Marc Palmer announcement

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
55 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Marc Palmer announcement

suryazi
Hi,

   Just saw Mr. Marc's announcement about aborting his free plugins development. Felt disappointed, but anyways he is his own master. Want to say thank you for all the hard work he did in uplifting the Grails Platform. We certainly will miss you.

Marc you left your Mark on Grails.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

gauravchauhan
*Marc you left your Mark on Grails.*
+1 to that

On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 4:49 PM, suryazi <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

   Just saw  Mr. Marc's announcement
<http://www.anyware.co.uk/2005/2013/02/07/a-change-to-my-grails-plugins/>
about aborting his free plugins development. Felt disappointed, but anyways
he is his own master. Want to say thank you for all the hard work he did in
uplifting the Grails Platform. We certainly will miss you.

*Marc you left your Mark on Grails.*



--
View this message in context: http://grails.1312388.n4.nabble.com/Marc-Palmer-announcement-tp4641446.html
Sent from the Grails - user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email





--
Regards
Gaurav Chauhan
Contact No : +91-95607-66664 
Skype : chauhan.gaurav
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

Marc Palmer Local
:

> *Marc you left your Mark on Grails.*
> +1 to that

>
>

Thanks. I'm still around though :)


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

thomas fuller
I can't help but sympathize with Marc.

A few years I attended the Gr8Conf in Copenhagen and I recall some laughter from a few people in the audience when it was suggested, by me, that an app store model for Grails might be a nice idea. In my opinion the idea of getting people to pay for plugins is still a great one, however it may be difficult to charge in this space mainly because, as Marc noted, the market is small. There are examples of where this does work, just take a look at WordPress, to name just one, where some plugins are strictly proprietary products, however the number of WP users is much larger than Grails.

In my opinion, the idea of doing open source software development must always have a financial reward associated with it -- after all, I went into business to make money. My business test case for writing a Grails plugin had several questions I was trying to answer and unfortunately those answers came back as not very interesting.

I'd like to be able to tell the readers that there's a model that works here, unfortunately I just don't see it. Yes it works for VMWare as they can support the platform and be the first point of contact for consultancy services, but what about the "ecosystem" or the (I hate this word) "community"? Back in the 80's Microsoft implemented a strategy whereby they would go after the top 5% (?) of customers and leave the remainder to their partners and this worked so well they almost put IBM out of business. There is no similar strategy here that I can see -- none.

Re: "I do remain concerned that there seems to be a distinct lack of large companies that use Grails giving back to the community in any tangible way. I can’t understand this, given the fantastic benefits that Grails provides. Perhaps people think that because VMWare own it that there is no need to provide extra resources?"

It's because 1.) they don't care and 2.) if they do care, there's always legal or possibly a department head or someone else to stand in the way.

With only one exception, I always found working at large companies to be soul-destroying. Sure I'll do it, but it's just to pay the bills -- the real excitement is with startups.

Tom

On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Marc Palmer <[hidden email]> wrote:
:

> *Marc you left your Mark on Grails.*
> +1 to that

>
>

Thanks. I'm still around though :)


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

suryazi
The current situation of professional plugin developers like Marc is unfortunate yet understandable. In my honest opinion, the lead to support the developers has to be taken by VMWare itself, as they are the one who are handling the product and without the active support of the developing community the product will not sustain long enough and they are going to lose their initial investment. As the community grows and more enterprises/organization adopts the frameworks they can shift to appstore model by charging users for using/downloading the plugins.

thomas fuller wrote
I can't help but sympathize with Marc.

A few years I attended the Gr8Conf in Copenhagen and I recall some laughter
from a few people in the audience when it was suggested, by me, that an app
store model for Grails might be a nice idea. In my opinion the idea of
getting people to pay for plugins is still a great one, however it may be
difficult to charge in this space mainly because, as Marc noted, the market
is small. There are examples of where this does work, just take a look at
WordPress, to name just one, where some plugins are strictly proprietary
products, however the number of WP users is much larger than Grails.

In my opinion, the idea of doing open source software development must
always have a financial reward associated with it -- after all, I went into
business *to make money*. My business test case for writing a Grails plugin
had several questions I was trying to answer and unfortunately those
answers came back as not very interesting.

I'd like to be able to tell the readers that there's a model that works
here, unfortunately I just don't see it. Yes it works for VMWare as they
can support the platform and be the first point of contact for consultancy
services, but what about the "ecosystem" or the (I hate this word)
"community"? Back in the 80's Microsoft implemented a strategy whereby they
would go after the top 5% (?) of customers and leave the remainder to their
partners and this worked so well they almost put IBM out of business. There
is no similar strategy here that I can see -- *none*.

Re: "I do remain concerned that there seems to be a distinct lack of large
companies that use Grails giving back to the community in any tangible way.
I can’t understand this, given the fantastic benefits that Grails provides.
Perhaps people think that because VMWare own it that there is no need to
provide extra resources?"

It's because 1.) they don't care and 2.) if they do care, there's always
legal or possibly a department head or someone else to stand in the way.

With only one exception, I always found working at large companies to be
soul-destroying. Sure I'll do it, but it's just to pay the bills -- the
real excitement is with startups.

Tom

On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Marc Palmer <[hidden email]> wrote:

> :
>
> > *Marc you left your Mark on Grails.*
> > +1 to that
>
> >
> >
>
> Thanks. I'm still around though :)
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>
>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

Eamonn O'Connell-2
At the same time, it seems an easy answer to say VMWare should do it.


On 17 February 2013 09:15, suryazi <[hidden email]> wrote:
The current situation of professional plugin developers like Marc is
unfortunate yet understandable. In my honest opinion, the lead to support
the developers has to be taken by VMWare itself, as they are the one who are
handling the product and without the active support of the developing
community the product will not sustain long enough and they are going to
lose their initial investment. As the community grows and more
enterprises/organization adopts the frameworks they can shift to appstore
model by charging users for using/downloading the plugins.


thomas fuller wrote
> I can't help but sympathize with Marc.
>
> A few years I attended the Gr8Conf in Copenhagen and I recall some
> laughter
> from a few people in the audience when it was suggested, by me, that an
> app
> store model for Grails might be a nice idea. In my opinion the idea of
> getting people to pay for plugins is still a great one, however it may be
> difficult to charge in this space mainly because, as Marc noted, the
> market
> is small. There are examples of where this does work, just take a look at
> WordPress, to name just one, where some plugins are strictly proprietary
> products, however the number of WP users is much larger than Grails.
>
> In my opinion, the idea of doing open source software development must
> always have a financial reward associated with it -- after all, I went
> into
> business *to make money*. My business test case for writing a Grails
> plugin
> had several questions I was trying to answer and unfortunately those
> answers came back as not very interesting.
>
> I'd like to be able to tell the readers that there's a model that works
> here, unfortunately I just don't see it. Yes it works for VMWare as they
> can support the platform and be the first point of contact for consultancy
> services, but what about the "ecosystem" or the (I hate this word)
> "community"? Back in the 80's Microsoft implemented a strategy whereby
> they
> would go after the top 5% (?) of customers and leave the remainder to
> their
> partners and this worked so well they almost put IBM out of business.
> There
> is no similar strategy here that I can see -- *none*.
>
> Re: "I do remain concerned that there seems to be a distinct lack of large
> companies that use Grails giving back to the community in any tangible
> way.
> I can’t understand this, given the fantastic benefits that Grails
> provides.
> Perhaps people think that because VMWare own it that there is no need to
> provide extra resources?"
>
> It's because 1.) they don't care and 2.) if they do care, there's always
> legal or possibly a department head or someone else to stand in the way.
>
> With only one exception, I always found working at large companies to be
> soul-destroying. Sure I'll do it, but it's just to pay the bills -- the
> real excitement is with startups.
>
> Tom
>
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Marc Palmer &lt;

> marc@.co

> &gt; wrote:
>
>> :
>>
>> > *Marc you left your Mark on Grails.*
>> > +1 to that
>>
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Thanks. I'm still around though :)
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>
>>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>
>>
>>





--
View this message in context: http://grails.1312388.n4.nabble.com/Marc-Palmer-announcement-tp4641446p4641462.html
Sent from the Grails - user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

thomas fuller
In reply to this post by suryazi
"As the community grows and more enterprises/organization adopts the frameworks they can shift to appstore model by charging users for using/downloading the plugins."

No I think you're missing a few things about the question -- let me elaborate:

1.) The question was originally discussed on this mailing list (in the original case not by me) and I brought it up again just to see if anyone else was interested more or less in monetizing their plugins and, if so, how they were planning to or actually doing it.
2.) You can implement this business model without an app store. There's absolutely nothing stopping a developer from adding licensing software to their plugin and either making the entire plugin proprietary, or following something like a freemium model. To date nobody has done this -- not even VMWare (not publicly at least).
3.) If you're going to sell software (as in #2) you're stuck with some options and there's a very good article on this here:

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/CamelsandRubberDuckies.html

See the section which starts specifically with "The reason I bring this up is because software is priced three ways: free, cheap, and dear.".

The user base for Grails is small, which means option two will be difficult to make much profit on and option three has all sorts of problems associated with it -- namely loooooong sales cycles.

This leaves support and consultancy services.

One thing which I find interesting is that I know of Marc's work and always assumed he saw something I didn't mainly because he had done so much of it. Reading his post says a lot to me and, to a degree, supports the findings of my business test.

Tom


On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 8:15 AM, suryazi <[hidden email]> wrote:
The current situation of professional plugin developers like Marc is
unfortunate yet understandable. In my honest opinion, the lead to support
the developers has to be taken by VMWare itself, as they are the one who are
handling the product and without the active support of the developing
community the product will not sustain long enough and they are going to
lose their initial investment. As the community grows and more
enterprises/organization adopts the frameworks they can shift to appstore
model by charging users for using/downloading the plugins.


thomas fuller wrote
> I can't help but sympathize with Marc.
>
> A few years I attended the Gr8Conf in Copenhagen and I recall some
> laughter
> from a few people in the audience when it was suggested, by me, that an
> app
> store model for Grails might be a nice idea. In my opinion the idea of
> getting people to pay for plugins is still a great one, however it may be
> difficult to charge in this space mainly because, as Marc noted, the
> market
> is small. There are examples of where this does work, just take a look at
> WordPress, to name just one, where some plugins are strictly proprietary
> products, however the number of WP users is much larger than Grails.
>
> In my opinion, the idea of doing open source software development must
> always have a financial reward associated with it -- after all, I went
> into
> business *to make money*. My business test case for writing a Grails
> plugin
> had several questions I was trying to answer and unfortunately those
> answers came back as not very interesting.
>
> I'd like to be able to tell the readers that there's a model that works
> here, unfortunately I just don't see it. Yes it works for VMWare as they
> can support the platform and be the first point of contact for consultancy
> services, but what about the "ecosystem" or the (I hate this word)
> "community"? Back in the 80's Microsoft implemented a strategy whereby
> they
> would go after the top 5% (?) of customers and leave the remainder to
> their
> partners and this worked so well they almost put IBM out of business.
> There
> is no similar strategy here that I can see -- *none*.
>
> Re: "I do remain concerned that there seems to be a distinct lack of large
> companies that use Grails giving back to the community in any tangible
> way.
> I can’t understand this, given the fantastic benefits that Grails
> provides.
> Perhaps people think that because VMWare own it that there is no need to
> provide extra resources?"
>
> It's because 1.) they don't care and 2.) if they do care, there's always
> legal or possibly a department head or someone else to stand in the way.
>
> With only one exception, I always found working at large companies to be
> soul-destroying. Sure I'll do it, but it's just to pay the bills -- the
> real excitement is with startups.
>
> Tom
>
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Marc Palmer &lt;

> marc@.co

> &gt; wrote:
>
>> :
>>
>> > *Marc you left your Mark on Grails.*
>> > +1 to that
>>
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Thanks. I'm still around though :)
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>
>>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>
>>
>>





--
View this message in context: http://grails.1312388.n4.nabble.com/Marc-Palmer-announcement-tp4641446p4641462.html
Sent from the Grails - user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

Marc Palmer Local
In reply to this post by Eamonn O'Connell-2

On 17 Feb 2013, at 08:21, "Eamonn O'Connell" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> At the same time, it seems an easy answer to say VMWare should do it.
>

That is certainly true.

It is an unfortunate side effect of acquiring an open source product that users of the product can think that it is no longer a co-operative open source project, and that their own time and effort is not required to keep developing it.

This is however an understandable position, as you would assume the company acquiring open source teams has some kind of sustainable business model in mind for such. It seems to me that this is often not the case. Some acquisitions of this kind are simply to stake out part of the market, to prevent others from acquiring the same team / dominating a niche, or to "support" revenue generation in other areas of the business. Some such acquisitions are indirect, as in the case of Grails, where SpringSource was bought and Grails was but one small part of the assets. Grails is nice to have, but it very much feels like it was hardly the prime objective of the acquisition.

This is ultimately, in my view, the flaw of free (as in beer) open source. Lots of people will disagree with my views on this, and they are entitled to. To those people I say do it and make a lot of sustainable money out of it, and then come back and show us how. :)

If nobody can charge for the actual use of such code, there is precious little revenue to support large teams and high quality ongoing development and innovation. The money has to come from somewhere, and unless you have a company that wants to bless the world with the ultimate framework for free forever, this is going to have to come from indirect means. I have a natural aversion to "I'll give you X for free and make my money on side effect Y". Call me a cynic.

This is evident in some way in that a lot of effort was spent not long after the acquisition by VMWare on building Cloud Foundry support into Grails. Cloud Foundry (and VMWare licenses and related product support contracts) being the indirect potential revenue stream for Grails. This evidently has not paid off as the team appear to be under-resourced at VMWare.

When revenue is an indirect consequence of a product, it is not a "primary" product of an organisation, as it is being used to sell another product. Therefore, typically, it will be under-resourced even if it is generating significant secondary revenue.

There is another issue too, related to the understandable requests to fix bugs rather than add new features. With limited resources, what should any company do in such a situation? When a product is "mature" it will always have lots of issues, and yet the same resources have to concentrate on moving a product forward, to refresh the product line and keep it competitive. So I can totally understand both sides of that argument.

So with my profoundly negative views out of the way, what's my conclusion?

Community needs to get a lot more active in core Grails.

Marc
~ ~ ~
Marc Palmer
Freelancer (Grails/Groovy/Java/UX)

Grails Plugins: http://grailsrocks.com
Blog: http://www.anyware.co.uk | Résumé: http://www.anyware.co.uk/marc
Contributor @ http://grails.org | Founder @ http://noticelocal.com
Developer @ http://weceem.org | Member @ http://spottymushroom.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/wangjammer5 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

Marc Palmer Local
In reply to this post by thomas fuller

On 17 Feb 2013, at 10:58, Thomas Fuller <[hidden email]> wrote:

> "As the community grows and more enterprises/organization adopts the frameworks they can shift to appstore model by charging users for using/downloading the plugins."
>
> No I think you're missing a few things about the question -- let me elaborate:
>
> 1.) The question was originally discussed on this mailing list (in the original case not by me) and I brought it up again just to see if anyone else was interested more or less in monetizing their plugins and, if so, how they were planning to or actually doing it.
> 2.) You can implement this business model without an app store. There's absolutely nothing stopping a developer from adding licensing software to their plugin and either making the entire plugin proprietary, or following something like a freemium model. To date nobody has done this -- not even VMWare (not publicly at least).
> 3.) If you're going to sell software (as in #2) you're stuck with some options and there's a very good article on this here:
>
> http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/CamelsandRubberDuckies.html
>
> See the section which starts specifically with "The reason I bring this up is because software is priced three ways: free, cheap, and dear.".
>
> The user base for Grails is small, which means option two will be difficult to make much profit on and option three has all sorts of problems associated with it -- namely loooooong sales cycles.
>
> This leaves support and consultancy services.
>

Actually, in my experience it really only leaves consultancy and contract development.

> One thing which I find interesting is that I know of Marc's work and always assumed he saw something I didn't mainly because he had done so much of it. Reading his post says a lot to me and, to a degree, supports the findings of my business test.

I still think there could be an App Store like solution for software components - after all there was previously in Shareware where I made a fair bit of money just from stuff I built in my spare time. Free (beer) open source destroyed all that, and now the mentality among most people is that everything should be free in cost.

There is a minority who are happy and able (within their companies or personally) to pay for components and tools.

However when your customer base is always going to be a minority and you can't charge much, you need a BIG market and/or a lot of products (diminishing returns there).

My blog post and the changes I've made to how I contribute are about me gathering enough data now to show that neither the market size nor the mechanisms (App Store like) exist for me to make money doing that work.

It's pretty sad when you think you could make a pretty simple app for iOS and sell it for £0.69 per copy and make a lot more money, even in that crowded market, than you can off plugins used in major global websites.

Marc
~ ~ ~
Marc Palmer
Freelancer (Grails/Groovy/Java/UX)

Grails Plugins: http://grailsrocks.com
Blog: http://www.anyware.co.uk | Résumé: http://www.anyware.co.uk/marc
Contributor @ http://grails.org | Founder @ http://noticelocal.com
Developer @ http://weceem.org | Member @ http://spottymushroom.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/wangjammer5 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

tomas lin
In reply to this post by thomas fuller
There was a lot of hoopla a few years back when autobase became payware - http://blog.enfranchisedmind.com/2009/10/new-version-autobase-payware/

There was even a comment by someone  who said something along the line of "how can you do this to us? everything autobase is based on is open source, GPL is the devil, GAARRAHGBBARRRGHHH" ( might not be an exact quote ).

So yeah, people who use plugins and don't contribute pretty much suck. 

On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Thomas Fuller <[hidden email]> wrote:
"As the community grows and more enterprises/organization adopts the frameworks they can shift to appstore model by charging users for using/downloading the plugins."

No I think you're missing a few things about the question -- let me elaborate:

1.) The question was originally discussed on this mailing list (in the original case not by me) and I brought it up again just to see if anyone else was interested more or less in monetizing their plugins and, if so, how they were planning to or actually doing it.
2.) You can implement this business model without an app store. There's absolutely nothing stopping a developer from adding licensing software to their plugin and either making the entire plugin proprietary, or following something like a freemium model. To date nobody has done this -- not even VMWare (not publicly at least).
3.) If you're going to sell software (as in #2) you're stuck with some options and there's a very good article on this here:

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/CamelsandRubberDuckies.html

See the section which starts specifically with "The reason I bring this up is because software is priced three ways: free, cheap, and dear.".

The user base for Grails is small, which means option two will be difficult to make much profit on and option three has all sorts of problems associated with it -- namely loooooong sales cycles.

This leaves support and consultancy services.

One thing which I find interesting is that I know of Marc's work and always assumed he saw something I didn't mainly because he had done so much of it. Reading his post says a lot to me and, to a degree, supports the findings of my business test.

Tom


On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 8:15 AM, suryazi <[hidden email]> wrote:
The current situation of professional plugin developers like Marc is
unfortunate yet understandable. In my honest opinion, the lead to support
the developers has to be taken by VMWare itself, as they are the one who are
handling the product and without the active support of the developing
community the product will not sustain long enough and they are going to
lose their initial investment. As the community grows and more
enterprises/organization adopts the frameworks they can shift to appstore
model by charging users for using/downloading the plugins.


thomas fuller wrote
> I can't help but sympathize with Marc.
>
> A few years I attended the Gr8Conf in Copenhagen and I recall some
> laughter
> from a few people in the audience when it was suggested, by me, that an
> app
> store model for Grails might be a nice idea. In my opinion the idea of
> getting people to pay for plugins is still a great one, however it may be
> difficult to charge in this space mainly because, as Marc noted, the
> market
> is small. There are examples of where this does work, just take a look at
> WordPress, to name just one, where some plugins are strictly proprietary
> products, however the number of WP users is much larger than Grails.
>
> In my opinion, the idea of doing open source software development must
> always have a financial reward associated with it -- after all, I went
> into
> business *to make money*. My business test case for writing a Grails
> plugin
> had several questions I was trying to answer and unfortunately those
> answers came back as not very interesting.
>
> I'd like to be able to tell the readers that there's a model that works
> here, unfortunately I just don't see it. Yes it works for VMWare as they
> can support the platform and be the first point of contact for consultancy
> services, but what about the "ecosystem" or the (I hate this word)
> "community"? Back in the 80's Microsoft implemented a strategy whereby
> they
> would go after the top 5% (?) of customers and leave the remainder to
> their
> partners and this worked so well they almost put IBM out of business.
> There
> is no similar strategy here that I can see -- *none*.
>
> Re: "I do remain concerned that there seems to be a distinct lack of large
> companies that use Grails giving back to the community in any tangible
> way.
> I can’t understand this, given the fantastic benefits that Grails
> provides.
> Perhaps people think that because VMWare own it that there is no need to
> provide extra resources?"
>
> It's because 1.) they don't care and 2.) if they do care, there's always
> legal or possibly a department head or someone else to stand in the way.
>
> With only one exception, I always found working at large companies to be
> soul-destroying. Sure I'll do it, but it's just to pay the bills -- the
> real excitement is with startups.
>
> Tom
>
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Marc Palmer &lt;

> marc@.co

> &gt; wrote:
>
>> :
>>
>> > *Marc you left your Mark on Grails.*
>> > +1 to that
>>
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Thanks. I'm still around though :)
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>
>>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>
>>
>>





--
View this message in context: http://grails.1312388.n4.nabble.com/Marc-Palmer-announcement-tp4641446p4641462.html
Sent from the Grails - user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

suryazi
May be out of context but how Ruby on Rails is surviving so long (financially) with all the active plugin development?
 
tomas lin wrote
There was a lot of hoopla a few years back when autobase became payware -
http://blog.enfranchisedmind.com/2009/10/new-version-autobase-payware/ .

There was even a comment by someone  who said something along the line of
"how can you do this to us? everything autobase is based on is open source,
GPL is the devil, GAARRAHGBBARRRGHHH" ( might not be an exact quote ).

So yeah, people who use plugins and don't contribute pretty much suck.

On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Thomas Fuller <[hidden email]>wrote:

> "As the community grows and more enterprises/organization adopts the
> frameworks they can shift to appstore model by charging users for
> using/downloading the plugins."
>
> No I think you're missing a few things about the question -- let me
> elaborate:
>
> 1.) The question was originally discussed on this mailing list (in the
> original case *not* by me) and I brought it up again just to see if
> anyone else was interested more or less in monetizing their plugins and, if
> so, how they were planning to or actually doing it.
> 2.) You can implement this business model without an app store. There's
> absolutely nothing stopping a developer from adding licensing software to
> their plugin and either making the entire plugin proprietary, or following
> something like a freemium model. To date nobody has done this -- not even
> VMWare (not publicly at least).
> 3.) If you're going to sell software (as in #2) you're stuck with some
> options and there's a very good article on this here:
>
> http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/CamelsandRubberDuckies.html
>
> See the section which starts specifically with "The reason I bring this up
> is because software is priced three ways: free, cheap, and dear.".
>
> The user base for Grails is small, which means option two will be
> difficult to make much profit on and option three has all sorts of problems
> associated with it -- namely loooooong sales cycles.
>
> This leaves support and consultancy services.
>
> One thing which I find interesting is that I know of Marc's work and
> always assumed he saw something I didn't mainly because he had done so much
> of it. Reading his post says a lot to me and, to a degree, supports the
> findings of my business test.
>
> Tom
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 8:15 AM, suryazi <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> The current situation of professional plugin developers like Marc is
>> unfortunate yet understandable. In my honest opinion, the lead to support
>> the developers has to be taken by VMWare itself, as they are the one who
>> are
>> handling the product and without the active support of the developing
>> community the product will not sustain long enough and they are going to
>> lose their initial investment. As the community grows and more
>> enterprises/organization adopts the frameworks they can shift to appstore
>> model by charging users for using/downloading the plugins.
>>
>>
>> thomas fuller wrote
>> > I can't help but sympathize with Marc.
>> >
>> > A few years I attended the Gr8Conf in Copenhagen and I recall some
>> > laughter
>> > from a few people in the audience when it was suggested, by me, that an
>> > app
>> > store model for Grails might be a nice idea. In my opinion the idea of
>> > getting people to pay for plugins is still a great one, however it may
>> be
>> > difficult to charge in this space mainly because, as Marc noted, the
>> > market
>> > is small. There are examples of where this does work, just take a look
>> at
>> > WordPress, to name just one, where some plugins are strictly proprietary
>> > products, however the number of WP users is much larger than Grails.
>> >
>> > In my opinion, the idea of doing open source software development must
>> > always have a financial reward associated with it -- after all, I went
>> > into
>> > business *to make money*. My business test case for writing a Grails
>> > plugin
>> > had several questions I was trying to answer and unfortunately those
>> > answers came back as not very interesting.
>> >
>> > I'd like to be able to tell the readers that there's a model that works
>> > here, unfortunately I just don't see it. Yes it works for VMWare as they
>> > can support the platform and be the first point of contact for
>> consultancy
>> > services, but what about the "ecosystem" or the (I hate this word)
>> > "community"? Back in the 80's Microsoft implemented a strategy whereby
>> > they
>> > would go after the top 5% (?) of customers and leave the remainder to
>> > their
>> > partners and this worked so well they almost put IBM out of business.
>> > There
>> > is no similar strategy here that I can see -- *none*.
>> >
>> > Re: "I do remain concerned that there seems to be a distinct lack of
>> large
>> > companies that use Grails giving back to the community in any tangible
>> > way.
>> > I can’t understand this, given the fantastic benefits that Grails
>> > provides.
>> > Perhaps people think that because VMWare own it that there is no need to
>> > provide extra resources?"
>> >
>> > It's because 1.) they don't care and 2.) if they do care, there's always
>> > legal or possibly a department head or someone else to stand in the way.
>> >
>> > With only one exception, I always found working at large companies to be
>> > soul-destroying. Sure I'll do it, but it's just to pay the bills -- the
>> > real excitement is with startups.
>> >
>> > Tom
>> >
>> > On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Marc Palmer <
>>
>> > marc@.co
>>
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> >> :
>> >>
>> >> > *Marc you left your Mark on Grails.*
>> >> > +1 to that
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Thanks. I'm still around though :)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>> >>
>> >>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://grails.1312388.n4.nabble.com/Marc-Palmer-announcement-tp4641446p4641462.html
>> Sent from the Grails - user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>
>>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>
>>
>>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

graham
In reply to this post by Marc Palmer Local
Perhaps there is a real case for Marc and a few other plugin developers to set up a plugin app store.
Certainly as a commercial developer using Grails I would have no issue with paying for code, after all I pay for IDEA (because at the moment I feel it is the best IDE) but, to be honest, I'm not too sure how much I would be willing to pay and whether a one-off or annual charge; personally a one-off is easier but then if on-going support is offered then an annual charge would be fine - that is how we sell our software, one purchase and annual maintenance. But the code would need to be fairly bug-free, well defined and documented - but not absurdly so and in any event plugins often have quite a restricted behaviour so that should not be a major cost.
I do have a general issue with the current approach to Grails plugins: to an extent they are an if not much- then certainly fairly-vaunted part of the Grails system but when you come to look at the list of plugins in detail, many are very old, plainly not supported and of dubious value - while I appreciate the source is available and I could fix them etc. myself it is often easier and quicker to write them oneself.

graham
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

suryazi
I fully agree with you Graham. "Help us to Help you better".

Another idea which came to my mind is that of incubators. I found this approach with Shiro, which was initially incubated as JSecurity and later on became a company itself called Stormpath/Katasoft. Cannot this approach be applied to plugins by VMWare.

graham wrote
Perhaps there is a real case for Marc and a few other plugin developers to set up a plugin app store.
Certainly as a commercial developer using Grails I would have no issue with paying for code, after all I pay for IDEA (because at the moment I feel it is the best IDE) but, to be honest, I'm not too sure how much I would be willing to pay and whether a one-off or annual charge; personally a one-off is easier but then if on-going support is offered then an annual charge would be fine - that is how we sell our software, one purchase and annual maintenance. But the code would need to be fairly bug-free, well defined and documented - but not absurdly so and in any event plugins often have quite a restricted behaviour so that should not be a major cost.
I do have a general issue with the current approach to Grails plugins: to an extent they are an if not much- then certainly fairly-vaunted part of the Grails system but when you come to look at the list of plugins in detail, many are very old, plainly not supported and of dubious value - while I appreciate the source is available and I could fix them etc. myself it is often easier and quicker to write them oneself.

graham
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

Ingo Wiarda
In reply to this post by graham
On 17.02.2013 14:34, graham wrote:
> Perhaps there is a real case for Marc and a few other plugin developers to
> set up a plugin app store.
> Certainly as a commercial developer using Grails I would have no issue with
> paying for code, after all I pay for IDEA (because at the moment I feel it
> is the best IDE)
I also have no problem paying for code - but somehow it feels different
paying for a standalone tool (IDEA) than for a plugin in a free and open
source framework.
If every plugin in the Grails plugin repository came with a price tag,
the appeal of this repository would be diminished,
and the motivation for participation might also change.

> but, to be honest, I'm not too sure how much I would be
> willing to pay and whether a one-off or annual charge; personally a one-off
> is easier but then if on-going support is offered then an annual charge
> would be fine - that is how we sell our software, one purchase and annual
> maintenance.
In the case of our open source CMS, @work we sell the customization and
support,
and the customers pay for their proprietary extensions (if any) as well
as (some of) the open source work,
if they need new features. (Perhaps having a
Grails-Plugin-Feature-Kickstarter page could work...)
And yet I feel  there is  a problem with "giving back" to Grails in
general and the
developers of the handful of core plugins we use (other than
contributing to the
amount of open source code based on Grails and thus extending the reach
of this
awesome framework by a tiny amount).

> I do have a general issue with the current approach to Grails plugins: to an
> extent they are an if not much- then certainly fairly-vaunted part of the
> Grails system but when you come to look at the list of plugins in detail,
> many are very old, plainly not supported and of dubious value - while I
> appreciate the source is available and I could fix them etc. myself it is
> often easier and quicker to write them oneself.
Also, many plugins are rather thin wrappers around other libraries,
sometimes
even with different licenses which then get silently adopted into the
Apache 2.0 licensed plugin...
example (for the licensing issue, not the thin-wrapper): jQuery is MIT,
jQuery-Plugin is Apache.
It would be nice if wrapper-plugins would state the original authors and
license alongside the
plugin authors.

And indeed, often it is easier* to use
dependencies{ current.library} than
plugins { wrapped.old.library}

Ingo



* always keeping an eye on avoiding the not-in-house trap ;)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

graham
Ingo Wiarda wrote
If every plugin in the Grails plugin repository came with a price tag,
the appeal of this repository would be diminished,
and the motivation for participation might also change.
I certainly didn't mean that...my thoughts, and I am not trying to put words into others' mouths, is that some very useful, general, and requiring on-going support plugins would be charged for - but let evolution rule that: if there was a plugin-store and nobody bought half of them, those would get dropped fairly quickly I imagine.
But while I can see the open-sourceness of Grails and why, perhaps, that should extend to plugins one shouldn't forget that those working on Grails are, I believe, getting paid a salary - not by the Grails users, however.
For example: I have a few things that I may make into plugins for our own purposes and in a couple of cases could be generally useful; they could be released as plugins, but could I then spend the time and effort to maintain them over and beyond what our own requirements are ? That seems to me the crux of the issue, and perhaps why many plugins are not continued with - and perhaps it is a failing of Grails users in general - that having found a plugin that looks interesting they take it and use it but never feed back any later changes.
I do not have very much experience of open-source environments so I don't know how others do work and maybe there is something different about Grails and the average Grails user but perhaps in this case the attempt to directly monetise the work should be made ?

graham

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

Marc Palmer Local
In reply to this post by suryazi

On 17 Feb 2013, at 12:05, suryazi <[hidden email]> wrote:

> May be out of context but how Ruby on Rails is surviving so long
> (financially) with all the active plugin

... Completely different market for rails and different user demographic.

IMO grails' closeness to java and j2ee has ultimately been counterproductive on the contributions front.

Rails was trendy early on and appealed to lots of small independent developers who were very active (vs. java enterprise users who aren't renowned for they open source contribution) and the framework was driven by real business requirements in popular web services.

Marc
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

Marc Palmer Local
In reply to this post by Ingo Wiarda
On 17 Feb 2013, at 15:23, Ingo Wiarda <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 17.02.2013 14:34, graham wrote:
>> Perhaps there is a real case for Marc and a few other plugin developers to
>> set up a plugin app store.
>> Certainly as a commercial developer using Grails I would have no issue with
>> paying for code, after all I pay for IDEA (because at the moment I feel it
>> is the best IDE)
> I also have no problem paying for code - but somehow it feels different
> paying for a standalone tool (IDEA) than for a plugin in a free and open source framework.
> If every plugin in the Grails plugin repository came with a price tag,
> the appeal of this repository would be diminished,
> and the motivation for participation might also change.
>
>

Don't spend any more time thinking about it because it will never be a viable source of income unless the grails user base grows by at least an order of magnitude.

However as my blog post said, you're screwed selling stuff to devs, and totally screwed if you started out not charging and try to charge later.

If I thought for a second I could make good money selling plugins I'd be doing it. All the data I have gathered via the various efforts I have tried shows that this just isn't going to happen due to the constrained market size.

I don't think you could do this with rails either though

The real problem is the assumption that we shouldn't pay for stuff. We screw ourselves over!

Marc
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

wwwclaes
> The real problem is the assumption that we shouldn't pay for stuff. We screw ourselves over!

I'm thinking there is an initial barrier to start paying that has to be crossed.

Earlier in this thread I saw a comparison with mobile App Stores, looking at my own behaviour there, I was rather hesitant to start paying even small amounts but once I got my VISA registered and my first purchase completed, the press on the Buy button has been rather frequent. It's not all about money, it's also a new routine.

I don't believe in a market for commercial plugins. I want to believe in a market for support and development related to plugins. I think that would be great for the future and quality of the plugins and as such for Grails.

Marc, if your Kickstarter does not reach its goal, would you consider transforming it into something smaller just to get things going? At least we currently have 78 people with the finger on the Buy button, ready to make that initial purchase.

Actually, that will soon be 79 once I cross that barrier myself ;-)

/Claes
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

Sebastien ARBOGAST
I wouldn't say that the problem comes from the fact that people are not used to pay anymore and want everything for free. Free is also what allows people to step on the shoulders of their peers. To take something that already existed, improve it and make it available to others. And that's good, we should keep that. The fact that you are not able to maintain your plugins on your free time is not a big deal: those who need evolution can upgrade it themselves.
The real problem for me is one of sponsorship: there are some people that are benefiting from the Grails ecosystem: training companies, book publishers and first among them: VMWare/Springsource. They are the ones who reap financial benefits from a dynamic ecosystem and all the contributors of something like Grails. So I think they should really take their responsibilities and hire big contributors like Marc for their work. Because if they don't invest in their own community, more people like Marc will keep getting discouraged and the ecosystem will rot in place.

Unless it's already their intention...

---
Sébastien Arbogast
http://sebastien-arbogast.com


2013/2/17 Claes Svensson <[hidden email]>
> The real problem is the assumption that we shouldn't pay for stuff. We screw ourselves over!

I'm thinking there is an initial barrier to start paying that has to be crossed.

Earlier in this thread I saw a comparison with mobile App Stores, looking at my own behaviour there, I was rather hesitant to start paying even small amounts but once I got my VISA registered and my first purchase completed, the press on the Buy button has been rather frequent. It's not all about money, it's also a new routine.

I don't believe in a market for commercial plugins. I want to believe in a market for support and development related to plugins. I think that would be great for the future and quality of the plugins and as such for Grails.

Marc, if your Kickstarter does not reach its goal, would you consider transforming it into something smaller just to get things going? At least we currently have 78 people with the finger on the Buy button, ready to make that initial purchase.

Actually, that will soon be 79 once I cross that barrier myself ;-)

/Claes

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Marc Palmer announcement

thomas fuller
In reply to this post by Marc Palmer Local
Re: "Don't spend any more time thinking about it because it will never be a viable source of income unless the grails user base grows by at least an order of magnitude."

I'd argue it would need to grow by many orders of magnitude.

Tom

On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 6:48 PM, Marc Palmer <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 17 Feb 2013, at 15:23, Ingo Wiarda <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 17.02.2013 14:34, graham wrote:
>> Perhaps there is a real case for Marc and a few other plugin developers to
>> set up a plugin app store.
>> Certainly as a commercial developer using Grails I would have no issue with
>> paying for code, after all I pay for IDEA (because at the moment I feel it
>> is the best IDE)
> I also have no problem paying for code - but somehow it feels different
> paying for a standalone tool (IDEA) than for a plugin in a free and open source framework.
> If every plugin in the Grails plugin repository came with a price tag,
> the appeal of this repository would be diminished,
> and the motivation for participation might also change.
>
>

Don't spend any more time thinking about it because it will never be a viable source of income unless the grails user base grows by at least an order of magnitude.

However as my blog post said, you're screwed selling stuff to devs, and totally screwed if you started out not charging and try to charge later.

If I thought for a second I could make good money selling plugins I'd be doing it. All the data I have gathered via the various efforts I have tried shows that this just isn't going to happen due to the constrained market size.

I don't think you could do this with rails either though

The real problem is the assumption that we shouldn't pay for stuff. We screw ourselves over!

Marc
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email



123