Testimony [Was: BCGControlBar goes commercial]
-
The recent move of the BCG library into the commercial realm has sparked many reactions here. I, personally, am amazed that Stas had kept BCG freeware as long as he has. The thing to understand is that in a one-man-operation such as that which Stas has created, is very difficult to maintain. It only took 6 months from my initial release of WndTabs in February '99 until my e-mail support folder was growing at over 50 mails a months. Quickly enough, though - as the user base grew - so did the number of mails. Looking at that folder now (a year and a half worth of mail), it is 1450 items, at 25394K. That's 2.5GB of mail to read and write! And if you look at the "other" stuff, like letters to the hosting company, letters regarding interoperability, etc, that figure quickly climbs to an unthinkable 4.5GB! It used to be that when a program would go from free to shareware, I'd get upset and stop using it. This is a childish way of thinking, but unfortunately, many programmers still feel that way. I assure you that a one-man-operation is a great personal sacrifice. Unlike big open-source projects, there's no one else to answer all the e-mails, there's no one else to fix the bugs, integrate the fixes, update the documentation, and a million other things. You are ultimately torn between your desire to keep your project alive and the need for compensation. So I say: We should applaud Stas for his great effort, and for also being fair about his fair pricing scheme for the Shareware and Freeware programmers that helped make BCG what it is today. -Oz --- Grab WndTabs from http://www.wndtabs.com to make your VC++ experience that much more comfortable...
-
The recent move of the BCG library into the commercial realm has sparked many reactions here. I, personally, am amazed that Stas had kept BCG freeware as long as he has. The thing to understand is that in a one-man-operation such as that which Stas has created, is very difficult to maintain. It only took 6 months from my initial release of WndTabs in February '99 until my e-mail support folder was growing at over 50 mails a months. Quickly enough, though - as the user base grew - so did the number of mails. Looking at that folder now (a year and a half worth of mail), it is 1450 items, at 25394K. That's 2.5GB of mail to read and write! And if you look at the "other" stuff, like letters to the hosting company, letters regarding interoperability, etc, that figure quickly climbs to an unthinkable 4.5GB! It used to be that when a program would go from free to shareware, I'd get upset and stop using it. This is a childish way of thinking, but unfortunately, many programmers still feel that way. I assure you that a one-man-operation is a great personal sacrifice. Unlike big open-source projects, there's no one else to answer all the e-mails, there's no one else to fix the bugs, integrate the fixes, update the documentation, and a million other things. You are ultimately torn between your desire to keep your project alive and the need for compensation. So I say: We should applaud Stas for his great effort, and for also being fair about his fair pricing scheme for the Shareware and Freeware programmers that helped make BCG what it is today. -Oz --- Grab WndTabs from http://www.wndtabs.com to make your VC++ experience that much more comfortable...
I am extremely grateful that Stas has contributed his library to CodeProject, but we now face a problem. The basic tenant of the Code Project is that we are all here to share our thoughts, our knowledge and most importantly our code with each other freely. Every time there is the merest sniff of commercialism in an article it is savaged and I get a hundred emails damning my black soul for allowing it near the site. BCGControlBar is free for students and for educational use. The previous versions of BCGControlBar are also still free, but any commercial use of the library requires a fee. I am talking with Stas about the status of his BCGControlBar article on CodeProject, but I want to hear your opinions on how you think this, and other libraries should be presented on the Code Project. There are a ton of really cool libraries and components out there that require a fee for use. Would you rather not see any mention of these on the Code Project, or would you rather take the approach then the more information you have, the better equipped you are to make decisions relating to the code you use. Do you think that presenting shareware libraries and components amounts to free and unfair advertising, or that it encourages people to move from free to shareware? Talk to me - either here or private email (chris@codeproject.com) cheers, Chris Maunder
-
I am extremely grateful that Stas has contributed his library to CodeProject, but we now face a problem. The basic tenant of the Code Project is that we are all here to share our thoughts, our knowledge and most importantly our code with each other freely. Every time there is the merest sniff of commercialism in an article it is savaged and I get a hundred emails damning my black soul for allowing it near the site. BCGControlBar is free for students and for educational use. The previous versions of BCGControlBar are also still free, but any commercial use of the library requires a fee. I am talking with Stas about the status of his BCGControlBar article on CodeProject, but I want to hear your opinions on how you think this, and other libraries should be presented on the Code Project. There are a ton of really cool libraries and components out there that require a fee for use. Would you rather not see any mention of these on the Code Project, or would you rather take the approach then the more information you have, the better equipped you are to make decisions relating to the code you use. Do you think that presenting shareware libraries and components amounts to free and unfair advertising, or that it encourages people to move from free to shareware? Talk to me - either here or private email (chris@codeproject.com) cheers, Chris Maunder
My 2 cents is that if it is free under certain condititions and the article is not a big ad on why I should buy then it should be here. If it is severely limited to the point of uselessness and the article explains why I should get my VISA card out, then it should not, unless a marketplace area is created ( which BTW is not a bad idea, it would allow component sellers a chance to put their product out there, and developers a chance to comment if they have used it ). I have no qualms with people making a quid by programming, it's what I'm trying to do, after all. But if people are allowed to post articles that have no intrinsic use unless I buy something, the signal to noise ratio of the site is adversely affected. Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
-
I am extremely grateful that Stas has contributed his library to CodeProject, but we now face a problem. The basic tenant of the Code Project is that we are all here to share our thoughts, our knowledge and most importantly our code with each other freely. Every time there is the merest sniff of commercialism in an article it is savaged and I get a hundred emails damning my black soul for allowing it near the site. BCGControlBar is free for students and for educational use. The previous versions of BCGControlBar are also still free, but any commercial use of the library requires a fee. I am talking with Stas about the status of his BCGControlBar article on CodeProject, but I want to hear your opinions on how you think this, and other libraries should be presented on the Code Project. There are a ton of really cool libraries and components out there that require a fee for use. Would you rather not see any mention of these on the Code Project, or would you rather take the approach then the more information you have, the better equipped you are to make decisions relating to the code you use. Do you think that presenting shareware libraries and components amounts to free and unfair advertising, or that it encourages people to move from free to shareware? Talk to me - either here or private email (chris@codeproject.com) cheers, Chris Maunder
Actually, I have no problems with pointers to commercial libraries. This place *IS* about helping developers, and sometimes commercial libraries are what people need. CP should not be about free advertising though. Articles which illustrate commercial libraries are OK if they are generic enough. For instance, years ago, Scot Wingo published an article in DDJ or WDJ or something that described how to create a grid control, using his commercial library as the example. This was generic enough that he was actually telling you how to create your own grid.
-
I am extremely grateful that Stas has contributed his library to CodeProject, but we now face a problem. The basic tenant of the Code Project is that we are all here to share our thoughts, our knowledge and most importantly our code with each other freely. Every time there is the merest sniff of commercialism in an article it is savaged and I get a hundred emails damning my black soul for allowing it near the site. BCGControlBar is free for students and for educational use. The previous versions of BCGControlBar are also still free, but any commercial use of the library requires a fee. I am talking with Stas about the status of his BCGControlBar article on CodeProject, but I want to hear your opinions on how you think this, and other libraries should be presented on the Code Project. There are a ton of really cool libraries and components out there that require a fee for use. Would you rather not see any mention of these on the Code Project, or would you rather take the approach then the more information you have, the better equipped you are to make decisions relating to the code you use. Do you think that presenting shareware libraries and components amounts to free and unfair advertising, or that it encourages people to move from free to shareware? Talk to me - either here or private email (chris@codeproject.com) cheers, Chris Maunder
Honestly, this web page has become my favorite place to visit on the web. I like to come here for help/advice/ideas... Having shareware on here really wouldn't bother me too greatly but I'd want that section not integrated with the main. There are times when there just isn't time to write something yourself and if it's not available for free.... I'd like an area on the site where I could see what kind of things are available for purchase. However, I'd hate to see the site reduced to nothing but a shareware site which could happen a little too easily.
-
I am extremely grateful that Stas has contributed his library to CodeProject, but we now face a problem. The basic tenant of the Code Project is that we are all here to share our thoughts, our knowledge and most importantly our code with each other freely. Every time there is the merest sniff of commercialism in an article it is savaged and I get a hundred emails damning my black soul for allowing it near the site. BCGControlBar is free for students and for educational use. The previous versions of BCGControlBar are also still free, but any commercial use of the library requires a fee. I am talking with Stas about the status of his BCGControlBar article on CodeProject, but I want to hear your opinions on how you think this, and other libraries should be presented on the Code Project. There are a ton of really cool libraries and components out there that require a fee for use. Would you rather not see any mention of these on the Code Project, or would you rather take the approach then the more information you have, the better equipped you are to make decisions relating to the code you use. Do you think that presenting shareware libraries and components amounts to free and unfair advertising, or that it encourages people to move from free to shareware? Talk to me - either here or private email (chris@codeproject.com) cheers, Chris Maunder
I agree with everybody's comments. Chances are good that anyone who has a library for commercial use has a site up about it (like Stas for example). Perhaps a seperate section with links or banners to these sites would be sufficient, IMHO. That leaves precious server space for the (free) how-tos and tutorials with the source / demo downloads, --not to mention (hopefully) smaller amounts of flame mail to Chris about commercialism. Just a thought. Matt
-
I am extremely grateful that Stas has contributed his library to CodeProject, but we now face a problem. The basic tenant of the Code Project is that we are all here to share our thoughts, our knowledge and most importantly our code with each other freely. Every time there is the merest sniff of commercialism in an article it is savaged and I get a hundred emails damning my black soul for allowing it near the site. BCGControlBar is free for students and for educational use. The previous versions of BCGControlBar are also still free, but any commercial use of the library requires a fee. I am talking with Stas about the status of his BCGControlBar article on CodeProject, but I want to hear your opinions on how you think this, and other libraries should be presented on the Code Project. There are a ton of really cool libraries and components out there that require a fee for use. Would you rather not see any mention of these on the Code Project, or would you rather take the approach then the more information you have, the better equipped you are to make decisions relating to the code you use. Do you think that presenting shareware libraries and components amounts to free and unfair advertising, or that it encourages people to move from free to shareware? Talk to me - either here or private email (chris@codeproject.com) cheers, Chris Maunder
Chris, What Stas is doing is blatantly evil, Next he'll be buying food and eating. Start showing us some of those Crocodile Dundee attributes that you Ozzies are supposed to have and make an executive decision. Anyhow My opinion which I'm not going to charge my consultancy fee for today is. Build a second site that is A1 commercial, with everthing from popup windows to "dancing girls" ( I always think its cute how you Ozzies say dancing). And seperate the two sites with a thick link, I'd love to have one place to go to know what tools are available, what other folk think of them etc.
Or you could in a Users login preferences set the level of commercialism that a Logged in user accepts .
Now Thats a kool idea, Regardz Colin T-Set Stat STAS at stats test.
a tongue twisting palindrone -
My 2 cents is that if it is free under certain condititions and the article is not a big ad on why I should buy then it should be here. If it is severely limited to the point of uselessness and the article explains why I should get my VISA card out, then it should not, unless a marketplace area is created ( which BTW is not a bad idea, it would allow component sellers a chance to put their product out there, and developers a chance to comment if they have used it ). I have no qualms with people making a quid by programming, it's what I'm trying to do, after all. But if people are allowed to post articles that have no intrinsic use unless I buy something, the signal to noise ratio of the site is adversely affected. Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
I'd be interested to know what the people think, who submitted code for inclusion into the library. Would they of submitted it if they had known that someone else would be making money out of it in the future? Have these people been notified? I know Stas did the main bulk of the code but I will be interested to see how much help he gets in the future. C
-
The recent move of the BCG library into the commercial realm has sparked many reactions here. I, personally, am amazed that Stas had kept BCG freeware as long as he has. The thing to understand is that in a one-man-operation such as that which Stas has created, is very difficult to maintain. It only took 6 months from my initial release of WndTabs in February '99 until my e-mail support folder was growing at over 50 mails a months. Quickly enough, though - as the user base grew - so did the number of mails. Looking at that folder now (a year and a half worth of mail), it is 1450 items, at 25394K. That's 2.5GB of mail to read and write! And if you look at the "other" stuff, like letters to the hosting company, letters regarding interoperability, etc, that figure quickly climbs to an unthinkable 4.5GB! It used to be that when a program would go from free to shareware, I'd get upset and stop using it. This is a childish way of thinking, but unfortunately, many programmers still feel that way. I assure you that a one-man-operation is a great personal sacrifice. Unlike big open-source projects, there's no one else to answer all the e-mails, there's no one else to fix the bugs, integrate the fixes, update the documentation, and a million other things. You are ultimately torn between your desire to keep your project alive and the need for compensation. So I say: We should applaud Stas for his great effort, and for also being fair about his fair pricing scheme for the Shareware and Freeware programmers that helped make BCG what it is today. -Oz --- Grab WndTabs from http://www.wndtabs.com to make your VC++ experience that much more comfortable...
I'm using an old version of the BCGControlBar. The only problem, that I see about BCG going commercial , is that BCG was based on free code from Internet sites ( CodeProject, CodeGuru , etc... ) By making the BCG free and deliver the code , hundred of developers worldwide have help Stas to find bugs , develop new features , etc... So , today the Product is mature ( with the help of a lot of people ) and Stas try to make money with it ( and with the work of others ). I cannot blame Stas trying to make money with his lib and his work. But I think it is not a way to handle with the work other people. I can take a lot of code from CodeProject, change the class names to have something coherent, and try to sell "my" work. Stephane
-
I'm using an old version of the BCGControlBar. The only problem, that I see about BCG going commercial , is that BCG was based on free code from Internet sites ( CodeProject, CodeGuru , etc... ) By making the BCG free and deliver the code , hundred of developers worldwide have help Stas to find bugs , develop new features , etc... So , today the Product is mature ( with the help of a lot of people ) and Stas try to make money with it ( and with the work of others ). I cannot blame Stas trying to make money with his lib and his work. But I think it is not a way to handle with the work other people. I can take a lot of code from CodeProject, change the class names to have something coherent, and try to sell "my" work. Stephane
Hi, > is that BCG was based on free code from Internet sites ( > CodeProject, CodeGuru , etc... ) Sorry, but I have to correct you: BCGControlBar is not based on the free code from CodeProject or CodeGuru: yes, there were some parts in the early library versions, where some free code is used. You may see links to these articles at the "Credits" section. I don't hide it. Also, for the most significant articles I've got a personal authors permission about usage it. But, again, our new development team and I wrote 99% of library code. > I can take a lot of code from CodeProject, change the > class names to have something coherent, and try to > sell "my" work Ok, I'm waiting for your library! :-) Best regards, Stas Levin
-
I'd be interested to know what the people think, who submitted code for inclusion into the library. Would they of submitted it if they had known that someone else would be making money out of it in the future? Have these people been notified? I know Stas did the main bulk of the code but I will be interested to see how much help he gets in the future. C
I have contributed a few pieces of code for use here-and-there within the library, I have also contributes some major classes such as MTI (Multiple Top Level Interface - ala Office 2000). Each time I said quite clearly that 'use this how you wish'. Unlike, it seems, other authors who freely share code, but then demand payment as soon as the code appears in a commercial product (there was a discussion about this here earlier in the year), I could'nt care less. If someone finds my code helpful, good for them. They can use it how they want. Obviously my views are not taken by everybody, but I would suspect that Stas has contacted anybody who contributed major additions to this library. The small bug fixes here and there would not, to me, be grounds for demanding payment, or saying he can't sell it... When you beta test for Microsoft, you may sugest a change to part of the program. If you then find the change is implemented, you can't demand payment, or say they can't sell it. Also, the source is, as it always was, available for download, and I feel that the level of testing and bug fixes, etc, would not drop just becasuse it is commercialsed. Remember that Stas is only targetting the people who can afford to license the library, not those who can't.
-
I am extremely grateful that Stas has contributed his library to CodeProject, but we now face a problem. The basic tenant of the Code Project is that we are all here to share our thoughts, our knowledge and most importantly our code with each other freely. Every time there is the merest sniff of commercialism in an article it is savaged and I get a hundred emails damning my black soul for allowing it near the site. BCGControlBar is free for students and for educational use. The previous versions of BCGControlBar are also still free, but any commercial use of the library requires a fee. I am talking with Stas about the status of his BCGControlBar article on CodeProject, but I want to hear your opinions on how you think this, and other libraries should be presented on the Code Project. There are a ton of really cool libraries and components out there that require a fee for use. Would you rather not see any mention of these on the Code Project, or would you rather take the approach then the more information you have, the better equipped you are to make decisions relating to the code you use. Do you think that presenting shareware libraries and components amounts to free and unfair advertising, or that it encourages people to move from free to shareware? Talk to me - either here or private email (chris@codeproject.com) cheers, Chris Maunder
I always feel the more info the better. If there are commercial libriaries that do what I need available, likely they will always be *far* cheaper than me developing it myself. Maybe some sort of section for that stuff. Biggest problem would be if it just turned into a pit of ActiveX controls and VB stuff, and other, umm... junk, like that. It should be interesting to see how this discussion goes. I still can't believe anyone would complain about $300 for something as comprehensive as BCGLibary. (for commercial users).. that's like 2 days of programming cost or less. I guess folks don't ever pay attention to what their time is worth. Jim Wuerch www.miwasoft.com Quote from my readme files: "This is BETA software, and as such may completely destroy your computer, change the alignment of the planets and invert the structure of the universe."
-
The recent move of the BCG library into the commercial realm has sparked many reactions here. I, personally, am amazed that Stas had kept BCG freeware as long as he has. The thing to understand is that in a one-man-operation such as that which Stas has created, is very difficult to maintain. It only took 6 months from my initial release of WndTabs in February '99 until my e-mail support folder was growing at over 50 mails a months. Quickly enough, though - as the user base grew - so did the number of mails. Looking at that folder now (a year and a half worth of mail), it is 1450 items, at 25394K. That's 2.5GB of mail to read and write! And if you look at the "other" stuff, like letters to the hosting company, letters regarding interoperability, etc, that figure quickly climbs to an unthinkable 4.5GB! It used to be that when a program would go from free to shareware, I'd get upset and stop using it. This is a childish way of thinking, but unfortunately, many programmers still feel that way. I assure you that a one-man-operation is a great personal sacrifice. Unlike big open-source projects, there's no one else to answer all the e-mails, there's no one else to fix the bugs, integrate the fixes, update the documentation, and a million other things. You are ultimately torn between your desire to keep your project alive and the need for compensation. So I say: We should applaud Stas for his great effort, and for also being fair about his fair pricing scheme for the Shareware and Freeware programmers that helped make BCG what it is today. -Oz --- Grab WndTabs from http://www.wndtabs.com to make your VC++ experience that much more comfortable...
Hi Oz, I absolutely agree with you, and I wish Stas the best in his endeavours. Of course, great job that he is doing should be rewarded. However I have mixed feelings about the necessity to go to my manager and explain to him that the toolkit that I was actively promoting in the company as a free and open source thing (and I'd managed to convince the company to move to BCG from Stingray) is now commercial and we have to change our just-made next year budget once again to include $300 per each of 50+ developers (none of whom except myself are working on UI and just need to link to the DLL to build the project). I can anticipate his answer... And it is not the money that matters. There would be no problem at all were the toolkit commercial from the very beginning. Allright, going to see the manager and try to convince him ;) Yuri P.S. To the webmaster (Chris?): could you please change the answer script so that the Submit button would no longer be default one? This is not a first time I get into the trap hitting Enter in responce to the IE5's auto-completion prompt for user name, and submitting the no-name message instead ;)
-
Hi Oz, I absolutely agree with you, and I wish Stas the best in his endeavours. Of course, great job that he is doing should be rewarded. However I have mixed feelings about the necessity to go to my manager and explain to him that the toolkit that I was actively promoting in the company as a free and open source thing (and I'd managed to convince the company to move to BCG from Stingray) is now commercial and we have to change our just-made next year budget once again to include $300 per each of 50+ developers (none of whom except myself are working on UI and just need to link to the DLL to build the project). I can anticipate his answer... And it is not the money that matters. There would be no problem at all were the toolkit commercial from the very beginning. Allright, going to see the manager and try to convince him ;) Yuri P.S. To the webmaster (Chris?): could you please change the answer script so that the Submit button would no longer be default one? This is not a first time I get into the trap hitting Enter in responce to the IE5's auto-completion prompt for user name, and submitting the no-name message instead ;)
I know how you feel! I am using Stingray products at the moment and I hate them. They were quite fair some years ago, but now they are asking for $$$ just for updating to the newest version even when I am paying some 100$ a year for support and updates. They told me this is a new product line (uuhh?). I was thinking about changing my development to BCG as well but now I must rethink it. Who knows what will be the price tag in 2, 3 years? I don't want to repeat my experience! So many people are upset about this step. I can understand Stan's decision, but why don't we start a REAL freeware library using an open source model? We have got tons of code and I think we could get many helpers from CodeProject readers! I could help with people from my team.
-
I know how you feel! I am using Stingray products at the moment and I hate them. They were quite fair some years ago, but now they are asking for $$$ just for updating to the newest version even when I am paying some 100$ a year for support and updates. They told me this is a new product line (uuhh?). I was thinking about changing my development to BCG as well but now I must rethink it. Who knows what will be the price tag in 2, 3 years? I don't want to repeat my experience! So many people are upset about this step. I can understand Stan's decision, but why don't we start a REAL freeware library using an open source model? We have got tons of code and I think we could get many helpers from CodeProject readers! I could help with people from my team.
Hi there, First of all, thank you very much to everybody who has responded to this issue! We really appreciate all your comments, wishes and suggestions. I just would like to make a small correction: we’re agree, that license had ambiguous statement about the library usage and we made this part clearer. The current statement says: “The Software is "in use" when you develop any source code depended on the Software and link your projects to the libraries (original or modified).” So, you don’t need to pay for the product if you don’t use it :-) Please, if you see, that some part of the license agreement is not clear, please let us know and we’ll be happy to correct the problem ASAP. Sincerely Yours, Stas Levin
-
I am extremely grateful that Stas has contributed his library to CodeProject, but we now face a problem. The basic tenant of the Code Project is that we are all here to share our thoughts, our knowledge and most importantly our code with each other freely. Every time there is the merest sniff of commercialism in an article it is savaged and I get a hundred emails damning my black soul for allowing it near the site. BCGControlBar is free for students and for educational use. The previous versions of BCGControlBar are also still free, but any commercial use of the library requires a fee. I am talking with Stas about the status of his BCGControlBar article on CodeProject, but I want to hear your opinions on how you think this, and other libraries should be presented on the Code Project. There are a ton of really cool libraries and components out there that require a fee for use. Would you rather not see any mention of these on the Code Project, or would you rather take the approach then the more information you have, the better equipped you are to make decisions relating to the code you use. Do you think that presenting shareware libraries and components amounts to free and unfair advertising, or that it encourages people to move from free to shareware? Talk to me - either here or private email (chris@codeproject.com) cheers, Chris Maunder
I would like to see CodeProject welcome commercial and shareware material so long as it is useful to the CP community. After all, what we have in common is that we use commercial tools (VC++, MFC) to program for a commercial closed-source OS, so it's a bit precious to demand that we only consider free open-source tools to use with our commercial compilers and to run on our commercial OS. The bottom line should be, how useful will the material be to people on CP? My greatest concern would be that I search for solutions to a problem I face and the hits are dominated not by articles that help me understand the problem or that give examples of how to solve it, but with ads that don't help me. I would like to see commercial stuff segregated to a specific part of CodeProject and for a checkbox for searches that would let the user decide whether he wants to search in the commercial area or not. Having just posted something on the quality of commercial libraries, and having participated in the lively discussion of "Software Protector" last month, I would welcome an area that would let CP members honestly discuss the merits and defects of commercial software libraries. Having an area for commercial products on CP would provide an uncensored forum for discussing these products that we could not find on a vendor's website or a banner ad. If this provided valuable feedback to library vendors, then we'd all win. Given that it costs money to run CodeProject, it might be worth considering whether companies should pay a fee to post articles plugging their commercial products (i.e., have a space for paid infomercials and advertorials). There are drawbacks to this, because it would undermine the editorial neutrality of CP and create a conflict of interest regarding how CP treats negative comments about paying customers.