Creating applications for sale.
-
I agree with you to a point. However, there needs to be some way of protecting software you develop. Say you wrote Flappy Bird. Is it fair that anyone can come along and make a game that looks and feels just the same, and makes money out of it, and all you can protect is the name (which is why we have Floppy Bird, Flappy Bat etc.)
newton.saber wrote:
it is unlikely a large company like microsoft would purchase such an application. They'd probably just build it themselves.
Quite the opposite, in fact. Big companies like Apple, Microsoft etc. tend to buy up companies with ideas, rather than developing it themselves. Even MS Word, they hired the programmers of another WP program to develop one for them. the V part of VB was bought from outside. and Minecraft. So while they may not buy the software, they may well buy the company!
PooperPig - Coming Soon
Very good points and I agree with you about Microsoft possibly buying the company. Also, it is frustrating such as in the case of Flappy Bird where there were a million knock-offs. However, I believe if Flappy Bird hadn't been abandoned then the original creator would've been able to fight those -- of course that means legal action and that's a time-waster. However, I believe if the original creator hadn't given up on it then others wouldn't have been as quick to try to steal feeling the compulsion of law against them. For example, Super Mario Bros doesn't have near as many knock offs -- or at least none of them really ever became more popular than the original. But, again I agree with you that real creators are somewhat crushed between the thieves and the patent trolls. It's a difficult challenge.
-
bcp? SSIS? I think even 45 minutes is too long.
I would never provide either of these to a non-technical end user as a solution. Considering the maintenance and permissions required along with always having to know both the source and destination. Neither of these would be a viable solution. They also would not provide an easy "wizard like" way to apply custom filters and rules to generate separate exports. Nor would they give the users an easy way to view the results before exporting. bcp is great as long as you always know your source and destination. Both the source and destination also need to "look the same". SSIS in some situations may work if this were strictly ETL and was being used/maintained by the IS staff. However, as a non-technical end user environment. This would never work. Here again, you would need to know the source and destination. If anything were to change, it would require a change to the package. It's more of a "right tool for the job" kind of deal. The application I created allows you to easily apply rules and/or filters to data. It allows a user to create different exports from the same source data. The application does not care what the source or destination are and the size of the file is a non-issue as well. If you are a technical user, you can provide column widths and data types but it's not necessary or required. You can import from any source and export that information to any source (n) times. Thank you for the feedback.
I hate users. Not all of them, just the ones who talk.CP member: Al Einstien
-
Submit your program or idea and check out Windows Store.
Of one Essence is the human race thus has Creation put the base One Limb impacted is sufficient For all Others to feel the Mace (Saadi )
I would like to thank everyone for their feedback. A lot of people brought up ideas that I hadn't thought of before. I think my best course of action would be to finish up the application and offer it up to beta testers and see how much (if any) interest there is in the marketplace. Thanks again!
I hate users. Not all of them, just the ones who talk.CP member: Al Einstien
-
I agree with you to a point. However, there needs to be some way of protecting software you develop. Say you wrote Flappy Bird. Is it fair that anyone can come along and make a game that looks and feels just the same, and makes money out of it, and all you can protect is the name (which is why we have Floppy Bird, Flappy Bat etc.)
newton.saber wrote:
it is unlikely a large company like microsoft would purchase such an application. They'd probably just build it themselves.
Quite the opposite, in fact. Big companies like Apple, Microsoft etc. tend to buy up companies with ideas, rather than developing it themselves. Even MS Word, they hired the programmers of another WP program to develop one for them. the V part of VB was bought from outside. and Minecraft. So while they may not buy the software, they may well buy the company!
PooperPig - Coming Soon
Check out Willams arcade game Joust to discover where Flappy Bird got its idea.
-
Hello all. I've been doing a bunch of looking around but I can't really find an answer to my question. I would like to create an application written for Windows using the .NET framework and WPF with an SQL Server backend. I've read online that creating and selling your own software can be very expensive. You will need to trademark your idea and apply for a patent in order to make sure you retain all the rights. You will also most likely need to retain a lawyer to make sure all your t's are crossed. So, considering all the above, I have 2 questions. Does anyone know of a "beginners" guide for creating and selling your own software? If I just wanted to sell it outright retaining no rights. How could I market the application to a company like Microsoft without them just taking the idea and developing it on their own? Thanks all for reading this. I appreciate any help.
I hate users. Not all of them, just the ones who talk.CP member: Al Einstien
OMalleyW wrote:
If I just wanted to sell it outright retaining no rights. How could I market the application to a company like Microsoft without them just taking the idea and developing it on their own?
Let them come to you. Build a profitable company around your idea to get their attention, and protect it so they can't reproduce it on their own. Then sell the company to them.
We can program with only 1's, but if all you've got are zeros, you've got nothing.
-
Very good points and I agree with you about Microsoft possibly buying the company. Also, it is frustrating such as in the case of Flappy Bird where there were a million knock-offs. However, I believe if Flappy Bird hadn't been abandoned then the original creator would've been able to fight those -- of course that means legal action and that's a time-waster. However, I believe if the original creator hadn't given up on it then others wouldn't have been as quick to try to steal feeling the compulsion of law against them. For example, Super Mario Bros doesn't have near as many knock offs -- or at least none of them really ever became more popular than the original. But, again I agree with you that real creators are somewhat crushed between the thieves and the patent trolls. It's a difficult challenge.
Look. We write software to make a profit, and because we enjoy it. I am a libertarian, I believe in property rights above all else. But I also believe that patents should be a LOT harder to get. WD-40 did not patent their product, and it helps them because it would have expired long ago. If a product, like flappy bird, is easy to reproduce/knock off, then it DESERVES to be knocked off. It served its purpose, and made the author rich. Move on. I do NOT believe in software patents. They get Copyrights. They are written. Hardware Patents. Oh Yeah! But it gets crazy. For example Ice Ice Baby turned out to rip off someone elses tune. He gets NOTHING from sales of that song. This is where it gets blurry. Do we protect software the same way? Someone makes a word processor, and EVERY WORD PROCESSOR (because it has the same basic "beat") is now infringing? (Copyright laws COULD do that), despite Borland winning the Look and Feel case against Lotus! If taking an idea to its very end scares you as much as this idea scares me, then it is probably a bad idea to be applying it this way. Personal Quip: Most doors in a restroom use a little SLIDER device to lock/unlock the door. How did Apple Patent that SAME CONCEPT in a different form factor (slide to unlock)??? Knock offs only work when the core brand was successful. I HOPE FOR YOU that your idea is so good that you get THOUSANDS of knockoffs! :-)
-
Look. We write software to make a profit, and because we enjoy it. I am a libertarian, I believe in property rights above all else. But I also believe that patents should be a LOT harder to get. WD-40 did not patent their product, and it helps them because it would have expired long ago. If a product, like flappy bird, is easy to reproduce/knock off, then it DESERVES to be knocked off. It served its purpose, and made the author rich. Move on. I do NOT believe in software patents. They get Copyrights. They are written. Hardware Patents. Oh Yeah! But it gets crazy. For example Ice Ice Baby turned out to rip off someone elses tune. He gets NOTHING from sales of that song. This is where it gets blurry. Do we protect software the same way? Someone makes a word processor, and EVERY WORD PROCESSOR (because it has the same basic "beat") is now infringing? (Copyright laws COULD do that), despite Borland winning the Look and Feel case against Lotus! If taking an idea to its very end scares you as much as this idea scares me, then it is probably a bad idea to be applying it this way. Personal Quip: Most doors in a restroom use a little SLIDER device to lock/unlock the door. How did Apple Patent that SAME CONCEPT in a different form factor (slide to unlock)??? Knock offs only work when the core brand was successful. I HOPE FOR YOU that your idea is so good that you get THOUSANDS of knockoffs! :-)
I agree 100%. At most you could copyright a specific brand but not an idea who's origin is generic in both concept and application. Ideally this application will evolve into a much more complete plug-in for both existing and new ETL/Data Warehousing solutions. Thanks for your reply!
I hate users. Not all of them, just the ones who talk.CP member: Al Einstien
-
Look. We write software to make a profit, and because we enjoy it. I am a libertarian, I believe in property rights above all else. But I also believe that patents should be a LOT harder to get. WD-40 did not patent their product, and it helps them because it would have expired long ago. If a product, like flappy bird, is easy to reproduce/knock off, then it DESERVES to be knocked off. It served its purpose, and made the author rich. Move on. I do NOT believe in software patents. They get Copyrights. They are written. Hardware Patents. Oh Yeah! But it gets crazy. For example Ice Ice Baby turned out to rip off someone elses tune. He gets NOTHING from sales of that song. This is where it gets blurry. Do we protect software the same way? Someone makes a word processor, and EVERY WORD PROCESSOR (because it has the same basic "beat") is now infringing? (Copyright laws COULD do that), despite Borland winning the Look and Feel case against Lotus! If taking an idea to its very end scares you as much as this idea scares me, then it is probably a bad idea to be applying it this way. Personal Quip: Most doors in a restroom use a little SLIDER device to lock/unlock the door. How did Apple Patent that SAME CONCEPT in a different form factor (slide to unlock)??? Knock offs only work when the core brand was successful. I HOPE FOR YOU that your idea is so good that you get THOUSANDS of knockoffs! :-)
Great input. Really great example about the slider device on restroom as an analogy to apple's lame patent on slide to unlock. That's my point too, the less patents the better really. If you make something great people will buy it...and steal it. :D
-
I would like to thank everyone for their feedback. A lot of people brought up ideas that I hadn't thought of before. I think my best course of action would be to finish up the application and offer it up to beta testers and see how much (if any) interest there is in the marketplace. Thanks again!
I hate users. Not all of them, just the ones who talk.CP member: Al Einstien
If you offer it to beta testers. Please make it so THAT version will timeout. Also, COMMIT to: 1) Ensuring there is a real version they can get to 2) If you FAIL, promise and deliver on making it opensource, on GitHub or Here... The point being... The only thing that scares me about buying software, is what happens when the vendor goes under, and I get a new machine and the software will not install because of it (I use CFI ShellToys), when he closed shop, he released a non-protected version, and thanked us all. I emailed him to get him to OpenSource it, so it could live on, but his email was already taken down. Opportunity lost. I paid decent money, and it still works, which is good. And upgrading my hard drive no longer causes it to fail :-) Anyways, with a commitment like that, you are likely to get more traction. If it is worthwhile, you will profit. If knockoffs come, they have been forewarned that they have LITTLE VALUE if you close up shop, because THEY will be forced to compete with Free. And the Barrier to entry and the Risk to the consumer is greatly reduced. Especially a corporate user who does not want to maintain your code, but might feel compelled if they have to. Again, I hope THOUSANDS of knockoffs show up because of your success...
-
Very good points and I agree with you about Microsoft possibly buying the company. Also, it is frustrating such as in the case of Flappy Bird where there were a million knock-offs. However, I believe if Flappy Bird hadn't been abandoned then the original creator would've been able to fight those -- of course that means legal action and that's a time-waster. However, I believe if the original creator hadn't given up on it then others wouldn't have been as quick to try to steal feeling the compulsion of law against them. For example, Super Mario Bros doesn't have near as many knock offs -- or at least none of them really ever became more popular than the original. But, again I agree with you that real creators are somewhat crushed between the thieves and the patent trolls. It's a difficult challenge.
In very simple terms: a trademark protects the names of things, e.g. Flappy Bird. a patent protects an invention. a copyright protects the expression of an idea, but not the idea itself. The U.S. courts, at least in the case of Lotus 123 ruled that look and feel can be part of the expression of an idea, but exactly where the line gets drawn is extremely fuzzy. In the U.S. at least, you can claim a copyright or a trademark without actually registering it with the government and still be protected by law, though those protections are not as strong as those actually registered.
-
Hello all. I've been doing a bunch of looking around but I can't really find an answer to my question. I would like to create an application written for Windows using the .NET framework and WPF with an SQL Server backend. I've read online that creating and selling your own software can be very expensive. You will need to trademark your idea and apply for a patent in order to make sure you retain all the rights. You will also most likely need to retain a lawyer to make sure all your t's are crossed. So, considering all the above, I have 2 questions. Does anyone know of a "beginners" guide for creating and selling your own software? If I just wanted to sell it outright retaining no rights. How could I market the application to a company like Microsoft without them just taking the idea and developing it on their own? Thanks all for reading this. I appreciate any help.
I hate users. Not all of them, just the ones who talk.CP member: Al Einstien