standard and Enterprise.

Regarding the discussion about the possibility to deploy to iOS for 
semi-professionals and hobbyists:
With the current situation how often xCode is upgraded and how often therefore 
Livecode needs to be fixed to work again with that xCode version, i really do not 
see any advantage for such a "pay once use forever” license without having the 
opportunity  to subscribe to a software maintenance plan.
But even with such an option to subscribe to such a plan, the discussion starts 
over and over again as soon as  an xCode version is released which is not 
working with older “not upgraded” LC versions.


Matthias




Matthias Rebbe
Bramkampsieke 13
32312 Lübbecke
Tel +49 5741 31
+49 160 5504462
Fax: +49 5741 310002
eMail: matth...@m-r-d.de 

BR5 Konverter - BR5 -> MP3 
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-03 Thread Matthias Rebbe

I am stuck between a rock and a hard place.

On one hand i would prefer a pay once use for ever license model.
On the other i want a software tool which is maintained  and upgraded 
regularly, even if that means that i have to pay for it.

I remember discussions when the old “pay once use that version forever, but you 
can pay for updates” license model were active.
The people were moaning that the tool they just  had purchased some months or 
weeks ago, was upgraded and the upgrade was not free.
I remember discussions about the price for the yearly upgrade fee of Revolution 
standard and Enterprise.

Regarding the discussion about the possibility to deploy to iOS for 
semi-professionals and hobbyists:
With the current situation how often xCode is upgraded and how often therefore 
Livecode needs to be fixed to work again with that xCode version, i really do 
not see any advantage for such a "pay once use forever” license without having 
the opportunity  to subscribe to a software maintenance plan.
But even with such an option to subscribe to such a plan, the discussion starts 
over and over again as soon as  an xCode version is released which is not 
working with older “not upgraded” LC versions.


Matthias




Matthias Rebbe
Bramkampsieke 13
32312 Lübbecke
Tel +49 5741 31
+49 160 5504462
Fax: +49 5741 310002
eMail: matth...@m-r-d.de 

BR5 Konverter - BR5 -> MP3 
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition




On 3.05.2016 00:50, Monte Goulding wrote:

One thing that nobody seems to have pointed out is the current price is not $999. 
As Peter commented (and a number of people seem to have read in a snippy tone 
unfortunately) the price rises have been and continue to be well telegraphed with 
the opportunity to lock in the current price. Regardless of that though I do tend 
to agree that those with turnover of under $2 or so (and not really likely to 
expand that) looking at > 5% of that going as an expense on development 
platform would struggle to justify it. In those cases they would either need to 
look at other platforms or determine if they can obtain equivalent revenue by 
changing their business model to use the GPL version. How LiveCode capture the 
$200 per year or so those users might have on offer without sacrificing revenue 
from those with higher turnover is something I'm sure is under consideration. Note 
that I'm not really including those that have a reasonable prospect of revenue 
growth because they can probably tap in

to public and private sources of startup support.

That presupposes that the time one is offered to "lock" is convenient for
the developer and that she has the money to do that at that point.

And "public and private sources of startup support" is a very 
USA-Western European-centric view of things.
For the sake of argument, if one were to mention that phrase to someone 
living in the Dominican Republic,
Brazil or Bulgaria (Now why would I pick those 3 countries, I wonder?) 
they might look at you fairly blankly.


"Private joke" for Andre: Hey, let's phone up Dilma Rousseff and ask her 
for a quick $2,000 to fund our startup.


Richmond.



Cheers

Monte

Sent from my iPhone


On 3 May 2016, at 1:40 AM, RM  wrote:

With the exception of the PDF reader (as you pointed out) for development 
purposes there is no real difference between Livecode versions
(and I am aware that you are pushing for further differentiation, and I 
understand your rationale), so paying $999 for a year for something whose
single difference fron the FREE version is the ability to protect ones' code 
really does not seem justifiable.


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode




___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition


Um: think very closely about "look at Naomi Campbell" :)

Richmond.

On 2.05.2016 23:16, Peter M. Brigham wrote:

Richmond, as soon as I wrote that I just knew it would be a set-up line for you.

-- Peter

Peter M. Brigham
pmb...@gmail.com


On May 2, 2016, at 4:05 PM, RM wrote:


The Scots have been running the world for at least 300 years.

Why do you think that about 50% of all Canadians, and a very large number of 
Americans have Scots names?

After all, just look at Naomi Campbell!

Richmond.

On 2.05.2016 22:46, Peter M. Brigham wrote:


On May 2, 2016, at 3:44 PM, Peter TB Brett wrote:


On 02/05/2016 20:20, Peter M. Brigham wrote:

Back in the day, Apple marketed heavily to the teaching/educational
market, and the result was a generation of kids who grew up using
Macs. IMO, Edinburgh would do well to try to get LC used by as many
teachers at the middle school and high school level as possible (and
why not grade school too?) -- the multiplier effect here would be
enormous. I would think that a special pricing scheme for educators
would be an extremely good investment in the long run, even if there
were scanty short-run returns.

There already is a very heavily discounted scheme for education, which includes 
course materials.  It's accessible right from the front page of the website.

LiveCode is very widely used in Scottish schools.

Good. I was not aware of that. Go LC!!! In 10 years the Scots will be running 
the world!

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-02 Thread Mark Rauterkus

Hi,

Thanks for the mention Richard.

I have hope that we can land this grant. Then, in turn, that the grant(s)
can be a catalyst for great things to come for new waves of users. Plus,
I'm sure that some really cool teaching experiences still need to be
crafted for the LRNG.org platform.

Time will tell.

More news soon.


--
Ta.


Mark Rauterkus   m...@rauterkus.com
http://Play.CLOH.org
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-02 Thread Monte Goulding

Aha... Was the Kickstarter for open source or for the refactor? When you 
consider that the vast majority of Kickstarter funding came from discounted 
licenses were we finding development or taking advantage of discounts? I 
personally made one of the highest contributions of everyone to the Kickstarter 
(US$5000) and believe that has been repaid many times over. It is an incredibly 
generous thing to release your hard earned intellectual property under an open 
source licence and I don't think that should be taken for granted.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 3 May 2016, at 8:15 AM, JB  wrote:
> 
> If I remember correctly we paid around
> one million dollars for it.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-02 Thread JB

If I remember correctly we paid around
one million dollars for it.

I agree with Richmond about renting
software.  A business needs to worry
Livecode could quit offering them the
rental of the software and then they
are not allowed to develope at all.  A
minor bug they could have fixed with
their latest version will destroy them;

JB


> On May 2, 2016, at 8:06 AM, Peter TB Brett  wrote:
> 
> On 02/05/2016 14:31, RM wrote:
> 
>> 2. The enormous differential between the FREE version and the Commercial
>> version: this seems almost an unbridgeable
>> gap.
> 
> Do you think that people underestimate the value that they get from the Open 
> Source edition of LiveCode because they get it at no cost?
> 
> Peter
> 
> -- 
> Dr Peter Brett 
> LiveCode Open Source Team
> 
> LiveCode 2016 Conference: https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> 


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-02 Thread Monte Goulding

One thing that nobody seems to have pointed out is the current price is not 
$999. As Peter commented (and a number of people seem to have read in a snippy 
tone unfortunately) the price rises have been and continue to be well 
telegraphed with the opportunity to lock in the current price. Regardless of 
that though I do tend to agree that those with turnover of under $2 or so 
(and not really likely to expand that) looking at > 5% of that going as an 
expense on development platform would struggle to justify it. In those cases 
they would either need to look at other platforms or determine if they can 
obtain equivalent revenue by changing their business model to use the GPL 
version. How LiveCode capture the $200 per year or so those users might have on 
offer without sacrificing revenue from those with higher turnover is something 
I'm sure is under consideration. Note that I'm not really including those that 
have a reasonable prospect of revenue growth because they can probably tap into
  public and private sources of startup support.

Cheers

Monte

Sent from my iPhone

> On 3 May 2016, at 1:40 AM, RM  wrote:
> 
> With the exception of the PDF reader (as you pointed out) for development 
> purposes there is no real difference between Livecode versions
> (and I am aware that you are pushing for further differentiation, and I 
> understand your rationale), so paying $999 for a year for something whose
> single difference fron the FREE version is the ability to protect ones' code 
> really does not seem justifiable.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-02 Thread Peter M. Brigham

Richmond, as soon as I wrote that I just knew it would be a set-up line for you.

-- Peter

Peter M. Brigham
pmb...@gmail.com


On May 2, 2016, at 4:05 PM, RM wrote:

> The Scots have been running the world for at least 300 years.
> 
> Why do you think that about 50% of all Canadians, and a very large number of 
> Americans have Scots names?
> 
> After all, just look at Naomi Campbell!
> 
> Richmond.
> 
> On 2.05.2016 22:46, Peter M. Brigham wrote:
> 
>> On May 2, 2016, at 3:44 PM, Peter TB Brett wrote:
>> 
>>> On 02/05/2016 20:20, Peter M. Brigham wrote:
 Back in the day, Apple marketed heavily to the teaching/educational
 market, and the result was a generation of kids who grew up using
 Macs. IMO, Edinburgh would do well to try to get LC used by as many
 teachers at the middle school and high school level as possible (and
 why not grade school too?) -- the multiplier effect here would be
 enormous. I would think that a special pricing scheme for educators
 would be an extremely good investment in the long run, even if there
 were scanty short-run returns.
>>> 
>>> There already is a very heavily discounted scheme for education, which 
>>> includes course materials.  It's accessible right from the front page of 
>>> the website.
>>> 
>>> LiveCode is very widely used in Scottish schools.
>> 
>> Good. I was not aware of that. Go LC!!! In 10 years the Scots will be 
>> running the world!

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition


The Scots have been running the world for at least 300 years.

Why do you think that about 50% of all Canadians, and a very large 
number of Americans have Scots names?


After all, just look at Naomi Campbell!

Richmond.

On 2.05.2016 22:46, Peter M. Brigham wrote:

On May 2, 2016, at 3:44 PM, Peter TB Brett wrote:


On 02/05/2016 20:20, Peter M. Brigham wrote:

Back in the day, Apple marketed heavily to the teaching/educational
market, and the result was a generation of kids who grew up using
Macs. IMO, Edinburgh would do well to try to get LC used by as many
teachers at the middle school and high school level as possible (and
why not grade school too?) -- the multiplier effect here would be
enormous. I would think that a special pricing scheme for educators
would be an extremely good investment in the long run, even if there
were scanty short-run returns.

There already is a very heavily discounted scheme for education, which includes 
course materials.  It's accessible right from the front page of the website.

LiveCode is very widely used in Scottish schools.

Good. I was not aware of that. Go LC!!! In 10 years the Scots will be running 
the world!

-- Peter

Peter M. Brigham
pmb...@gmail.com



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-02 Thread William Prothero

Folks:
Just thinking out loud.

This has probably been thought about, but as the HTML5 export gets refined, I 
wonder about the feasibility of creating an actual Livecode programming 
environment that runs through a browser. The reason I think of this is that 
young folks seem to increasingly use tablets and phones. Since Apple won’t let 
programming environments reside on iOS, the web is perhaps the only other 
option for these devices. Perhaps this could introduce the younger generation 
to a “ready to try” experience with livecode. Perhaps users could even store 
their “apps” online and develop web accessible apps for themselves or whatever. 
A small monthly subscription fee could help pay the bills and there hopefully 
would be those who would download the standalone environment.

After a student graduates to desktop, perhaps there could be a “kit” that 
interfaces LC to an Arduino board. I guess this would have to be an assembler 
for Arduino machine code (argh). Anyway, just thinking of a path that will 
direct the younger generation to the wonders of LiveCode.

It’s probably an idea for another kickstarter. Or not.
Bill

> On May 2, 2016, at 12:34 PM, RM  wrote:
> 
> I don't know about "clever Richmond", but what I do know about is lots of 
> clever Primary and Secondary school kids (pace Grade/Middle/High)
> who come along, listen to my "wibble", watch me move chess pieces around the 
> table, move beans around a mancala board, and then sit right down
> and dig into Livecode without a backward look.
> 
> I give them an I+1 task, and they start work on paper, then move to the 
> machines, cross-fertilise with each other, and I generally sit behind them
> looking at what they are doing on screen and throw them the odd "bone" from 
> time to time, or they ask me intelligent questions which I do my
> best to answer.
> 
> There does NOT need to be all that "dumbing down" crap because school kids 
> today are, on the whole, no more stupid than we were when we were that
> age, and Livecode on a Linux PC beats either bashing FORTRAN holes in cards 
> or a Research machine jacked into a black-&-white telly any day of the week.
> 
> There does NOT need to be " a special pricing scheme" for schools because we 
> already have the best possible pricing scheme imaginable: FREE.
> 
> Possibly, just possibly, if kids are "fed" LIvecode at school, those that 
> become programmers will be prepared tpo pay for a commercial version; so,
> while Livecode does not need a special price, it should be pushing Livecode 
> in schools worldwide a million times more than it is at the moment.
> 
> Who, apart from a few schools in Scotland and the USA has heard of Livecode?
> 
> As has been pointed out; the Livecode team are working very hard indeed to 
> produce a fantastic product, but regardless of it fantasticness
> if it isn't adopted their efforts will be for not very much; so, it's like 
> pushing drugs . . . "Psst, heard about the latest cool computer thing?"
> 
> Richmond.
> 
> On 2.05.2016 22:20, Peter M. Brigham wrote:

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-02 Thread Peter M. Brigham

On May 2, 2016, at 3:44 PM, Peter TB Brett wrote:

> On 02/05/2016 20:20, Peter M. Brigham wrote:
>> 
>> Back in the day, Apple marketed heavily to the teaching/educational
>> market, and the result was a generation of kids who grew up using
>> Macs. IMO, Edinburgh would do well to try to get LC used by as many
>> teachers at the middle school and high school level as possible (and
>> why not grade school too?) -- the multiplier effect here would be
>> enormous. I would think that a special pricing scheme for educators
>> would be an extremely good investment in the long run, even if there
>> were scanty short-run returns.
> 
> There already is a very heavily discounted scheme for education, which 
> includes course materials.  It's accessible right from the front page of the 
> website.
> 
> LiveCode is very widely used in Scottish schools.

Good. I was not aware of that. Go LC!!! In 10 years the Scots will be running 
the world!

-- Peter

Peter M. Brigham
pmb...@gmail.com



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-02 Thread Peter TB Brett


On 02/05/2016 20:20, Peter M. Brigham wrote:


Back in the day, Apple marketed heavily to the teaching/educational
market, and the result was a generation of kids who grew up using
Macs. IMO, Edinburgh would do well to try to get LC used by as many
teachers at the middle school and high school level as possible (and
why not grade school too?) -- the multiplier effect here would be
enormous. I would think that a special pricing scheme for educators
would be an extremely good investment in the long run, even if there
were scanty short-run returns.


There already is a very heavily discounted scheme for education, which 
includes course materials.  It's accessible right from the front page of 
the website.


LiveCode is very widely used in Scottish schools.

 Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

I don't know about "clever Richmond", but what I do know about is lots 
of clever Primary and Secondary school kids (pace Grade/Middle/High)
who come along, listen to my "wibble", watch me move chess pieces around 
the table, move beans around a mancala board, and then sit right down

and dig into Livecode without a backward look.

I give them an I+1 task, and they start work on paper, then move to the 
machines, cross-fertilise with each other, and I generally sit behind them
looking at what they are doing on screen and throw them the odd "bone" 
from time to time, or they ask me intelligent questions which I do my

best to answer.

There does NOT need to be all that "dumbing down" crap because school 
kids today are, on the whole, no more stupid than we were when we were that
age, and Livecode on a Linux PC beats either bashing FORTRAN holes in 
cards or a Research machine jacked into a black-&-white telly any day of 
the week.


There does NOT need to be " a special pricing scheme" for schools 
because we already have the best possible pricing scheme imaginable: FREE.


Possibly, just possibly, if kids are "fed" LIvecode at school, those 
that become programmers will be prepared tpo pay for a commercial 
version; so,
while Livecode does not need a special price, it should be pushing 
Livecode in schools worldwide a million times more than it is at the moment.


Who, apart from a few schools in Scotland and the USA has heard of Livecode?

As has been pointed out; the Livecode team are working very hard indeed 
to produce a fantastic product, but regardless of it fantasticness
if it isn't adopted their efforts will be for not very much; so, it's 
like pushing drugs . . . "Psst, heard about the latest cool computer thing?"


Richmond.

On 2.05.2016 22:20, Peter M. Brigham wrote:

On May 2, 2016, at 10:38 AM, Earthednet-wp wrote:


Folks,
Richmond, thanks for your forthright posts and entertaining metaphors!

Re fees, licenses, etc, I am a retired prof who spent a lot of years programming for 
research, then to support student learning in a large oceanography class. My son is an 
elementary teacher who teaches Lego robotics. It seems to me that a difficult, but ripe 
local market is being plumbed by Richmond. But, on a larger scale, I find teachers are 
easily put off by what appears to be complicated, time consuming new resources. They are 
extremely busy and collapse in a heap during their summer time off, unless they are 
running summer classes and "camps" (like my son is) to pay the bills. It seems 
to me that Richmond, so creative, is in a position to expand his business model to 
include teachers who want to teach basic programming, with a kid oriented approach. 
Perhaps to control dinosaur robots, or some such. I know there's scratch and all the 
Arduino resources, but perhaps there is a niche for livecode. But, bottom line, teachers 
need to get sucked in with a complete plug and play res

ource that will excite kids and require very little up front time. Maybe there 
would be an income stream? Online support, code help??

Back in the day, Apple marketed heavily to the teaching/educational market, and 
the result was a generation of kids who grew up using Macs. IMO, Edinburgh 
would do well to try to get LC used by as many teachers at the middle school 
and high school level as possible (and why not grade school too?) -- the 
multiplier effect here would be enormous. I would think that a special pricing 
scheme for educators would be an extremely good investment in the long run, 
even if there were scanty short-run returns.

-- Peter

Peter M. Brigham
pmb...@gmail.com


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode




___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-02 Thread Peter M. Brigham

On May 2, 2016, at 10:38 AM, Earthednet-wp wrote:

> Folks,
> Richmond, thanks for your forthright posts and entertaining metaphors!
> 
> Re fees, licenses, etc, I am a retired prof who spent a lot of years 
> programming for research, then to support student learning in a large 
> oceanography class. My son is an elementary teacher who teaches Lego 
> robotics. It seems to me that a difficult, but ripe local market is being 
> plumbed by Richmond. But, on a larger scale, I find teachers are easily put 
> off by what appears to be complicated, time consuming new resources. They are 
> extremely busy and collapse in a heap during their summer time off, unless 
> they are running summer classes and "camps" (like my son is) to pay the 
> bills. It seems to me that Richmond, so creative, is in a position to expand 
> his business model to include teachers who want to teach basic programming, 
> with a kid oriented approach. Perhaps to control dinosaur robots, or some 
> such. I know there's scratch and all the Arduino resources, but perhaps there 
> is a niche for livecode. But, bottom line, teachers need to get sucked in 
> with a complete plug and play reso
 urce that will excite kids and require very little up front time. Maybe there 
would be an income stream? Online support, code help?? 

Back in the day, Apple marketed heavily to the teaching/educational market, and 
the result was a generation of kids who grew up using Macs. IMO, Edinburgh 
would do well to try to get LC used by as many teachers at the middle school 
and high school level as possible (and why not grade school too?) -- the 
multiplier effect here would be enormous. I would think that a special pricing 
scheme for educators would be an extremely good investment in the long run, 
even if there were scanty short-run returns.

-- Peter

Peter M. Brigham
pmb...@gmail.com


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

I was rather hoping the signal would come from the Mothership.

R.

On 2.05.2016 20:20, Richard Gaskin wrote:

RM wrote:

> All I am making a noise about is the vast difference between GPL and
> Commercial.

I agree that "noise" is a good word there.  Perhaps it may be useful 
to wait until you find some way to turn that into signal.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-02 Thread Richard Gaskin


RM wrote:

> All I am making a noise about is the vast difference between GPL and
> Commercial.

I agree that "noise" is a good word there.  Perhaps it may be useful to 
wait until you find some way to turn that into signal.


--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
 
 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

I am well aware that the Free (GPL) version is amazingly valuable - I 
use it every day.

All I am making a noise about is the vast difference between GPL and 
Commercial.

R.

On 2.05.2016 19:15, Richard Gaskin wrote:

RM wrote:

> ...paying $999 for a year for something whose single difference
> fron the FREE version is the ability to protect ones'
> code really does not seem justifiable.

So if they discontinued the Community Edition you'd be satisfied?

Your portrayal of value is exactly backwards:  the Indy license isn't 
less valuable because most of the features are also available under 
GPL license at no cost, but rather the GPL version is mind-blowingly 
valuable as it includes nearly everything in the proprietary editions 
but at no cost.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-02 Thread Richard Gaskin

RM wrote:

> ...paying $999 for a year for something whose single difference
> fron the FREE version is the ability to protect ones'
> code really does not seem justifiable.

So if they discontinued the Community Edition you'd be satisfied?

Your portrayal of value is exactly backwards:  the Indy license isn't 
less valuable because most of the features are also available under GPL 
license at no cost, but rather the GPL version is mind-blowingly 
valuable as it includes nearly everything in the proprietary editions 
but at no cost.

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web

 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

I hope not as it is a fantastic thing (despite some slightly off-colour 
remarks I may have made in the past), but that is not
my concern. What is my concern is that I feel that very few start-ups, 
small-time software people ("one-hit wonders") an hobbyists
who wish to code-protect their source code are going to feel comfy about 
stumping up $999 for that.


If one wants to play "rentals" then why not have a rental arrangement 
whereby a programmer can rent a Commercial version to
protect their code and hive off standalones on a very short-term basis 
(12 hours?) for a reasonable rate ($50?), and then, should their

offering succeed they can buy into something more permanent.

With the exception of the PDF reader (as you pointed out) for 
development purposes there is no real difference between Livecode versions
(and I am aware that you are pushing for further differentiation, and I 
understand your rationale), so paying $999 for a year for something whose
single difference fron the FREE version is the ability to protect ones' 
code really does not seem justifiable.


Richmond.

On 2.05.2016 18:06, Peter TB Brett wrote:

On 02/05/2016 14:31, RM wrote:


2. The enormous differential between the FREE version and the Commercial
version: this seems almost an unbridgeable
gap.


Do you think that people underestimate the value that they get from 
the Open Source edition of LiveCode because they get it at no cost?


 Peter




___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-02 Thread Roger Eller

Seasoned long-term users of HC, SuperC, MetaC, Revolution, & LiveCode all
appreciate the value of the open-source version.  If for nothing else, it
is perfect for noobs to learn and discover its power before buying a
license.  People who frequently throw out terms like "you get what you pay
for" certainly have no clue in this regard.

~Roger

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Peter TB Brett 
wrote:

> On 02/05/2016 14:31, RM wrote:
>
> 2. The enormous differential between the FREE version and the Commercial
>> version: this seems almost an unbridgeable
>> gap.
>>
>
> Do you think that people underestimate the value that they get from the
> Open Source edition of LiveCode because they get it at no cost?
>
>  Peter
>
> --
> Dr Peter Brett 
> LiveCode Open Source Team
>
> LiveCode 2016 Conference: https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/
>
>
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-02 Thread Peter TB Brett


On 02/05/2016 14:31, RM wrote:


2. The enormous differential between the FREE version and the Commercial
version: this seems almost an unbridgeable
gap.


Do you think that people underestimate the value that they get from the 
Open Source edition of LiveCode because they get it at no cost?


 Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode 2016 Conference: https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-02 Thread Earthednet-wp

Folks,
Richmond, thanks for your forthright posts and entertaining metaphors!

Re fees, licenses, etc, I am a retired prof who spent a lot of years 
programming for research, then to support student learning in a large 
oceanography class. My son is an elementary teacher who teaches Lego robotics. 
It seems to me that a difficult, but ripe local market is being plumbed by 
Richmond. But, on a larger scale, I find teachers are easily put off by what 
appears to be complicated, time consuming new resources. They are extremely 
busy and collapse in a heap during their summer time off, unless they are 
running summer classes and "camps" (like my son is) to pay the bills. It seems 
to me that Richmond, so creative, is in a position to expand his business model 
to include teachers who want to teach basic programming, with a kid oriented 
approach. Perhaps to control dinosaur robots, or some such. I know there's 
scratch and all the Arduino resources, but perhaps there is a niche for 
livecode. But, bottom line, teachers need to get sucked in with a complete plug 
and play resour
 ce that will excite kids and require very little up front time. Maybe there 
would be an income stream? Online support, code help?? 

Just thinking aloud. Gotta go, bike ride to breakfast. Yum!

Best,
Bill

William Prothero
http://es.earthednet.org

> On May 2, 2016, at 6:31 AM, RM  wrote:
> 
> That's a very well constructed bit of text and I tend to agree with you re 
> "the best way to get the
> resources required for maintaining and improving the Open Source
> edition of LiveCode is actually to add Business-only features."
> 
> I don't know whether RunRev's "goods and services" section is attracting any 
> customers.
> 
> Where I do take issue with Livecode is two-fold:
> 
> 1. The rental concept: I would like to pay a flat fee that would buy me a 
> version that would continue being usable as
> long as I decided its value had not been superseded by newer versions and/or 
> feature creep in Operating systems.
> 
> 2. The enormous differential between the FREE version and the Commercial 
> version: this seems almost an unbridgeable
> gap.
> 
> Richmond.
> 
>> On 2.05.2016 15:40, Peter TB Brett wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> I recently posted on the forums in reply to being asked why the PDF external 
>> is initially going to be exclusive to Business edition, and I thought it 
>> would be useful to cross-post it here.
>> 
>> http://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=27160#p141910
>> 
>>> I am the main advocate for LiveCode Open Source within the LiveCode
>>> core dev team, and maybe I can address some of these issues.
>>> 
>>> The core dev team needs to eat and pay rent, so LiveCode Ltd. has to
>>> make some money to help support LiveCode development. The vast
>>> majority of work we do (90%+) goes directly into the Open Source
>>> edition of LiveCode. To raise money to pay the core dev team's
>>> salaries, the company sells Indy and Business subscriptions that let
>>> people make closed-source programs with LiveCode.
>>> 
>>> The revenue needs to grow, so that the core dev team can expand, so
>>> that all the things that people are asking for (like Raspberry Pi
>>> support, further work on HTML5 deployment, an improved networking
>>> library, etc.) can be created. This means getting more people to pay
>>> for subscriptions. However, many users don't think that Indy and
>>> Business are good value for money because "all" that they get is
>>> closed-source deployment. To help these users justify upgrading to a
>>> subscription, the company has bought in some externals from 3rd party
>>> vendors and bundled them into the Indy and Business editions -- first
>>> mergExt, and now a PDF external.
>>> 
>>> At the moment, I am struggling in internal discussions when I argue
>>> for bringing neat new features to the Open Source edition. Evidence
>>> over the last year or so suggests that adding a feature to the
>>> Business or Indy edition makes a much bigger boost to subscription
>>> revenue -- revenue which funds improvements and maintenance of all
>>> editions of LiveCode. Even when you consider the new Business-only
>>> features like the PDF viewer, these still reflect a minority of the
>>> work we do; taking these into account still leaves almost all the
>>> work we do going directly into the Open Source edition of LiveCode.
>>> 
>>> In many ways, I feel that at the moment the best way to get the
>>> resources required for maintaining and improving the Open Source
>>> edition of LiveCode is actually to add Business-only features. Do you
>>> have a better idea? For example, some people have suggested keeping
>>> the source code on GitHub but charging people for access to Community
>>> builds as a way to get revenue to support the Open Source edition.
>>> What do you think?
>> 
>> I know there are a lot of people who use the Open Source edition of LiveCode 
>> on this mailing list, and I would appreciate your feedback.
>> 
>>

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition

2016-05-02 Thread Mike Kerner

As someone who pays in, I believe that if anything there should be more
things that are added to the indy/business end of the spectrum to get more
folks to pay in, and to get me to pay more.  We have paid to have things
added to LC, through externals and other third-party add-ons.  Most of
those are now available to everyone, and I'm ok with that.  Without revenue
growth, LC is going to always be gasping for air.  The only way that we get
cool new features if there is money to pay for effort.  While LCB will
hopefully allow others to contribute to LC, I think that there will not be
enough of it to make revolutionary leaps as frequently as we would want
them.  As the paid licenses generate more revenue, the freebees will see
feature growth, as well.

I am surprised at how few of the Business/Indy perks have gotten me
excited, though.  I want LC to convince me to spend more, but so far that
has not happened.  The Business and Indy licenses strike me as being steep,
compared to other tools that we pay for, so I want to see something for it
before I cough up more.

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 8:40 AM, Peter TB Brett 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I recently posted on the forums in reply to being asked why the PDF
> external is initially going to be exclusive to Business edition, and I
> thought it would be useful to cross-post it here.
>
> http://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=27160#p141910
>
> I am the main advocate for LiveCode Open Source within the LiveCode
>> core dev team, and maybe I can address some of these issues.
>>
>> The core dev team needs to eat and pay rent, so LiveCode Ltd. has to
>> make some money to help support LiveCode development. The vast
>> majority of work we do (90%+) goes directly into the Open Source
>> edition of LiveCode. To raise money to pay the core dev team's
>> salaries, the company sells Indy and Business subscriptions that let
>> people make closed-source programs with LiveCode.
>>
>> The revenue needs to grow, so that the core dev team can expand, so
>> that all the things that people are asking for (like Raspberry Pi
>> support, further work on HTML5 deployment, an improved networking
>> library, etc.) can be created. This means getting more people to pay
>> for subscriptions. However, many users don't think that Indy and
>> Business are good value for money because "all" that they get is
>> closed-source deployment. To help these users justify upgrading to a
>> subscription, the company has bought in some externals from 3rd party
>> vendors and bundled them into the Indy and Business editions -- first
>> mergExt, and now a PDF external.
>>
>> At the moment, I am struggling in internal discussions when I argue
>> for bringing neat new features to the Open Source edition. Evidence
>> over the last year or so suggests that adding a feature to the
>> Business or Indy edition makes a much bigger boost to subscription
>> revenue -- revenue which funds improvements and maintenance of all
>> editions of LiveCode. Even when you consider the new Business-only
>> features like the PDF viewer, these still reflect a minority of the
>> work we do; taking these into account still leaves almost all the
>> work we do going directly into the Open Source edition of LiveCode.
>>
>> In many ways, I feel that at the moment the best way to get the
>> resources required for maintaining and improving the Open Source
>> edition of LiveCode is actually to add Business-only features. Do you
>> have a better idea? For example, some people have suggested keeping
>> the source code on GitHub but charging people for access to Community
>> builds as a way to get revenue to support the Open Source edition.
>> What do you think?
>>
>
> I know there are a lot of people who use the Open Source edition of
> LiveCode on this mailing list, and I would appreciate your feedback.
>
>   Peter
>
> --
> Dr Peter Brett 
> LiveCode Open Source Team
>
> LiveCode 2016 Conference: https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/
>
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>



-- 
On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth
On the second day, God created the oceans.
On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours,
   and did a little diving.
And God said, "This is good."
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Revenue and the Open Source edition