XenSSO - XenForo Single Sign On [Paid] [Deleted]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Naatan said:
Sorry to hear you feel that way. Developing the addon takes a lot of time and know-how though, it's actually priced relatively cheap.
Click to expand...
Not disputing the time or how you want to price it :P - just giving feedback. I'll be looking into this more this weekend and may just pull the trigger on it
 
Kainzo said:
Not disputing the time or how you want to price it :p - just giving feedback. I'll be looking into this more this weekend and may just pull the trigger on it
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback :) If there are more people interested that feel the price is unreasonable I will consider lowering it, but personally I feel it is quite reasonable. I understand anyone will be hesitant of spending amounts over 20 USD without doing a little research though, which is why the Q&A section on the support site is open to anyone :)
 
I think 60 USD is a steal. I charge 50 USD per hour for our services, and no way could I do something like this in an hour and 12 minutes. But had I seen this in time for the initial funding round, I probably would not have minded spending upwards of 300 USD or more (then again, I'm in this with a few partners, so the cost would be split).

But no. I do not think 60 USD is anywhere near being too expensive. Just my 2 cents.
 
Agreed, I see no issue with the price of this for what is on offer and what it achieves.
Kainzo said:
This sounds really awesome, just a bit pricey =/
Click to expand...
Well... if you were one of the prime contributors the price was a whole lot more. Nathan's price is a bargain for the complexities involved for this to function correctly, without any lag upon a forum itself, unlike older systems for other softwares that drag the network due to syncing and such nonsense.

This has zero impact on the server and can be installed across multiple servers and such, https or http for any one install, or all in the network, and the list goes on.

This took Nathan longer than he had anticipated as well, at a cost he absorbed based on a fixed price for the product due to not releasing a half arsed solution, but instead ensuring the best solution was built. He changed tactics a little way in as a better method was found, thus the result is impeccable to say the least.

The issues for existing members has also not gone unnoticed, due to possible conflicts, which Nathan already has an excellent plan to handle that at the user level to resolve initial conflicts for existing users who's usernames conflict across network installs by presenting them a one-time ability to change their username at the conflicting site, all automatically without admin intervention.
 
If this addon works well ... I've seen projects like this go for $2000 - $5000 on elance type sites.
This addon is VERY complicated and will require some ongoing "care".
$60 is basically free.

For a site that uses this the VALUE is ENORMOUS. For that fact alone, this addon should be the price of a Xenforo minimum ($140).

The idea here is you've spent $140 x 2 = $280, and $60 bucks to connect them is very generous.

I think each install for this could be tricky. Lots of potential gotchas. I could see Naatan having to spend "way too many" hours to get installs up and running (which should be paid hours on top of the $60).

The pricing structure might be better as

$50 per extra site you want to connect.
ie. if you want to connect two sites to a main site .. Cost $100.
ie. if you want to connect three sites to a main site .. Cost $150.
 
Digital Doctor said:
If this addon works well ... I've seen projects like this go for $2000 - $5000 on elance type sites.
This addon is VERY complicated and will require some ongoing "care".
$60 is basically free.

For a site that uses this the VALUE is ENORMOUS. For that fact alone, this addon should be the price of a Xenforo minimum ($140).

The idea here is you've spent $140 x 2 = $280, and $60 bucks to connect them is very generous.

I think each install for this could be tricky. Lots of potential gotchas. I could see Naatan having to spend "way too many" hours to get installs up and running (which should be paid hours on top of the $60).

The pricing structure might be better as

$50 per extra site you want to connect.
ie. if you want to connect two sites to a main site .. Cost $100.
ie. if you want to connect three sites to a main site .. Cost $150.
Click to expand...

Have you actually installed this mod before you've started commenting on how tricky it could be to install or having to spend "way too many" hours to support it or how much should be charged for it etc. Don't you think its rather insulting to the developer for you to start going on about how "you" think that they have under priced their product. It implys they've got no business acumen in dealing with thier own products.
 
akia said:
Have you actually installed this mod before you've started commenting on how tricky it could be to install or having to spend "way too many" hours to support it or how much should be charged for it etc.
Click to expand...

No. I've been around projects like this for years. Jfusion type projects. They are very complicated.
 
Digital Doctor said:
No. I've been around projects like this for years. Jfusion type projects. They are very complicated.
Click to expand...
Which again goes back to my point, don't you think Naatan understands this and will have priced it accordingly taking this into account.

I don't think it helps to sell the product when people are making comments in its listing thread about how complicated it is when they don't actually know if it is or not. Just because other products are, doesn't mean this one is.
 
Thanks so much for your feedback guys, I really appreciate you sharing your opinions.

@Anthony - if I ever get rich can I hire you to be my PR person? :p You say things so much better than I ever could.

@Digital Doctor - what you say is very true, but if I would price it at it's value it wouldn't sell at all. That's unfortunately just the reality of the matter. Plus I'd feel bad pricing it higher than XenForo which is a far more complicated and larger product than XenSSO is.

@akia - I can never get offended by what someone says if their intent is honest, but I appreciate you sticking up for me :)

The addon itself is fairly complex but I take special care to code things as intuitive as possible, I'm a bit of a perfectionist when it comes to programming (in complete contrast with my offline habbits ;)).
 
I agree, for the function it serves, $60 is a steal.

I was actually surprised at the low price when I saw it posted.

But again, it is all relative. There are some owners/admins that may see no need for this and $60 would be way too much. Personally, I would never post that on someone's release/resource thread as I see it as disrespectful. Plus, I was taught....if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. So, I'll leave it at that :)
 
akia said:
I don't think it helps to sell the product when people are making comments in its listing thread about how complicated it is when they don't actually know if it is or not. Just because other products are, doesn't mean this one is.
Click to expand...
I think the point DD is making, is that server indifferences may be an issue within itself. Nathan tested the product on his environment, gave it to me, I found errors on my environment. As already cited in an earlier post here http://xenforo.com/community/threads/xensso-xenforo-single-sign-on-paid.30289/#post-346909 Andy had issues due to his server specifications.

Whilst DD may not have installed it, and Nathan may or may not have factored this into his pricing, the issue about server indifferences is very real when it comes to add ons like this. Some add ons may take Nathan some more work due to specific server software or securities being ran that may, or may not, interfere with OpenID authentication process being an external XF process, compared to a normal add-on that only works internally in XF, thus server security instances and such aren't an issue.

Irrespective of this, none of these issues ever took Nathan very long to correct, ie. minutes to an hour for a fix during most beta issues.

I believe the product will only get better with more installations, as Nathan encounters the issues and incorporates them within the development... thus it grows into a robust product that caters a vast majority of server instances.

I have already purchased the test domains and will install a public test environment tonight, my time, for people to play around with prior to purchasing, as Nathan has approved my use of his work to aid prospective buyers with a test environment (I have a few spare XF licenses as part of supporting XF... so putting them to good use).
 
For many buyers of this addon who have several XF forums under their network, the cost of this is non-material. They usually run their site as a business, not as hobby so software cost is business expense and tax deductible.

When I look at the cost, I consider how much value it will bring to my business. This addon certainly has added a lot more value to my sites than many that I have purchased.
 
I'm glad more people posted about this :) I wasn't trying to spark a heated or disrespectful debate.

I myself don't manage businesses or host networks of XF forums. So for me, we are a bit price sensitive.

In either case, great job on the addon and I hope you get back what you want for time invested :D
 
There is now a public demonstration network using this product for buyers to trial test in any different way you choose to register upon.

All sites are completely stripped of any posting access to remove anyone using them for spam purposes, including all text based profile fields.

The demonstration is specifically established to demonstrate a difference in site types as well, being master, slave and a sub-domain that uses a self signed server https (the only site in the network using it) to demonstrate any site within the network can be https (master or slave works with http or https).

Please note, the self signed https certificate will fail, you will need to accept it as being non-secure depending on the browser used to access the site. It is purely to demonstrate https functionality.

Master: http://www.xensso.com
Slave: http://www.xenssoslave.com
Slave: https://sub.xenssosub.com

Ensure you understand the restrictions though before stating there is an error. You cannot be logged into one site in a browser under one username, then try and access another site in the network in the same browser under another. The browser session is dependent upon it.

You can however use multiple browsers at once to access different username registrations, as each browser caches its own session.

If you register at a slave, it will automatically register at the master.

You do not automatically get registered at every slave though, which is done at each slave upon first login only.

In other words, if you register at the master you are not registered at the slaves, however; nobody else could register your username or use your email address on a registration at a slave. Once a username and email are registered once, they are reserved across all network sites automatically.

Once you have logged into every single site in a network atleast once, thus holding a physical account on each site, when you login at one site within a browser session you should automatically become logged in within seconds at other sites you visit in the network.

If you logout of a site within a browser session, then you will not be logged back in automatically in that browser session.

Hence my raising the understanding of multiple browsers for testing purposes due to session restrictions.

Closing a browser does not automatically close a session either, as most browsers are still running in the background in both Windows and Mac OS. You either need to logout of each site in the network to start a new network session or force quit your browser and reopen to begin a new session.
 
Anthony Parsons said:
There is now a public demonstration network using this product for buyers to trial test in any different way you choose to register upon.

All sites are completely stripped of any posting access to remove anyone using them for spam purposes, including all text based profile fields.

The demonstration is specifically established to demonstrate a difference in site types as well, being master, slave and a sub-domain that uses a self signed server https (the only site in the network using it) to demonstrate any site within the network can be https (master or slave works with http or https).

Please note, the self signed https certificate will fail, you will need to accept it as being non-secure depending on the browser used to access the site. It is purely to demonstrate https functionality.

Master: http://www.xensso.com
Slave: http://www.xenssoslave.com
Slave: https://sub.xenssosub.com

Ensure you understand the restrictions though before stating there is an error. You cannot be logged into one site in a browser under one username, then try and access another site in the network in the same browser under another. The browser session is dependent upon it.

You can however use multiple browsers at once to access different username registrations, as each browser caches its own session.

If you register at a slave, it will automatically register at the master.

You do not automatically get registered at every slave though, which is done at each slave upon first login only.

In other words, if you register at the master you are not registered at the slaves, however; nobody else could register your username or use your email address on a registration at a slave. Once a username and email are registered once, they are reserved across all network sites automatically.

Once you have logged into every single site in a network atleast once, thus holding a physical account on each site, when you login at one site within a browser session you should automatically become logged in within seconds at other sites you visit in the network.

If you logout of a site within a browser session, then you will not be logged back in automatically in that browser session.

Hence my raising the understanding of multiple browsers for testing purposes due to session restrictions.

Closing a browser does not automatically close a session either, as most browsers are still running in the background in both Windows and Mac OS. You either need to logout of each site in the network to start a new network session or force quit your browser and reopen to begin a new session.
Click to expand...

Thanks a lot Anthony, you're absolutely right about everything you said, the only thing I'd like to reiterate on is that in fact your browsing session -is- cleared when you close your browser, you just have to make sure it's actually -closed-(which you implied already). On Mac you have to actually right click your browser and click quit, on Windows you just have to make sure all Windows are closed. Alternatively clearing your cookies would achieve the same goal.

This "caveat" is only apparent when you are testing as a regular end-user would never really walk into this scenario.
 
Anthony Parsons said:
Closing a browser does not automatically close a session either, as most browsers are still running in the background in both Windows and Mac OS. You either need to logout of each site in the network to start a new network session or force quit your browser and reopen to begin a new session.
Click to expand...

Everything in this addon sounds completely amazing, except this part. The smarter code guru's need to fix this for the dumb end user (cough cough). Thats not something were going to know about if you don't mention it.

But this is a truly awesome addition to the addon's list. $60 isn't $#i+ so when I get another forum, damn straight they will be linked.

This is something I always wanted VB to do, but they always had crap, hard coded, solutions (haven't been back to see them since XF came out and never will), and this is super awesome and pretty easy to install and use from what I gather.

Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

-Andrew

(will definitely buy when I have 2 websites)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
  • Question Question
Single Sign-on Provider?
Replies
5
Views
2K
tyteen4a03
tyteen4a03
Anthony Parsons
  • Locked
Add-on [PAID] Multiple XF Single Sign-on Solution
4 5 6
Replies
106
Views
11K
Anthony Parsons
Anthony Parsons
Top Bottom