04-08-2022, 09:53 AM
Hi Mark,
Yes, that's what I was afraid of.
I know there will be new functionalities, and that's exciting.
However, this is quite typical of Livecode products.
I'm using many other products, and very few of them have that philosophy.
And I believe that it plays a large part in the lack of adoption of LiveCode.
The most successful products I know (without talking about open source projects, of course) Ex: Maya, Adobe, and Dropbox, do not separate their products and complicate the thinking.
Maya, for example, tried this approach by having plugins or different versions. It was a failure.
Adobe was intentionally splitting their products, Illustrator, Photoshop, Indesign, etc... With significant overlaps in functionalities. You had to buy many products and juggle between licenses and functionalities.
It failed, and they now offer all of them as a complete package. It still annoying to use different software, but that kinda makes sense.
When they announce new exciting stuff, it's usually available for their existing users, with some nuances, of course. But this is generally more about the resources. More data.
They will never have a tiny photoshop and a photoshop on steroids. It's photoshop with all in it.
I believe it is more beneficial to have a product that is cost-effective and grows in functionality without increasing its cost.
You profit by increasing your client base, encouraging them to use more resources, not by charging them more for the tool that will let them use your resources more.
After all, if I succeed (and I will succeed faster with full functionalities), I will want a plan with more data, right?
I don't think your strategy is good, but hey, it is yours, and I respect it.
I merely provide my 2 cent opinion, and I hope it will influence you.
Phil
Yes, that's what I was afraid of.
I know there will be new functionalities, and that's exciting.
However, this is quite typical of Livecode products.
I'm using many other products, and very few of them have that philosophy.
And I believe that it plays a large part in the lack of adoption of LiveCode.
The most successful products I know (without talking about open source projects, of course) Ex: Maya, Adobe, and Dropbox, do not separate their products and complicate the thinking.
Maya, for example, tried this approach by having plugins or different versions. It was a failure.
Adobe was intentionally splitting their products, Illustrator, Photoshop, Indesign, etc... With significant overlaps in functionalities. You had to buy many products and juggle between licenses and functionalities.
It failed, and they now offer all of them as a complete package. It still annoying to use different software, but that kinda makes sense.
When they announce new exciting stuff, it's usually available for their existing users, with some nuances, of course. But this is generally more about the resources. More data.
They will never have a tiny photoshop and a photoshop on steroids. It's photoshop with all in it.
I believe it is more beneficial to have a product that is cost-effective and grows in functionality without increasing its cost.
You profit by increasing your client base, encouraging them to use more resources, not by charging them more for the tool that will let them use your resources more.
After all, if I succeed (and I will succeed faster with full functionalities), I will want a plan with more data, right?
I don't think your strategy is good, but hey, it is yours, and I respect it.
I merely provide my 2 cent opinion, and I hope it will influence you.
Phil