search

octobercms / october

Self-hosted CMS platform based on the Laravel PHP Framework.
https://octobercms.com/
Other
11.04k stars 2.21k forks source link

Subscription based licenses for plugins #4662

Closed briddle closed 4 years ago

briddle commented 5 years ago

There has been some discussion on this in the #3683, but it is time for a dedicated issue for it. Please contribute your ideas concerning subscription based licenses for plugins here.

Subscription based licenses for plugins allow Marketplace Authors to provide ongoing support and improvements for their products. Think one-time initial cost, plus discounted recurring fee for new updates and ongoing support.

briddle commented 5 years ago

At the moment the Marketplace still only offers plugins for a one-time payment. Having users only pay once and receive updates and support indefinitely seems like an unsustainable business model.

amdad commented 5 years ago

Subscription when already per site licenses? Not enough of this? Supporting own product should be in best interest of author. If product is good people buy more licenses. Subscription models are good but when you don't have per site licenses or you have really heavy products that needs a lot of works. I don't see any of that kind in Marketplace yet.

Support can be separate option to buy as a service but it can be also done privately between author and user as a job offer. But updates? That's smells bad coding for me.

I hate illegitimate subscription models. It's like opening door for bad products. Buy our crappy code today. And you'll be our slave for a long run... we may to fix that function later. With some !!! breaking changes updates.

briddle commented 5 years ago

I hate illegitimate subscription models. It's like opening door for bad products. Buy our crappy code today. And you'll be our slave for a long run... we may to fix that function later. With some !!! breaking changes updates.

I am having a very hard time not feeling insulted by this.

Supporting products is in the best interest of both the author and the user. The author is compensated for his/her time. The user has a product that continues to work. It is an equal exchange that benefits both. But an author cannot be compensated for future updates and support in a one-time purchase.

A one-time purchase only compensates the Author for his/her time developing the original product and in no way includes any future updates or support.

Depending on the price, plugins need to be sold an x number of times to earn back the initial investment in time let alone become profitable and compensate for plugins that have commercially failed.

There are many reasons to update a product. Sometimes they include new ideas or industry insights and sometimes support for new browsers and devices (or new features on them), or new services like changes with Payment Service Providers that have nothing to do with the Author and are part of a new equal exchange of time and money between a user (old or new) and the Author.

amdad commented 5 years ago

The user has a product that continues to work.

That's what I taking about. Pay for product to work. Otherwise... bye bye. That's not in best of interest of both. In best interest of user is buy products that WORKS. Just WORKS. In best interest of author is make this shit works (!!! after updates too). Otherwise get bad reviews from current and new buyers.

Only what paid additional service should be is... custom work and help that is caused by specific project demand. Plugin on clean installation of latest October should works and update itself as long as it is sold. Breaking changes should break sometimes some other custom project. Then payed job for author is totally deserved. But it's 1to1 relation. Doesn't need marketplace for that.

amdad commented 5 years ago

If author doesn't want to add new features for current and new buyers. Then plugin is what it is. Not developed anymore. So as long it works it works. When it stop to install correctly with latest October because lack of updates or bugfixes it should be unpublished from Marketplace for new users to buy or get deserved 'NOT USEFUL' reviews.

Shopaholic shows how you can sell additional features as a separate plugins. Think that way if author want to sell things that are not part of core product. Core product should have it's features always working and adding new features to make it more attractive to sell more is AUTHOR INTEREST. If doesn't want to enhance it it's totally OK. But it's NOT OK to ask for additional money to make my plugin to be resurrected. It's like selling the same thing once more time.

If author think some big additional features should not be given as an update SELL it as separate plugin. To enhance core one. Not try to justify rip off. "Buy our new shiny features, or your old.. stinky... base ones (which you payed for 😈 🤣) will not works anymore anyway".

User that bought plugin with specific set of features should be able to use them as long as plugin is still on sale / is supported. Do not force to update for so called "new features". In fact for your plugin still to work (sic!).

briddle commented 5 years ago

The user has a product that continues to work.

That's what I taking about. Pay for product to work. Otherwise... bye bye. That's not in best of interest of both. In best interest of user is buy products that WORKS. Just WORKS. In best interest of author is make this shit works (!!! after updates too). Otherwise get bad reviews from current and new buyers.

You seem very frustrated about this subject. Maybe you have had personal bad experiences, I do not know. Please be respectful.

You are right and you are wrong. Firstly, nobody is forcing you to do anything. You do not have to update and you do not have to purchase subscription-based plugins. The question here is:

Are you entitled to a new car if you have bought the previous model?

If you buy a car, you pay for that car to work. You do not pay for that car to continue to work forever or be upgraded to a new model. Is this any different for software? We can have a debate about that. But not here, as that is not the subject of this issue.

Paying for software maintenance

It seems quite normal to pay for software maintenance. Companies like Adobe stepped away from one-off pricing per version (offering new features and improvements) in favour of a subscription-model. This made their products much more affordable while also keeping Adobe healthy (and able to offer updates and support).

You can continue to use outdated products (they are yours to use, you just do not own updates that you have never paid for).

The downside of not updating software used online is that you could put the users of your website at risk because you do not keep your software up to date (this is your responsibility) or that the core software changes in a way that is unsupported by the outdated plugin. Both have nothing to do with the quality of the original product. In both cases the product author simply responds to changes outside his/her control and this has to be paid. If it is not paid the company will either not be there down the road or stops further updates (for free).

Shopaholic shows how you can sell additional features as a separate plugins. Think that way if author want to sell things that are not part of core product

Great (constructive) point! October does not support this yet. A plugin now has a page in the marketplace and builds a reputation. Offering a "v2" now means I loose that reputation. This prevents me from adding new features that you have never paid for. This does not only includes new functionality but also bugfixes for issues that may be caused by changes outside of my control two, three or more years from now.

I sincerely hope you understand the points I am trying to make here. I certainly recognise some of your frustration but not all developers (or all mechanics) are trying to scam you.

Most developers are not Adobe, Microsoft or Apple. Three major companies you may not like but that are still here and still employing a lot of developers because they obviously must be doing something right. Unlike these companies, most developers use unsustainable pricing models that may “feel” good now but not so much after they abandon their products because the pricing model proved unsustainable and is no longer worth their time.

LukeTowers commented 5 years ago

Right now, products on the marketplace are sold in an as-is condition. As such, there is no motivation for an author to ever release an update to the plugin after the initial launch or provide any support.

While I agree that for a lot of plugins on the marketplace right now a subscription model doesn't make sense given the quality and scope of what they do, there are a fair number of plugins that pack a large punch and would benefit from a subscription option (for instance, https://octobercms.com/plugin/responsiv-campaign, https://octobercms.com/plugin/responsiv-support, https://octobercms.com/plugin/radiantweb-proevents, https://octobercms.com/plugin/renatio-formbuilder, etc)

I think an ideal setup involve the following:

Another idea that could sweeten the deal for purchasers is to have the recurring license also tied to an in-marketplace support system. I.e. the recurring license would give you access to a dedicated, plugin-specific support ticketing system that also gives tools to the plugin authors to deal with your requests. To ensure that only quality plugins / authors are using this system we could have defined requirements for SLAs for dealing with the support requests logged in the system against specific products / authors with manual review by marketplace administrators if a given product / author falls below a preset standard.

I think that bundling ongoing support with new updates (one time purchases is the same as just purchasing one year of the updates & support) really makes this an extremely valuable feature for authors and users alike.

LukeTowers commented 5 years ago

@jonpxpx @robballantyne @ErrantQuill @rluders @norotaro @petehalverson @firemankurt @Thejuse @jan-vince @mightyhaggis @bennothommo @sergheiatanasov @lautsevich @CptMeatball @mmjjb @StanleyBonhomme @Teranode @drmzio @skoskie @oscarnevarezleal @MrGKanev @mjauvin @sabuz @w20k @daftspunk

Carrying over from https://github.com/octobercms/october/issues/3683#issuecomment-411808366.

Could we get your guys input on this discussion?

amdad commented 5 years ago

Yes, that was perfect example:

Adobe stepped away from one-off pricing per version (offering new features and improvements) Adobre is monpolyst and you should watch youtube on that matter sometimes how users taking shit about Adobe for having broken unfixed issues for many years now despise

I could end discussion now because you nail it. I left all Adobe products when they did that. For example Affinity offer free updates on 1.x series (1.5, 1.6 etc which includes many new features!) for all it's products and told users in advance that v2 will be paid, but also told and doing, that v2 is a far future. So they bugfixing and extending v1 for years now. And I'm more than happy to pay for v2 when it will come. Since it cost for lifetime less than what Adobe for 3 months of Cloud.

This is worse example of I'm talking about. They switch to rip off subscription model and even tough still their products doesn't work properly. Did they ask users if they want it? Hell no. With a huge project like that they can say. Hey, bugfixes for 3 years then stop. Buy or not. But they twist everything. "You want new features or not pay for it, otherwise even your base features will not work even it was out fault at first place 😈 😆!"

Great (constructive) point! October does not support this yet.

Great (constructive) point that you didn't understand I see. I didn't say a word about v2. But rather how to avoid it. Other hand, offering v2 with same functionality but way improved is a proof that v1 was not good thought out enough in a first place. And that's also say something about producer. By his own product. That IS reputation if you cannot transform worm v1 to butterfly v2 without users even know it. Or maybe can but won't because instead of rip of a shell from worm, wanna rip off users. And I don't talk about you. So why you talk about respect issue. We discuss subscription model and it's dangers. Because it will include, all cases. Good, Bad and Ugly. I talk about generic "author" all the time and possible scenarios. And not from perspective of user only but from creator.

One more time Shopaholic example:

  1. Build core plugin (which in their cases is free but it doesn't matter cause in our case could be paid)
    • Core functionaries that was once paid should work forever as long as you want still sell to next human being. Bugfixes are not author will, it's a must be if he want to be his work reputation maintained. If he brake updates for old users that's where his reputation came from also. Reviews are for clients to told future clients how ride goes.
    • Then at will. Do or don't add new features at all. You don't need to.
  2. Each feature that is not part of paid plugin itself. Can be sold as separate plugin to core plugin.
    • Then again, watch above. What you've sold must be working as long you want to push it to new user. If old users dealt along the ride with breaking updates, they can say what they think about it. New comer should know in advance what to expect.

Buying product is in fact long term investment. If author show lack of respect of buyer with his Short Term Life plugins. People should know what for they're sign on.

October is best example of software that do not fail you on updates and it's not work of accident. If author didn't care, buyer should be warned.

Put price label higher, but not hide real cost and your mistakes under cheap entry price, to make slaves as Adobe did knowing that many people cannot say "Bye bye Adobe". Simple as that. If Adobe had proper competition they wouldn't do what they did.

Time subscription, or all in one but we will not what exactly.

I really see why and when paid updates and support service are legit. When we have externals impact our software. Changing APIs or tons of other not author controlled matters. And difference when poor developers try hide their crappy code behind it. Simple as that.

Situation, where:

If someone cannot handle it's own plugin and be intelligent enough to make it modular. But rather push too much at one shot and require take all or left with nothing. That's dimly business model. When October rules from beginning was aim to be transparent simple and clear.

One more this is no October Marketplace issue you need to fresh start from v2 because v1 was not good enough to maintain it. We're on PHP, October super modular plugin system. Not onefileprogram.exe. Authors should learn from examples like Lovata guys (Shopaholic) how to aim it, where each single feature can be sold separately and maintain to just works. That's too much to expect?

I said same thing over and over. I know. But it's better than this shill

We should reach simplicity. not shillicity!

briddle commented 5 years ago

Interesting read about subscriptions for apps in Apples Appstore: https://developer.apple.com/app-store/subscriptions/

drmzio commented 5 years ago

I like this idea. Coming from a WordPress, almost all of the WP plugins I've used required an annual license that includes unlimited updates and support. This gives plugin developers the incentive to keep maintaining their plugins. A good example is the Gravity Forms WordPress plugin.

If this type of subscription-based licensing does get implemented into October, it would definitely stand out from the rest of the competing CMSs out there.

amdad commented 5 years ago

I like this idea. Coming from a WordPress, almost all of the WP plugins I've used required an annual license

with licensing per site?

Oh, guess who won apple design award for one product and apple app of the year 2017 for another? Affinity, which I mentioned above. Free updates. Still, do not compare us to 1file apps.

There are many reasons to update a product. Sometimes they include new ideas or industry insights and sometimes support for new browsers and devices (or new features on them), or new services like new Payment Service Providers that have nothing to do with the Author.

Payment Service Providers - all are sold separated in Shopahoic. So? Point is totally not valid. New Ideas - the same. Have new ideas improve your product. Or not. Your problem. Why making this user problem?

I pointed out when ongoing subscription can be valid in a way. And payment provider as external service is great example of that external always-can-change service that can broke at any moment.

That's why, let's see.

Create extension payment plugin and sell that separately if someone wants it.

That plugin have only one thing do to. Do payments integration. So true or false. If Works? Yes. OK elseif Not works? --< fix update else Out of Marketplace.

You need to fix this plugin if you want still to sell it to new users anyway or you lost reputation and plugin will get kicked. It's so painful that clients that bought it before get their updates to have it works?

If there is no guarantee payment plugin to work. It can break (out of external api changes- not author fault) week later after it was bought. User buy plugin "as it is" so author cannot be blamed. But can be kicked out of Marketplace if he plugin fails to do what should do. So that's what should him motivated. And most important of it. Problems with payment service plugin or other bright ideas features etc are treated separately. Not sold it in sneaky way with updates, to users that don't wanted it and now they need to deal with it

One plug at the time.

You sell set of features that plugin have and make it work if you want later add more futures that's you problem to make it works. Other buyers not ask for additional problems. If users are not happy because they are buggy give you reviews "Not useful" and plugin drown in reputation. If it's too buggy, it get's unpublished from store.

One plugin at the time. Working or not working. That's is the question. So, again, do not compare yourself to classic os programs that are 1 brick of wall only and can only dream about being modular plug and play as October is.

  • Hey, I got idea. Gimme your money. Cause I had idea.
  • No thanks, just wanna you bugfix what was broken even when I bought plugin year ago and to this day it's broken. Or that new function you introduced in latest update month ago. Still doesn't work properly so....
  • Oh, no sorry. That's not my fault that I make mistake year ago. You're buyed "as it is" buy your right to get bugfixes. Maybe this year mr. Update will be more gracious to you. Maybe not, will see. Take your chance. Wanna play? btw. I got this amazing idea to improve my plugin and think you should pay for it. it's really cool idea you know, just think how amazyng my product will be if I get your money to improve it. just think. And if you pay me and I make it.. and year later it will be still bugged as hell, then hey, you can pay for additional bugfixes always. Each year give us new possibilities to make a change. isn't that amazyng?

Apple also gives all OSes as free updates. not just one you bought with computer. so what? free bugfixes! free new features! new features = new bugs = new bugfixes. All free.

Closed doors for broken plugins. Reliability is what makes October October.

bugability is what makes devs poor.

Do not tell users: Thank you for buying my product. I hope it will works. If not. Soorrrryyy I will not fix it, haHaHahha. How can this be. This is how it is "as it is" xD

LukeTowers commented 5 years ago

@amdad if I understand your multiple posts correctly, your main concern is that developers will somehow abuse a recurring license system to force users to pay for broken products.

If such abuse were to happen it would be easily stopped by human intervention by the core team behind the marketplace in the first place. See my above comment for how such a licensing system could be structured to ensure quality and fair play by all involved.

Another idea that could sweeten the deal for purchasers is to have the recurring license also tied to an in-marketplace support system. I.e. the recurring license would give you access to a dedicated, plugin-specific support ticketing system that also gives tools to the plugin authors to deal with your requests. To ensure that only quality plugins / authors are using this system we could have defined requirements for SLAs for dealing with the support requests logged in the system against specific products / authors with manual review by marketplace administrators if a given product / author falls below a preset standard.

As a side note, please review our Code of Conduct. Specifically:

All reported issues to this project are valuable. Please act with respect and avoid demeaning, condescending, racist, sexist and other inappropriate language and conduct. Please ensure comments stay professional and constructive.

Any further comments that are not constructive or exhibit behaviours against the code of conduct will be hidden from the discussion.

amdad commented 5 years ago

Luke, no you don't understand. Because from all points i made you take only one one side of one aspect. You missed out the rest.

Ok, final note as simple as it can be. Me as buyer for example. I don't want to being forced to pay extra for what I didn't ask for and for that reason my bugfixes updates will be taken away?! How you can avoid that by human moderation Luke? This is rule that by it's definition is against buyer interest because you take away rights to bugfixes. I don't care about new features. Especially that in many cases it will be not new features, but improving of current ones. Plugin become old dated without those updates. And growing older with time. So I need to buy separate license for each site, and then separate update subscription for each of them? That's where it ends guys. Do it like this and we'll see how big Marketplace community of buyer will grow. good luck.

A big NO NO. I hope to not see this. This will hurt October community.

You guys wanna break current system and it's rules. So and I'm against it. That's all. Keep your new features as paid separate plugins and do not sell me the same product over and over just because you wants to improved it. To improve product is interest of author who sells it constantly. Also he is one who want to have better product to work with. Don't tell me it's in my interest. Others will not tell you this. They will just stop buying and looks for alternatives. If whole Marketplace will be full of deals like this, good luck with it. We'll see how October community of buyers will grow. Or rather devs start to fork it and make own custom versions, and users just start looks for other platforms to work with.

As a creator I always want, that all of my project/users/clients will have latest and greatest versions of mine to work smoothly and not to deal with my old outdated code. That's nonsense. As author I need all installations follow updates for custom modifications to keep up. Leaving old plugin in a project where it have custom theme and sometimes more modification create with time huge gap. Once it stays hind it may stays there because newer version will be too far ahead. It's like creating separate realities with use of time. Updates can be problematic but lack of them can totally makes older projects auto-forks.

I'm out of this discussion here. I said what I wanted.

drmzio commented 5 years ago

This is rule that by it's definition is against buyer interest because you take away rights to bugfixes.

Bug fixes require the developer to spend time Replicating the issue, Researching a solution, and Implementing the bug fix. All this takes time out of their day that could be spent doing something else. They aren't obligated to provide any bug fixes at all. In this case, it's up to the customer to leave a review on that plugin with important details about their experience using the plugin.

Introducing the subscription based license will at least encourage updates, bug fixes, and improvements for that plugin. October's current licensing model doesn't provide this incentive.

So I need to buy separate license for each site, and then separate update subscription for each of them?

If you plan on using the same plugin for multiple sites, then you'll be better off buying the Extended License (unlimited sites). Pay once and update all of your sites. This is ideal for agencies that work with multiple client websites.

I brought up WordPress as an example because it's the most popular CMS and it's still thriving. But October has what WordPress doesn't: An Object-oriented codebase that's built on top of Laravel, Plugin/theme marketplace (that you can buy directly), and a straightforward plugin system that makes it easy to start developing plugins.

This new licensing model won't hurt the October community. If anything, it will boost the quality of plugins by allowing plugin developers to get paid to keep fixing/improving their plugins, and encourage competition on who makes the best plugin that is well maintained and makes their customers happy.

LukeTowers commented 5 years ago

I second what @drmzio said:

you take away rights to bugfixes

Users do not have any right or entitlement to bug fixes. Just because they currently sometimes get free updates under the current system does not mean that they are entitled to them. Currently all plugins are sold in as-is condition, and the only reason people get free updates under the current system is that developers often use their own plugins, and it's more of a hassle to create a new plugin for a new version than it's worth so they just update their existing one.

Note that such a system would also be opt-in by the author and the user, existing plugins won't be automatically converted (without the author explicitly choosing to do so) and users are always free to forgo purchasing plugins using the subscription model or just decide to purchase a single year. The only people that might be affected would be current customers of paid plugins that happen to get updates for free right now (which I say again is merely a lucky byproduct of the current system for them, it is by no means something that they are entitled to under any conditions). Under those conditions, an author deciding to switch to a subscription model is the same to the end user as if they had just decided to release a "V2" of their plugin - the user can decide that the ongoing updates and support is worth paying for or they can decide that the current version they're on is good enough for their needs and leave it there.

bennothommo commented 5 years ago

I just want to throw in my full support for this feature. I strongly disagree that it will kill the community/marketplace - if anything, I believe it will entice enterprise-level plugins to be brought to the marketplace and make October a very appealing option when rolling out massive applications for big businesses. If you don't like subscription-based pricing, that's cool. There's no one forcing you to buy those plugins.

Some additional ideas I'd like to throw into the mix, both of them optional to the author:

w20k commented 5 years ago

I would like to add my 50 cents to the discussion. I do agree with @bennothommo that it could be more appealing for enterprise companies. Though I do understand concerns about Subscription-based licenses because it has its pros &cons.

The only approach that I've seen, so far, personally, was nearly perfectly balanced - IntelliJ Idea Subscription (they had a HUGE fuss over Reddit/social media/slack about their approach, but got it to pin down at the end). I'm one of the oldest users of IntelliJ Idea, been using it starting from the Beta version and still on it.

What did they do? It's so-called - perpetual-fallback-license, when you first buy your license you get a product with a fixed (fallback version), let us call it - X.Y.Z. During your first year, you get all the updates and new features. By the end of the license year, you could continue to pay and get a new fallback version - X.Y.Z2 or return to the version you own, which would be - X.Y.Z. All the critical/showstoppers/UX bugs and even minor features are included in your build - X.Y.Z.

_Details: https://sales.jetbrains.com/hc/en-gb/articles/207240845-What-is-perpetual-fallback-license-?_ga=2.36002276.591488752.1570447424-1463488784.1553850752_

Some ideas/thoughts or better to say a mix, based on the fallback license approach from IntelliJ Idea:

PS: IMHO, don't really like the comparison with LOVATA because their approach is pretty common within AAA game publishers nowadays and it's ugly, money-wise - 100% the best option. download z0ir404nkyv01 PS2: Wordpress plugins you buy a license per website for a ONE YEAR - nothing new here 😄

briddle commented 5 years ago

I like the IntelliJ idea subscription example of @w20k in that users have a base product to fall back on. I also agree with @w20k that the premium Wordpress plugins that I know use a per website per year license.

However, I would consider it very bad business practice to offer anything as perpetual in the sense of "forever". Why? Because nobody can foresee the future and determine a price for a service which scope is something that is impossible to define upfront.

All software needs to have an end-of-life date. In my opinion, pretending anything else is either a promise you know you cannot keep or negligence in running a sustainable and transparent business.

Let us take PHP for example:

Each release branch of PHP is fully supported for two years from its initial stable release. During this period, bugs and security issues that have been reported are fixed and are released in regular point releases.

After this two year period of active support, each branch is then supported for an additional year for critical security issues only. Releases during this period are made on an as-needed basis: there may be multiple point releases, or none, depending on the number of reports.

Once the three years of support are completed, the branch reaches its end of life and is no longer supported.

Source: https://www.php.net/supported-versions.php

lautsevich commented 5 years ago

Hi everyone, I just read all the comments here. 🤪️

We at LOVATA are OK with adding subscription licenses in one form or another to the marketplace even we don't need it badly.

Everyone should know how expensive it is to develop such a large and high-quality product as Shopaholic is. It's thousands of working hours of the highly qualified developers! So, if we all want to see October CMS community growth, to attract more highly qualified developers, to see October market share growth, we should be open to more marketplace monetization options.

Please, note! More money in the marketplace is more money for the core team to make October even better!

The only reason why Shopaholic is so modular is to not force the customers to buy extra product options they don't need at the moment. Just look at how much its functionality has grown over the two years since it was initially released. By the way, it follows the October CMS philosophy to be as simple as possible and to provide reach and flexible 'API' to extend the functionality.

We think it could be good for the whole October ecosystem health to guarantee free support for the paid plugins within a year. After the end of the support period, a user will continue to get the updates but can't ask for help. But the support period can be extended by buying a special subscription license. Or even buy an extended support license (with SLA) from the beginning.

Besides, subscription licenses could be used to attract end-users to rent ready-made websites directly on the marketplace. There's among of our products one appropriate example Sneakers Shop for Shopaholic bundle. Its price is $150. We believe it could be more interesting for someone to buy a subscription license for $10-15 per month for such a product.

So we welcome a subscription license type in the marketplace!

rluders commented 5 years ago

I'm totally OK with the subscription model. One of the reasons that I just changed my plugins to free and open source was 'cause I didn't have time and financial motivation to keep improving the plugin.

Subscriptions are great, cause it keeps you motivate to improve your plugins. Anyway I think that you should have the option to buy a version license or sign up for a subscription model where you get the new releases.

LukeTowers commented 5 years ago

Just to comment on @bennothommo's suggestion:

Free trials, being able to allow the plugin to be tested for a month or so to allow people to be confident in a plugin choice before using it.

I would like to handle the "Try before you buy" aspect of the marketplace experience by working with @petehalverson on his existing project that can spin up docker containers quickly. If we integrated with that then we could potentially offer the Live Demo feature to every plugin / theme author for free and by default.

lautsevich commented 5 years ago

@LukeTowers, it would be such a great customer UX provided by the marketplace!

Miguel-Serejo commented 5 years ago

As a developer, I tend to choose free plugins to keep costs down for myself and my clients, and if I don't find a free plugin that fits my needs I prefer to develop it myself.

That said, I would like to, at some point, offer some of my work on the marketplace.

I agree that subscriptions can be a boon to the marketplace, just as long as the subscription makes sense. For example, if a plugin is only offered as a subscription service, but the author doesn't provide regular updates, and there's no cost to the author associated with my usage of the plugin, the subscription doesn't make sense. It would also be difficult to enforce regular updates for subscription-based plugins, because some plugins might have other costs (for example a plugin that integrates with a company's services requires those services to be kept working, but may not require any updates on the plugin side for long periods of time. I'm thinking mostly payment gateways).

Some of the plugins I've developed are small utilities that offer development shortcuts, or basic content plugins that wouldn't really merit a price tag, so what I would like to be able to offer is free plugins with an optional support subscription.

Some of my plugins are highly generic and can be configured to work with a variety of existing plugins. For these I would like to offer a basic, free version which the user would need to configure, and paid pre-configured versions that would obviously need to be kept up-to-date in case any of the supported plugins change, or to add support for new plugins, as well as a support contract where I would help users integrate with any plugins they need.

Support contracts might be a bit tricky. Let's say I offer a free plugin and a support subscription for that plugin. If a user installs my plugin on 50 websites, and buys a support subscription for site 1, I have no way of knowing if a support request from that user relates to site 1 or site 26. For that reason, I propose that support contracts be made on a per-plugin basis, rather than per-site. For paid plugins, this would mean a user still needs to buy a license for each website, but for the price of one support contract they would get support for all their websites.

I also see no reason to treat plugins and themes differently with regards to monetization, or bundling. For example, if I develop a plugin and a theme that uses it, and sell a bundle of theme + plugin, but a user then decides to use the plugin with a different theme, I should still offer plugin-level support under the support contract.

There's also the issue of modular plugins, which I think could be resolved by having a "modular bundle". Think a system like the current bundles, but where you could choose which parts of the bundle to acquire. Each module can have independent pricing, but support contracts for the bundle should cover every module. This system would make a clear distinction between first-party extensions and third-party extensions. Obviously there would need to be a way for the core's author to authorize any third-party modules to make sure there are no conflicts, and that a third party doesn't just start offering bootlegged versions of official modules.

In summary, here's what I think plugin authors should be able to charge for:

Paid plugins should include some level of support. Also, paid plugins, especially those offering paid support, should get updates for at least one year after release. This might be a barrier to entry for some authors, but I would welcome some outside opinions on this matter.

Let's walk through an ideal scenario:

I want to build an online shop. I grab Shopaholic for free, and realize I have no idea what I'm doing. I buy an epsilon-tier support contract from LOVATA and for the next year I'm guaranteed to get the help I need to set up and maintain my shop. At some point I decide to buy the Labels for Shopaholic extension. Luckily the epsilon-tier support contract also covers LOVATA's extensions, so I don't have to worry about that. I do need to integrate Payeer though, so I buy a third-party extension, pkurg-payeer and get basic support from that extension's author to get set up. Then I'll consider whether I want to upgrade my LOVATA subscription from epsilon to goldilocks tier, which adds support for some third-party extensions, or if I want to buy better support directly from Pkurg. At the end of the year, my sales haven't gone as well as I was hoping.I'm still getting some residual profits that at least pay for the hosting costs, but won't pay for the support contracts. I drop the support contracts and keep my shop online. I lose access to future updates and move on to the next project.

In this scenario, LOVATA gets paid for a full year of support, plus a direct extension sale, Pkurg also sold an extension and maybe a year's worth of support, and the October team got their cut from the marketplace sales. With no support contract, LOVATA and Pkurg no longer have any costs associated with my usage of their plugins, and in my opinion, that's a fair shake. I paid for the plugins as they were at a certain point in time, and now that I'm not giving them any extra costs, I shouldn't have to keep paying.

I started typing this 2 hours ago with a very simple idea in mind but then got sidetracked into thinking about how the whole market ecosystem could work, and how I would like to use it, both as a buyer and as a seller. I probably missed something.

bennothommo commented 5 years ago

@amdad You appear be under this (flawed) assumption that as soon as October rolls out the option, not necessity, of subscription-based payments for plugins, suddenly everyone will switch over to that and the marketplace will collapse and no-one will buy plugins anymore. I do not believe that will be the case. Furthermore, if it turns out that people do not want to pay for subscriptions, then plugin developers will simply not use it and will continue to sell their plugins for flat prices.

That's the basis of a open market, the person who wants to develop the plugin gets to set the price based on what they believe is the worth of their plugin, and if people don't buy it due to that, then they have the option of changing the pricing or appealing to potential customers in another way.

Lovata sell their plugins for what they feel it is worth, and it is working for them. Why does that mean that other developers cannot sell their plugins for what they feel it is worth?

LukeTowers commented 5 years ago

@amdad I've previously warned you against using caps lock in your comments. Find a way to share your opinions without shouting.

amdad commented 5 years ago

Oh, sorry @LukeTowers, forgot about that strict form. Not intentional.

Guys, now you liked what @36864 write? He didn't said anything other than I. Rather prove my points. Devs rather go own way then will pay just for updates. Since many of them go own way instead of buy paid plugin anyway.

Subscription based updates No.

Let's stay with 'as it is' with free updates.

Subscription based support Yes.

Why not? As separate service! Which is better to do outside Marketplace. Since it's a normal job in my opinion Marketplace should not 'tax' it. That's why it's better to offer support on own website where you can set rules of service/subscription on your own terms. When client is not happy with your service that's between him and you. Not bother October team in any way.

So? Nothing to change.

@w20k don't you compare software philosophy to game which has beginning and end. Lovata philosophy is very good. Minimal core + add of features only you need. Less code = less bugs = better performance = you paid for what you want to use, and each function have proper price tag. You see all of them in advance not reveal along the ride. Later they can focus on writing new functions knowing they don't need to give away them for free, but rather sells then to users that are willing to pay for it. That's perfect situation. Because current clients are not bothered by functions they didn't order and many times didn't need at all. And can evaluate if it's worth to buy or not.

Especially your compare is ugly because you should rather compare it to 'free to play' which lives out of additional offers to maintain game at all. Not to full box games. Shopaholic core is FREE.

All in all Lovata showed you every aspects how it should be done and monetized properly.

  1. Separate all non crucial functions as separate plugins. For those precious, put price tag according to your wish.
  2. Sell your support as subscription or one time job.

October itself works like this from beginning. Minimal core, All non-crucial functions by plugins, since each project is different.

Lovata guys are super cool and their products showing level of professionalism that should be given as example for others. If for someone their prices are too high for complex full featured product. That's not a problem of Marketplace and it's rules. But everything is transparent and clear. Without traps and price tricks. Also they put so much effort into their products like every dev should do. They make their products better, to be possible the best with latest/greatest. Not to ask for repays for same license from current users. Their service is their obvious right to do. That's another reason why they need all clients on updated versions. If anyone ask for personal help they don't need to fight with outdated plugins/themes/october.

In other words, that's why updates must be for all users for all times. That's a starting point for anyone to job/service any system. When someone made custom mods on outdated system later updates might be a problem. And probably will be. That's why I told it will hurt community. More outdated systems = more problems = less happy users = Wasting true power of October. it's reliability = lowering down user experiences to other crappy systems.

And no, people do not run from Wordpress just because it's not so modern as other systems. Because there are already solutions that add modern standards as another layer to deal with that issue. People run from thousands of crappy plugins and authors that cannot do things simple and working. Integrating with each other, not conflicting and updating for years instead of "Hello, It's a new year and totally rewrite our New fresh better fancy better crap (which we still rewrite for two years anyway and it still will not be good as it should but we think about it in next year). Of course there many good exceptions. But it's obvious, when there is no one who control quality because it cannot be controlled. Since, everyone can do plugin. So there is tons of crap around. And morons who thinks that wordpress was good idea for proper ecommerce or other non-blog advanced systems now start understand. That 9 plugins for a single one-page where every one of them looks like different world, is not good UX. Nor webdesigner friendly & not dev dream for sure!

Sooner or later all popular system will be modernized. There will be no gap like now in technology. Only gap should be visible is Quality of plugins, support, and overall UX. less > more. When less = keep.good.standard or be replaced.

amdad commented 5 years ago

@amdad You appear be under this (flawed) assumption that as soon as October rolls out the option, not necessity, of subscription-based payments for plugins, suddenly everyone will switch over to that and the marketplace will collapse and no-one will buy plugins anymore. I do not believe that will be the case. Furthermore, if it turns out that people do not want to pay for subscriptions, then plugin developers will simply not use it and will continue to sell their plugins for flat prices.

I know what I know. I know what I saw. I'll repeat myself to you once more. This is toxic system where devs are not self motivated to make great product and wanted to make it better by themselves, to be attractive to buy and use. But rather put out poor code, and when user will place own website on this is kinda bounded. Bounded to creator and depend on it. Bad practices is bad practice. In dirty environment diseases have way more place to develop. Current system is transparent. I was depending on other devs for years so I know how it works and how it should.

Myself as an author, I just think it's pathetic mindset. Instead "I'll make my product best it can be too sell it and improve it as best I can, to sell it more" To "Ok, I'll put out what I've got as it is. And maybe... if someone ask for it, and likes it and pay me for it extra I'll fix by own bugs, I'll maybe reconsider adding new features if there will be enough motivation for it. Or maybe not "

That's two opposite mindsets.

  1. I create plugin to make great product to sell. Make it perfect to have 5 stars reviews. If I made mistake I fix my faults as quick I keep my buyers happy. People like, when they see that dev solving issues successfully and fast. Or have idea to make something way better to enter new level of simplicity and possibilities of growth.
  2. I created client project and I have this plugin also left from it, so I throw it to Marketplace 'as it is' maybe someone find it useful in any way to build own thing or we will see what future brings. No expectations.

Both, scenarios are totally different and totally fine. In both you get what you paid for 'as it is'. Reviews show up very quickly what type of scenario we got. Toxic is situation, only when user need to pay for subscription to get.. what? No one knows. You don't get 'as it is' you get Enya 'may it me' or 'not to be'. That's totally unfair according to buyer.. Then...

[...] it turns out that people do not want to pay for subscriptions

Bingo. You just proved my point.

I'm, 100% against to opening doors for this kind of endings. In current 'as it is' when people are unsatisfied with product then hey. They made enough of risk by buying it first. If you sell poor products do add to if just promises. That you may buy that subscription and maybe it will motivate me to fix my own faults and maybe I'll make it better in this year. Maybe not. Marketplace do not offer redounds! So who will be hurt buyers! The Community. Devs are not here to be masters but rather servants when they ask for money. When they give away 'as it is' no one will grudge. Unless author says This plugin works in description but bugs totally make that statement untrue. Then it's kinda fraud if author didn't want to fix plugin. Buyer should get refund. How you can get refund of subscription where user get updates but doesn't get what he wanted because dev are more features, more bugs and doesn't resolve what he was asking for for example? Situation is getting too messy too unclear.

We should avoid problems not make environment to excesses and abuses of buyers trust.

Just to say later, you can always drop that author. Who will refunds wasted time and fix frustration for user? Who will rewrite his system to make it as it should after he will be dropped by original author. Finally do you see guys?

Success is effortless

Grandmaster Flash

Success have it's laws where breaking them results failure. Try to effortlessly run on spiral twisted potholed road with foggy air where you don't see future. Make things flat, make it straight. Make air clear to see far distance. Because then and only den you can get your zen. I mean you can prevent crash. It's so simple I feel a little bit embarrassed that I need to even say it.

Subscription is deep fog. no one see future. Not even their own, to mentioning XYZ author. Which we know for sure, that there is far more 'nah' devs than truly good ones. It's switching easiest trade market to hardest that is, service market. So stop tell me this won't impact community. It will and you just say: "Hey, it's just how it is". I say:

Neeeeee

That's the basis of a open market, the person who wants to develop the plugin gets to set the price based on what they believe is the worth of their plugin, and if people don't buy it due to that, then they have the option of changing the pricing or appealing to potential customers in another way.

Lovata sell their plugins for what they feel it is worth, and it is working for them. Why does that mean that other developers cannot sell their plugins for what they feel it is worth?

LOL, Put a price tag on it! (like they do) On existing product that is here, before your eyes 'as it is'. Not put a price tag on ghost, premise 🔮, "it will be alright, one day, maybe, trust me, or not, i dunno, but hey I still get your money" XD

So, in one line:

Stop trying to make Marketplace into Servicespace!

You don't pleased with product you return it. You don't please with service you go to court. Risk kicked from 10 to XYZeleven.

😱

Ok, I've done my sentence. It's my farewell to dis topic forevr. I won't bother you anymore. Peace humans of the earth.

petehalverson commented 5 years ago

Our business model has been to develop private plugins that line up with the needs of our client base, our marketplace experience is really limited.

I'd strongly consider the ROI on developing subscriptions and an in-marketplace support system for plugins. Sounds painful, facilitating a support channel for authors. I don't know if it'd be worth the effort.

Though if you're doing that, may as well offer a paid support tier for October CMS itself...

CptMeatball commented 5 years ago

Wow! Quite a discussion going on here. After reading (almost) all comments in this thread, I think the primary "issue" is that a part of the buyers/people expect that their purchase includes updates indefinitely.

I think they should have a right to updates, up to a certain point. I think the same argument has been made several times here: From a developers POV it's not doable to support users indefinitely. Therefore, my personal opinion is that in case of licenses, a license based purchase is the best way to go - let's call it an update license for the sake of clarity.

This license should be locked to either a timeframe (you got 1 year of updates from date of purchase) or locked to a certain version (you pay for v1, you can't update to v2 without paying).

LukeTowers commented 5 years ago

@CptMeatball I'm not sure I'd agree with the version restriction on a license, that seems like it would start to cross into the "not having a strong enough ROI" that @petehalverson was mentioning.

However I do agree that users shouldn't be put in the position where they're literally just purchasing a single version of the plugin without any potential to update period.

I think probably the best way to handle that would be to have the following purchase options:

  1. Author sets their plugin to one-time purchase. Users are entitled to any updates that might happen to be released, but the product is sold as-is, and they're not entitled to any support (although the developer may choose to provide it).
  2. Author sets their plugin to subscription:
    • User can choose to make a single purchase for a one-year license that entitles them to the initial product & free updates for a year, as well as a license to the last version within the year span in perpetuity
    • User can choose to signup for auto renewing subscription to always renew their license at the end of every period so they don't have to worry about renewing it to continue to get updates automatically (note, they can cancel at any point, however an annual payment is non-refundable)

When it comes to the support system / plans, we could either have that be bundled as a part of the year subscription or have it as an entirely separate option that can be selected or not when checking out for a product that supports the support contract.

CptMeatball commented 5 years ago

@LukeTowers I was referring to the IntelliJ Idea perpetual fallback license that was mentioned before, but might have misunderstood that. Anyway, I agree that 1Y licenses are better. It's currently one of the most used ways when looking at premium plugins. Works fine TBH!

It also motivates the developer to keep updating the product and provide feedback and support when necessary.

briddle commented 5 years ago

The idea that software is a product is inherently flawed. Programming code ages faster than a new car (especially on the web) and therefore I would make the argument that all software is a service.

The question is, who is providing this service?

If you have a marketplace that offers software as if it were a product it becomes the responsibility of the buyer to maintain the software himself (or pay a 3rd-party to do this). In this case you are only entitled to a product that works at the time of your purchase. The purchase price can include bug-fixes for a limited time (I would suggest 1 year) but certainly not indefinitely.

People believe what they hope. If you claim to offer lifelong bug-fixes some people are bound to believe you and purchase your product. But lifelong updates for a one-time fee are a unicorn and very poor business practice. Offering life-long updates for a one-time fee is unsustainable and will either result in you breaking your promise or your business failing. As a company, I am not interested in making promises I cannot keep and I am also not interested in failing because my pricing model turned out to be popular but unsustainable.

If a future update of...

...breaks something years from now you are not entitled to a free bugfix (although I may provide it - either because I am a nice guy, or because I am an idiot who will go bankrupt).

Of course, you are not required to purchase a paid bugfix and are always free to resolve any issues beyond the included support period yourself (or pay a 3rd-party for this). You are not, however, entitled to my future time for a one-time fee below $4.000.000 so certainly not for $17 (the average price of a product on October before subtracting the well-deserved 30% marketplace commission).

Maybe the marketplace could allow developers to market their products under different labels?

1) Plugins that are already paid for by a customer and that may be of use to others (these will not be updated and will quickly become outdated, polluting the marketplace with garbage) 2) Plugins that are created as training/exercise (these will not be updated and will become outdated quickly , polluting the marketplace with garbage) 3) Plugins that are created as a product (either free, paid - in the case of simple plugins, or as a subscription in the case of more complicated plugins).

I wrote 2 articles about this:

Miguel-Serejo commented 5 years ago

(these will not be updated and will quickly become outdated, polluting the marketplace with garbage)

I believe this will eventually be a problem regardless of purchase models, because people die, companies go bankrupt, and code gets abandoned.

There should be a filter on the marketplace to hide plugins that haven't been updated in a long time, or have been shown to be incompatible with the current october release, and those that have been marked as incompatible should not be purchasable until the author fixes them.

briddle commented 5 years ago

How to setup subscriptions for plugins on the marketplace without recurring payments

I was brainstorming this problem and came up with a possible construction to restrict plugin updates to 1 year until the marketplace allows subscription-based licensing. Note that this is purely an academic concept and I have no plans to switch to this model for any of my current plugins.

1) Create a base plugin

This plugin creates the database infrastructure and perhaps offers some very basic functionality, but nothing else. This base plugin could be offered for free to attract new users and build a reputation with reviews and ratings.

2) Create a versioned extension

This extension will be updated for 1 calendar year (e.g. 2019). On the 1st of january of the next year, the old version will no longer receive any more updates. To receive additional updates users have to purchase an upgrade to the next version (e.g. 2020). Alternatively, users can decide not to update and maintain their version of your plugin themselves.

Any future changes to the database need to be made in the base plugin so users are free to uninstall extension version X and install extension version Y without losing data.

If needed, an update to the base plugin can alert the user about breaking changes to previous versions and ask them to confirm the update (e.g. !!! This update is only compatible with extension version Y or later).

If users purchase your extension later in the year, you could offer a discount using coupons. You could simply display the coupon-code on the plugin page.

Read my post on the October forum here

FlusherDock1 commented 5 years ago

A subscription system for plugins and templates is a musthave in the OctoberCMS ecosystem.

But question. How marketplace will guard subscription based plugins from stealing with "try before buy", if i can just register new account every month and download plugins that can't be "encrypted".

I understand that right now you can do that with paid plugins, but customers need to pay first.

LukeTowers commented 5 years ago

@FlusherDock1 I don't think we'd ever implement a "try before you buy" where the customer gets access to the code base. The furthest we'd ever go is having auto generated live demo sites integrating the plugin with no actual access to the codebase at all

sabuz commented 5 years ago

@FlusherDock1 I think freemium model can achieve your goal. And this is the most used model right now. Just consider wordpress.org. All the plugins/themes are free there. If customers are happy with free service, and want to extend the plugin/theme features, they buy premium version from the author. But for OctoberCMS, we've the ability to provide both free, and premim products on marketplace.

So, I think if we can

The discussion can be closed! ;)

github-actions[bot] commented 4 years ago

This issue will be closed and archived in 3 days, as there has been no activity in the last 30 days. If this issue is still relevant or you would like to see it actioned, please respond and we will re-open this issue.

github-actions[bot] commented 4 years ago

This issue will be closed and archived in 3 days, as there has been no activity in the last 30 days.

github-actions[bot] commented 4 years ago

This issue will be closed and archived in 3 days, as there has been no activity in the last 30 days.

github-actions[bot] commented 4 years ago

This issue will be closed and archived in 3 days, as there has been no activity in the last 30 days. If this issue is still relevant or you would like to see it actioned, please respond and we will re-open this issue. If this issue is critical to your business, consider joining the Premium Support Program where a Service Level Agreement is offered.