XF 2.4 general discussion, feedback, complaints, random off topic posts, etc.
- Thread starter Paul B
- Start date
MentaL
Well-known member
Buy a VMC to compliment the Giphy upgrade too!
Buy Verified Mark Certificates (VMC) or Common Mark Certificates (CMC) | DigiCert
Buy DigiCert Verified Mark (VMC) or Common Mark Certificates (CMC). Choose Verified Mark Certificate for registered trademarks and government seals or a Common Mark Certificate for trademarks protected by prior use.
www.digicert.com
$10,000 and we havn't even covered our shared hosting requirements
Mr Lucky
Well-known member
This sounds like a good reason not use it.
CedricV
Well-known member
Surely you can come with a more intelligent reply.
Mr Lucky
Well-known member
What do you mean?
Arantor
Well-known member
Well, when you're in a beta phase, pushing out rapid releases with bug fixes to clear the queue seems like a good idea.
But that is helped when you're not loaded down with plugins - and Invision has made it clear that plugins doing the kinds of changes that XF allows are going away eventually. (They are quite clear that monkey patching, which is essentially what XF proxy classes are doing, is an out of date technique.)
But that is helped when you're not loaded down with plugins - and Invision has made it clear that plugins doing the kinds of changes that XF allows are going away eventually. (They are quite clear that monkey patching, which is essentially what XF proxy classes are doing, is an out of date technique.)
Haven't been following Invision since they deprecated IP.Board. Is there plan to get rid of add-ons altogether or are they planning on introducing something else? At that point, sounds like they are just going closed source with no intent to have any 3rd party stuff?
Forsaken
Well-known member
There's some discussion about it here.
FTL
Well-known member
omg, this recursive meme totally hypnotizes my little brain into a suitably vacant stare. Love it!
cdub
Well-known member
Oh my are we doing this again?
FTL
Well-known member
I think that's an unfair business practice, shame they're getting away with it. Yet another reason not to go Invision.
CedricV
Well-known member
I agree. It is a bit unfair indeed. But then again, you know what you sign up for when purchasing a license. And honestly, 2 years is still a good amount of time. If people can’t renew in that time, that’s on them. But I’ve had my license since 2011, and also had a period where I didn’t use it for 2 years. It would definitely suck to lose an investment like that. Luckily I didn’t pay the current price.
It also makes clear that they don’t focus their business on hobbyists, as we knew for a longer period now.
Arantor
Well-known member
It has to be remembered that they push out releases very regularly (during 4.x we saw monthly releases), and their argument, such as it is, is that the regular release cadence is only possible because people keep paying, and that they feel someone who only pays every few years to renew just to get the latest features is unfairly benefitting versus the people who keep renewed - and it's not paying the bills for delivering those features.
Also worth noting, Woltlab at one point talked about 'if your licence lapses, the software stops working' but I don't remember if they reversed course on that.
Mendalla
Well-known member
Might as well just move to a subscription model at that point.
Arantor
Well-known member
They'd quite like that, but apparently the folks who aren't on a cloud plan have a problem with that.
FTL
Well-known member
Sounds plausible that it could be their reasoning, but then they're just trying to prop up an unviable business model and doesn't change that it's an unfair business practice by screwing over their customers. If I was looking to buy this product, I'd think twice once I saw that clause in it.
As it is, I've actually got a full, expired Invision license that I bought off another forum owner about a decade ago when he closed that forum that I renewed a couple of years back to try out my own hosting etc. I didn't renew it further as I'd already gone XF and preferred that for the post numbers and a few other reasons. I know at this point that I'll never use that license again, but it's now useless for renewal and they've also stopped their customers from reselling them, so I'm stuck with a totally dead license that can't be used in any way, shape or form. That simply can't be right.
It wouldn't surprised me that if some unlucky customer who wanted to use such an expired license and was told to pay full price again, that they'd win in court and Invision would have to change their terms and condition to remove these unfair clauses.
Arantor
Well-known member
I don't remember where I saw it but Matt M (one of the founders) actually said this, it's not me speculating that this is their reasoning.
Interesting question. Though there's enough precedent that I suspect it wouldn't go very far in practice.
Consider other software products where you've bought the product, and then that version of the activation server goes away meaning that you're no longer able to use the software without buying an upgrade. There's enough precedent of this in other industries that it would be hard to justify the change at this point. I am aware it's not exactly the same but the underlying precedents usually follow through.
I think XF's licensing methodology is more reasonable but it can't be good for the bottom line when you're 3 years between releases because not everyone stays renewed in that time.
