[REBOL] Re: Licensing, components
From: jason::cunliffe::verizon::net at: 19-Sep-2002 2:02
Thanks. I really appreciate your post.
Fascinating and thorough.
Good luck with your business...
> RAD. The ability to develop a [relatively] complex GUI-based application
> without being forced to use a database component from company B, an imaging
> module from company C, etc is a godsend. Everything can be done in REBOL
> and it can be done quickly.
Good points on RAD and also the UI cross-platform dsictibution and documentation
simplicty. One that that should be very prominent on http://rebol.com
> As for "made with encap", here we get interesting. In the niche industry I
> am targeting the UI is *the* selling point of my app and I do *not* want my
> VB and C based competitors to know "how it was done and how so quick".
> Encap, for me, is not only the means by which the source code is protected
> but also the means by which the "production process" is protected.
Yes it is an interesting point. I suspected this..
This was long held truism of much Amiga software, including the revolutionary
Video Toaster for some years. People had to keep it secret so clients would not
get nervous and/or try to drop reduce the budget.
Of course I'd love to hear more here about your application. Can you describe it
better in general or Rebol terms without revealing too much to your potential
You mention Medical Imaging.. what quantity of image data are your handling, how
big are the files, how fast is it, format?
> This *commercial* consideration may conflict with my *hobbyist* instincts
> to tell the world about REBOL, but I figure that spending time trying to
> sell REBOL-based applications is more beneficial to RT (and me) than
> talking to end-users about a particular deployment technology. Folks are
> interested in what your application can do, not what it is written in.
This is very true.
> Competitors *are* interested in what it is written in as they can then
> market against it (eg. "that REBOL app over there is really just an
> interpreted script, while our app is a highly optimised C executable",
> etc). Sales prospects are rather taken with the concept of a single,
> "optimised" 550K executable and no supporting DLL's.
I think we all are :-)
> > ftpgadget is the only application that I am aware of that is encapped.
> There are others, like mine, that are sold via channels other than the
> internet. I have just come back from a 5-day trade fair where my encap'ed
> demo was seen by hundreds of sales prospects, many of whom do not even have
> an email address let alone buy software over the internet.
Interesting. What kind of physuical package do you sell?
Does this mean your prudct is also not network-oriented either?
> Note that this fee is a yearly fee and is applied against the 10% owed. ie.
> if I sell $8,000 worth of software in a year then I owe RT $800 less $499.
> While I don't suggest the royalty scheme is the best way to gain large
> developer support, it does have the advantage of a low entry cost ($499)
> and like any franchise (eg. Macdonald's) if the franchise does well then RT
> does well and the developer still retains 90%.
Glad you raised this. The big ongoing debate here is how to stimulate developer
needs and growth as well as profitable REBOL sales.
Any more thoughts on that?
> > What improvements/changes do you recommend for Encap?
> Ability to change icons (it comes embedded with the standard "R" icons at
> 16x16, 32x32 and 48x48) and "Version" text. While other tools can be used
> to [interactively] modify the encapped executable, it would be better if
> encap excepted scripted parameters to do this (ie. a simple and complete
> build process).
> Sample install / uninstall scripts that handle pathing, icons, registry
> entries, etc. While I don't expect the likes of "Install Shield", I do
> expect an installer that prompts for an installation directory and places
> an icon on the user's desktop.
What kind of dalog do you have with RT?
Have you directly suggested improvements like these to them?
> -Does Encap work across platforms?
> Each platform requires it's own version of encap.
> -How do you control that?
> Purchase encap for each platform you intend to market for. Note that higher
> sales will effectively let you obtain encap on other platforms "for free".
> eg. $10,000 in sales covers the cost of encap for two platforms, even if
> most sales occurred on only one platform.
Sorry I don't quite follow your point..
What do you think about an attractive bundle Encap price?
Any 4 platforms for $ abc?
What about enabling limited trial/demo options for Encap?
> - Client and end-user reactions to the product?
> They love the UI of the application and don't know [or care] that it was
> written with REBOL.
Does anyone else?