Status update followup
There was a pretty tense discussion on Status update post regarding future of this project and changes we plan to make. Lack of details caused a lot of confusion and this post should provide you with more details
For those who have not read Status update post and discussion that followed here is a short list of most important decisions that we announced:
- There will be no new releases in 0.x branch. Next major version will be activeCollab 1.0
- Core development will be done by newly founded company while community will be able to contribute through plugins and tools that use API
- License will change and some of the advanced features will be available only in commercial version (read on for details)
This announcements raised a lot of concern in the community. Main problem with Status update post is that it is brief and without details on what we are doing now and how we plan to structure the project in the future so most of the people got only a blurry image of what is happening and that caused a lot of confusion. I've posted a followup comment with more details on questions that people asked but decided to republish it as a separate blog entry so everyone can read it (thanks to Dan for a suggestion). So, here is the list of most important questions raised by the community and explanations:
Concern #1: activeCollab will not be available as installable script
We never said that. Version that you can download and install on your own server will be available (free and commercial versions).
What we said is that beta testing will be done in hosted environment and we have a really strong reason for that decision:
Usually process for installable software: Pack a release, release it, support upgrade and installation, wait for new features and bug fixes to accumulate, pack another release, release it, wait for people who upgrade their installation just two weeks ago to finally find time to download new version and install it, provide support to people who are upgrading, see how it works… Repeat!
We don't want that kind of overhead in development process so we decided to go with hosted environment where we can provide bug fixes instantly and roll out new features as soon as they are ready for testing. As soon as we get ready for testing public announcement will be made and people will be able to sign for an account. We will have limited number of accounts (server resources are limited) so please subscribe to RSS feed or to our newsletter to get notified on time.
Concern #2: We will not be able to extend the system
1.0 has been under development for some time now (about a month or so) and it already has plugin support and thanks to RESTful approach the whole application is one big API. Plugins are mini applications that hook into the system (like time tracking, invoicing…) and system provides a great number of hooks that let them handle events thrown by system or other plugins. I would dare to say that with 1.0 version activeCollab is finally extensible.
Concern #3: Code will be completely closed
Development of core features will be handled by new company, but it does not mean that source code will not be available. With plugin support in place it is really important to give people something they can learn from. Having code available would help them better understand how system works. That will eventually result in some cool plugins and implementations and we want to support that.
We will make sure that developers get access to the source code, but that does not mean that it will be available under the terms of classic open source licenses such is GPL, LGPL, MPL... There are a lot of communities that work this way - vBulletin, IPB, Expression Engine etc. Developers have all the resources they need to develop their own functionality on top of the system, but the system itself is still the property of company who develops it. Some may think that open source is superior than this approach but just looking at projects that are structured this way shows that it works pretty nicely, even better than some open source project that they compete with.
Concern #4: Free version will be so crippled that it will be unusable
Line will be drawn between common features and business features. Unless you need business features free version will do just fine (most home users and non profit organizations will not notice the difference). If you need activeCollab for your business you will be able to develop all the features you need as plugins or to go with Business edition where you get commercial support and additional, business related plugins. Commercial versions will be reasonably priced.
Concern #5: There will be no new features in new release, just the price tag
If you really think this way you will be really surprised when you see first screenshots ;)
Concern #6: There will be no way to monitor the progress
We plan to blog about how development is progressing. We definitely want you to know what cool stuff we are building so sound recording hardware and screen capturing software is in place. Consider it as one new media / software development experiment.
Hope this helps. If you have any further questions or need more info than it is provided in this post please post a question in comments, but note that even we don't have all the answers at this moment.
Posted on: 2007-03-03 12:58
Comments:
I’m glad that you will continue to support and provide a free version of activecollab :-) Am really looking forward to 1.0, and am especially keen see what progress you’ve made.
From having read the comments which followed your last announcement, it seems clear that the greatest concern was the licensing of the source; and how it may subsequently deter community involvement. The ‘closed’ model you suggested will certainly increase productivity (assuming you will now invest more resources to ac), and I wish you and the team the best of luck!
Saj
From having read the comments which followed your last announcement, it seems clear that the greatest concern was the licensing of the source; and how it may subsequently deter community involvement. The ‘closed’ model you suggested will certainly increase productivity (assuming you will now invest more resources to ac), and I wish you and the team the best of luck!
Saj
“If you need activeCollab for your business you will be able to develop all the features you need as plugins or to go with Business edition where you get commercial support and additional, business related plugins. ”
Will your license support the free distribution of “business plugins” for free versions of the activeCollab software, if developers wish to distribute these plugins to the community for free?
Will your license support the free distribution of “business plugins” for free versions of the activeCollab software, if developers wish to distribute these plugins to the community for free?
All sounds good to me.
This is a nice update. I’m happy for the new direction.
Look at this for sample of free, hosted, paid version
http://kingdesign.net/tasks/
=Orca
Look at this for sample of free, hosted, paid version
http://kingdesign.net/tasks/
=Orca
way to sell out guys… how long did it take before you guys become the monster you were trying to slay?? oh yeah, couple months.
why give my money to you, you just knocked off another company’s product. the whole spirit of the project is gone.
why give my money to you, you just knocked off another company’s product. the whole spirit of the project is gone.
So like Joomla from Mambo here comes openCollab from activeCollab. :p
I chose activecollab because of its free as in freedom license. Now I’ll have to look elsewhere I guess. This sucks.
Hopefully someone will pick this project up and continue development under the GPL.
Hopefully someone will pick this project up and continue development under the GPL.
I sympathise with your situation: god knows I’ve been frustrated when I release something under an open-source licence and never see a penny in donations.
However, as other commenters have pointed out, the objective of this project was always to be a ‘free’ alternative to Basecamp. Compared to this 900lb gorilla, there are many frustrating aspects of this software but I was prepared to put up with them as I wasn’t paying $50 per month. I’m not sure how this new announcement sites with that.
I’m off back to Basecamp, but I wish you luck with your project and thank you for your efforts to date.
However, as other commenters have pointed out, the objective of this project was always to be a ‘free’ alternative to Basecamp. Compared to this 900lb gorilla, there are many frustrating aspects of this software but I was prepared to put up with them as I wasn’t paying $50 per month. I’m not sure how this new announcement sites with that.
I’m off back to Basecamp, but I wish you luck with your project and thank you for your efforts to date.
Hi – interesting development and I can see some commercial logic in this.
However, I looked to aC since it had a couple of improvements over Basecamp and more importantly it was free.
I was willing to put up with the hassle of the install and generally looking after it myself because of the benefit of permanent ownership, the lack of project limits and the fact that I wouldn’t be paying out for BC in the months when I wasn’t running large projects.
If you’re now going to be charging enough to even get into the same league as BC then the rationale for using aC disappears in a puff of ajaxy-prettiness and ease that BC offers (especially since I can use my own server to host the documents/attachments).
The remaining reason for aC would be if you could improve on the BC offering, while catching up with the prettiness of its interface. If you’re able to do that then I’d cough up for a shareware-y $25-50 licence.
So the real questions are not around the philosophy of open source, free or whatever: they are:
* when’s 1.0 due?
* what’ll be “in” it?
* commercially are we happy with your price, given the above.
Cheers
ikj
However, I looked to aC since it had a couple of improvements over Basecamp and more importantly it was free.
I was willing to put up with the hassle of the install and generally looking after it myself because of the benefit of permanent ownership, the lack of project limits and the fact that I wouldn’t be paying out for BC in the months when I wasn’t running large projects.
If you’re now going to be charging enough to even get into the same league as BC then the rationale for using aC disappears in a puff of ajaxy-prettiness and ease that BC offers (especially since I can use my own server to host the documents/attachments).
The remaining reason for aC would be if you could improve on the BC offering, while catching up with the prettiness of its interface. If you’re able to do that then I’d cough up for a shareware-y $25-50 licence.
So the real questions are not around the philosophy of open source, free or whatever: they are:
* when’s 1.0 due?
* what’ll be “in” it?
* commercially are we happy with your price, given the above.
Cheers
ikj
Although I can understand why, I am really disappointed by this choice. When you take 90% of your ideas and development concepts directly from your monolithic competitor, it is only natural to eventually adopt a watered down version of their business model as well. I think most users were willing to put up with the 80/20 rule simply because activeCollab was GPL. With that gone, the only way I would contribute to the 1.0 project is if community developed business plugins were GPL’d. Seeing as you’ve already said that this won’t be the case, I find the whole plugin / community developed model to be an ass-backwards stab at wikinomics (gone wrong) which will in turn beef your own I.P. and do nothing to advance innovation at the pace this project had the potential to push.
I read a few mentions of ‘openCollab’, if someone does want to pick up the GPL and run with it please let me know.
Could this be just another software that lost it’s following before 1.0? I guess we wait and see.
I read a few mentions of ‘openCollab’, if someone does want to pick up the GPL and run with it please let me know.
Could this be just another software that lost it’s following before 1.0? I guess we wait and see.
Hi,
Great project, I love it – going commercial is fine but what about current users?
Will they be able to import current projects into V. 1.0?
Great project, I love it – going commercial is fine but what about current users?
Will they be able to import current projects into V. 1.0?
Will they be able to import current projects into V. 1.0?
Of course.
I am glad to support your new business model and am happy you are going the direction you are. Basecamp would never be used here at my work because it is a hosted product. Having an installable alternative that is as rock solid as activeCollab will be a great thing.
Ilja, don’t be deterred by these whining freeloaders.
Ilja, don’t be deterred by these whining freeloaders.
Ilija,
I have loved the community around pMachine and Expression Engine. If you create something like that it would be absolutely wonderful.
I think a lot of people felt that activeCollab was going to be a community project and so they didn’t mind running it, testing it, reporting bugs, etc. My guess is that now, because the code is going to be closed and used as a profit maker for your company, they feel a little cheated. I personally don’t feel this way though. You’ve provided a functional product, for free, so I won’t complain. :)
I probably missed something, but is that the case? Expression Engine developers can GPL their own modules. I’m pretty sure that you can even create add-ons and sell them as well (just not bundled with EE). Will that not be allowed with activeCollab?
I have loved the community around pMachine and Expression Engine. If you create something like that it would be absolutely wonderful.
I think a lot of people felt that activeCollab was going to be a community project and so they didn’t mind running it, testing it, reporting bugs, etc. My guess is that now, because the code is going to be closed and used as a profit maker for your company, they feel a little cheated. I personally don’t feel this way though. You’ve provided a functional product, for free, so I won’t complain. :)
slajax said:
...the only way I would contribute to the 1.0 project is if community developed business plugins were GPL’d. Seeing as you’ve already said that this won’t be the case…
I probably missed something, but is that the case? Expression Engine developers can GPL their own modules. I’m pretty sure that you can even create add-ons and sell them as well (just not bundled with EE). Will that not be allowed with activeCollab?
I believe in Ilija.
There’s always a business model for free stuff like sugarcrm.com, task pro, even wordpress.
Both parties win-win. Customer still get their free stuff, and lazy customer will have to pay (for support, installation, webapps format, etc…)
There’s always a business model for free stuff like sugarcrm.com, task pro, even wordpress.
Both parties win-win. Customer still get their free stuff, and lazy customer will have to pay (for support, installation, webapps format, etc…)
Thanks everyone! Some of you understand what we are doing, some don’t and we are completely fine with that. Hopefully, 1.0 will show you why this is a good change.
Just one request – don’t think that this was EVER about ideology or any particular movement. We never tried to slay any monsters or fight against anyone.
I never heard of anything like this: platform is commercial so everything built on top of it need to be commercial. Really don’t know where he got that idea.
Of course it will be allowed. You can sell your plugins or give them for free if you wish. It is completely up to developers to decide whatever they will sell their plugins and services or give them away for free.
Just one request – don’t think that this was EVER about ideology or any particular movement. We never tried to slay any monsters or fight against anyone.
Doug Farnes said:
I probably missed something, but is that the case? Expression Engine developers can GPL their own modules. I’m pretty sure that you can even create add-ons and sell them as well (just not bundled with EE). Will that not be allowed with activeCollab?
I never heard of anything like this: platform is commercial so everything built on top of it need to be commercial. Really don’t know where he got that idea.
Of course it will be allowed. You can sell your plugins or give them for free if you wish. It is completely up to developers to decide whatever they will sell their plugins and services or give them away for free.
@Ilija
* Can you please provide a very detailed manual for the plugin/API part so we can easily extend Ac
* Please sign me up for the beta test
* Can you please provide a very detailed manual for the plugin/API part so we can easily extend Ac
* Please sign me up for the beta test
The only functionality that I needed for free was the ability to have multiples of things; projects, clients, users, etc., as with basecamp I was to limited with the free account. activeCollab 0.7 came to the rescue, so I hope 1.x licensing will still allow for multiples of these things so I can consider a pro license when I’m running a fully-fledged business!
I’m looking at project management solutions – activeCollab appealed to me since it seemed to be like BaseCamp, but we could host it on our servers.
So if 1.0 is to be paid for, what exactly are we paying for, and how? The download? Will users be forced to hold company data on external servers (a no-no for most commercial users)?
And more importantly, when is 1.0 coming out? :)
So if 1.0 is to be paid for, what exactly are we paying for, and how? The download? Will users be forced to hold company data on external servers (a no-no for most commercial users)?
And more importantly, when is 1.0 coming out? :)
I see a fork in the road. Someone or a group is going to take 0.71 and run with it as an open source project, maybe even call it openCollab as someone else suggested. The original developer will take activeCollab and move forward as a commercial project.
No worries.
No worries.
It’s sad to see that people doesn’t read. :(
Congratulations, Ilija, for your new project. I think it would make activeCollab better.
I think if I get money, making my development faster, with activecollab, why you, the developer, not.
Regards,
Congratulations, Ilija, for your new project. I think it would make activeCollab better.
I think if I get money, making my development faster, with activecollab, why you, the developer, not.
Regards,
I have donated to this project – only to find out it goes commercial. Situations like that keep me more and more from supporting so called ‘free’ OpenSource projects. If you gonna go commercial some day then say it loud and clear in the beginning … (and if I missed that it’s my own fault).
Personally I recommended aC to many clients and fellow developers. This will happen no more. I just wait for someone to fork this or I simply wait go b ack to BaseCamp like many others.
Some people don’t seem to understand how such a ‘trust breaker’ spoils your prestige. Anyone remember when Six Apart fiddled around with the licencing for MovableType – and how many people deserted them like mad for WordPress?
You have done just the same thing Sir – and it will bite you in the ass for a long time …
Personally I recommended aC to many clients and fellow developers. This will happen no more. I just wait for someone to fork this or I simply wait go b ack to BaseCamp like many others.
Some people don’t seem to understand how such a ‘trust breaker’ spoils your prestige. Anyone remember when Six Apart fiddled around with the licencing for MovableType – and how many people deserted them like mad for WordPress?
You have done just the same thing Sir – and it will bite you in the ass for a long time …
User 1: Hey, did you hear about activecollab?”
User 2: “Yeah. Stinks doesn’t it?”
User 1: “Yep …. I guess the party is over.”
User 2: “Oh well.”
User 1: “Race you back to basecamp!”
User 2: “Yeah. Stinks doesn’t it?”
User 1: “Yep …. I guess the party is over.”
User 2: “Oh well.”
User 1: “Race you back to basecamp!”
What’s wrong with some of you people?
Ilija owns this web site, aC’s code, and can do as he pleases with them. If he wants to star charging a million bucks for the licence is his problem. It’s nobody else’s business.
Most of you have already benefited from downloading and using the first versions, so what’s the bitching about? Or why don’t you create your own product and give it for free to the world so everybody can see what a nice person you are…
There will be a free version of the software, so why don’t you whining assholes shut the fuck up and get back to work ;)
Ilija owns this web site, aC’s code, and can do as he pleases with them. If he wants to star charging a million bucks for the licence is his problem. It’s nobody else’s business.
Most of you have already benefited from downloading and using the first versions, so what’s the bitching about? Or why don’t you create your own product and give it for free to the world so everybody can see what a nice person you are…
There will be a free version of the software, so why don’t you whining assholes shut the fuck up and get back to work ;)
@Ilija—Kudos on your tough decision-making and entrepreneurial efforts. While I can sympathize with the dissenters here for their various reasons, I think that you have created the beginnings of a great product and if you love it, should find a way to do it full time (like you’ve previously posted about). The SugarCRM model (and others) has significant benefits and it appears you’re wisely going that route.
I think the “free” vs “commercial” version plan is a great way to say ‘thanks’ to those who have committed time or resources to get aC to 0.71, while moving towards a sustainable business.
You’ve certainly contributed quite a bit already to those of us using aC, and I think the very least we can do is stay tuned for what’s next. Frankly, there are already a lot of things about aC that meet my needs better than Basecamp, and I’m willing to bide my time with 0.7 until 1.0 comes around.
Best regards, and thanks for the flurry of information.
I think the “free” vs “commercial” version plan is a great way to say ‘thanks’ to those who have committed time or resources to get aC to 0.71, while moving towards a sustainable business.
You’ve certainly contributed quite a bit already to those of us using aC, and I think the very least we can do is stay tuned for what’s next. Frankly, there are already a lot of things about aC that meet my needs better than Basecamp, and I’m willing to bide my time with 0.7 until 1.0 comes around.
Best regards, and thanks for the flurry of information.
Will they be able to import current projects into V. 1.0?
Of course.
Ok :) Well that’s good news…hey you never know.
I was actually looking into replacing Netoffice which has been good but is not supported anymore.
I didn’t want to host projects on any 3rd party servers so now that I tried Active Collab I am very anthousiastic and I am one of those definitely willing to pay (reasonably) for pro support over this type of product.
When will you guys have the final pricing information? Will you base pricing on number of users/projects?
keep going !
You know what ? Reading through the posts I had an me an epiphany ;-)
Bascially all the rather©rude comments are coming from people who were happy to have found a free Basecamp alternative.
Seriously … apart from the hosting issue the rest of the reasons are just excuses to rant.
So it all comes down to this :
You’re using AC for personal, non-profit, small business projects : the free version of 1.0 should do the trick (I guess we’ll have to trust Ilija on that and I have a feeling we won’t be dissapointed.
You’re using / going to use AC for Business ie: you’re making better money thanks to the tool …. point made.
Add a well-thought Plugin system and the futur doesn’t seem so gloomy after all.
Chris
Bascially all the rather©rude comments are coming from people who were happy to have found a free Basecamp alternative.
Seriously … apart from the hosting issue the rest of the reasons are just excuses to rant.
So it all comes down to this :
You’re using AC for personal, non-profit, small business projects : the free version of 1.0 should do the trick (I guess we’ll have to trust Ilija on that and I have a feeling we won’t be dissapointed.
You’re using / going to use AC for Business ie: you’re making better money thanks to the tool …. point made.
Add a well-thought Plugin system and the futur doesn’t seem so gloomy after all.
Chris
Is aC ever going to be able to communicate to other database types? MSSQL, Oracle, etc?
MySQL is free and all, but if you’re going commercial with this great product, I think mssql is the way to go (whether you hate you know who or not).
I’ve worked at very many dev projects around the states, and only one of them didn’t use MSSQL, they used oracle.
Just a suggestion!
Keep up the good work!!
-Icebox
MySQL is free and all, but if you’re going commercial with this great product, I think mssql is the way to go (whether you hate you know who or not).
I’ve worked at very many dev projects around the states, and only one of them didn’t use MSSQL, they used oracle.
Just a suggestion!
Keep up the good work!!
-Icebox
Of course it will be allowed. You can sell your plugins or give them for free if you wish. It is completely up to developers to decide whatever they will sell their plugins and services or give them away for free. bq.
In this case I will consider supporting the commercial version if it meets my standards. Your original post indicated that plugin development would remain the property of company X which doesn’t sound very GPL.
I’ll try to warm up to the idea of it being a commercial project, but community comes first in my opinion.
Is the licensing for the current version of ActiveCollab (.7.x) compatible with GPL and can it be changed to it? In order to fork this project to a proper GPL’d project, it’s necessary that the license be GPL’d to avoid this sort of thing in the future.
http://code.activecollab.com/svn/ac/trunk/LICENSE
I agree with orangeguru to some degree, i donated to keep the project open and free. I do also understand you need to make money from this venture if it is using a lot of your time you do need to get paid, however more community involvement and information in your decision making may have been wise.
I for one would not use your new project if openCollab was available as an alternative, the only part missing from the current system for me was time tracking and i hear that people have taken this forward on their own.
Drayen
I for one would not use your new project if openCollab was available as an alternative, the only part missing from the current system for me was time tracking and i hear that people have taken this forward on their own.
Drayen
Your blog updates the post everytime someone adds a comment to the post, due to the title being changed to reflect the number of comments. This makes following your blog posts via an RSS reader impossible because there are new items everytime someone posts
@micah: Its a feature, not a bug.
What RSS reader do you use?
Most readers behave according to specification and it states that only GUID change should result in reader showing a feed item as updated, not title change; somebody correct me if I’m wrong. Title is changed so people can see that there are new comments on the post, but GUID remains the same all the time.
What RSS reader do you use?
Most readers behave according to specification and it states that only GUID change should result in reader showing a feed item as updated, not title change; somebody correct me if I’m wrong. Title is changed so people can see that there are new comments on the post, but GUID remains the same all the time.
I would like to congratulate Ilija on making his project as mature as it has become. A valiant effort.
I would like to comment on what many have suggested in this thread as “time to move to Basecamp”: Basecamp remotely is hosted. activeCollab is not. Those who understand the significance will likely be activeCollab customers in the future. Those that do not see the significance, are probably better served by basecamp. That is cool. I am not flaming basecamp. Future activeCollab customers will be of a different stock and have different needs.
I would like to suggest that many of the features and functions I have seen requested, although good suggestions, are not necessarily good for the form and function of aC. Ilija has managed the flow and scope of this project with admirable forethought and skill. There are many things we all would have done differently but probably not as well.
Would I like to see time tracking? Hell yeah! Is being able to issue a billing statement more important than having the well executed collaborative workspace that ac offers for free? Well, I would say “no”. Is Ilija entitled to do what he wants with his code including offering it commercially? Absolutely. Am I entitled to take the 0.7.1 release and use it as the foundation of a super-secret space program? According to the rules, I guess I am.
Thanks for that.
I would like to comment on what many have suggested in this thread as “time to move to Basecamp”: Basecamp remotely is hosted. activeCollab is not. Those who understand the significance will likely be activeCollab customers in the future. Those that do not see the significance, are probably better served by basecamp. That is cool. I am not flaming basecamp. Future activeCollab customers will be of a different stock and have different needs.
I would like to suggest that many of the features and functions I have seen requested, although good suggestions, are not necessarily good for the form and function of aC. Ilija has managed the flow and scope of this project with admirable forethought and skill. There are many things we all would have done differently but probably not as well.
Would I like to see time tracking? Hell yeah! Is being able to issue a billing statement more important than having the well executed collaborative workspace that ac offers for free? Well, I would say “no”. Is Ilija entitled to do what he wants with his code including offering it commercially? Absolutely. Am I entitled to take the 0.7.1 release and use it as the foundation of a super-secret space program? According to the rules, I guess I am.
Thanks for that.
I hesitate to comment (and reset the entry in RSS readers) but micah’s experience isn’t unique. The entries from the blog show up as new in Bloglines for me as well.
Micah is right, it makes it a pain to read in RSS because there is always something “new” but you never know if it is really new or not…and after a while I just assume it’s not new which makes subscribing kind of pointless. :(
Anyways, fyi.
Micah is right, it makes it a pain to read in RSS because there is always something “new” but you never know if it is really new or not…and after a while I just assume it’s not new which makes subscribing kind of pointless. :(
Anyways, fyi.
Sorry for offtopic…
Now that you mentioned Bloglines, I played with it a bit and there is a setting when you are adding a new feed witch says to Bloglines what to do with updated entries – mark them as new (default) or ignore them. You should select ignore…
I failed to find how to change this for an existing feed but you can always delete the feed and subscribe again.
Any other reader having this problem? I’ve tested it with Netvibes, Google Reader and NewsFire and all of them behave as expected (don’t mark the entry when title changes).
Doug Farnes
The entries from the blog show up as new in Bloglines for me as well.
Now that you mentioned Bloglines, I played with it a bit and there is a setting when you are adding a new feed witch says to Bloglines what to do with updated entries – mark them as new (default) or ignore them. You should select ignore…
I failed to find how to change this for an existing feed but you can always delete the feed and subscribe again.
Any other reader having this problem? I’ve tested it with Netvibes, Google Reader and NewsFire and all of them behave as expected (don’t mark the entry when title changes).
Also sorry to get off-topic with this, but thanks for the response.
You said:
You are right, this will work with Bloglines, however by doing this you can miss legitimate, actual updates to post bodies. For example, if you post something, get a bunch of comments, and then realize what you posted was wrong, or missing some information so you update your original post—then the Bloglines readers will not see this update of yours if they are ignoring updates, as you suggest. A lot of blogs do these post updates (boingboing.net for example will update posts with new information by including a red “Update: ....” which is nice to see when it is updated.
By the way – there are right now 125 subscribers to this blog via Bloglines, probably there were more but they dropped off because they didn’t realize this “ignore” setting…
You said:
Now that you mentioned Bloglines, I played with it a bit and there is a setting when you are adding a new feed witch says to Bloglines what to do with updated entries – mark them as new (default) or ignore them. You should select ignore…
You are right, this will work with Bloglines, however by doing this you can miss legitimate, actual updates to post bodies. For example, if you post something, get a bunch of comments, and then realize what you posted was wrong, or missing some information so you update your original post—then the Bloglines readers will not see this update of yours if they are ignoring updates, as you suggest. A lot of blogs do these post updates (boingboing.net for example will update posts with new information by including a red “Update: ....” which is nice to see when it is updated.
By the way – there are right now 125 subscribers to this blog via Bloglines, probably there were more but they dropped off because they didn’t realize this “ignore” setting…
If it’s true that the specification says “only GUID change should result in reader showing a feed item as updated” then it would be better to inform bloglines about the problem than to cut it away. I like the feature of showing the number of comments in after the subject line, although I can understand both sides there are to the story (what micah said above, about “real” updates that won’t be seen anymore).
I have to say this decision really is stoopid. You can’t compete with 37 Signals, to think you can is just suffering delusions of grandeur. The ONLY reason activecollab was so popular is that it was ‘free’ and open and looked like basecamp.
Why are geeks so completely useless at business ?
Why are geeks so completely useless at business ?
The Sage RSS reader add-on for Firefox also marks the article unread if a comment is added.
Goodbye, AC!
It was a nice ride while it lasted. All the best, Ilija!
It was a nice ride while it lasted. All the best, Ilija!
My big questions are:
1. Will the free version of 1.0 have at least the same functionality as the current version 0.7?
2. Will the free version of 1.0 be installable on any server or have a fixed hosting requirement?
3. What will the price be of the business version, and what additional items will we get for that price?
1. Will the free version of 1.0 have at least the same functionality as the current version 0.7?
2. Will the free version of 1.0 be installable on any server or have a fixed hosting requirement?
3. What will the price be of the business version, and what additional items will we get for that price?
acuserguy:
Will the free version of 1.0 have at least the same functionality as the current version 0.7?
activeCollab 1.0 is pretty much changed. Some modules have been split into two or more separate modules, some are removed (forms to be more specific) but you’ll be able to do almost anything with free version of 1.0 as you can now, with 0.7.1.
acuserguy:
Will the free version of 1.0 be installable on any server or have a fixed hosting requirement?
Free version will be installable on any server that meets system requirements (we’ll try to keep them as low as possible – thats why we are working on PHP4 support and removing all unnecessary requirements).
acuserguy:
What will the price be of the business version, and what additional items will we get for that price?
This information will be available few weeks before launch.
We are sorry, but we can’t provide all the details at this point.
Ilija Studen
Thank you for activecollab and everthing so far.
Whatever you need to do to support continued development.
I agree keep a free community edition. The more input and participation
the greater likelyhood of a strong successful product.
Thank you for activecollab and everthing so far.
Whatever you need to do to support continued development.
I agree keep a free community edition. The more input and participation
the greater likelyhood of a strong successful product.
This whole topic bother me. The idea that he’s not allowed to make any money on all of his amazing efforts is obsurd.
bq[fr].Why are geeks so completely useless at business ?
It seems the Sugar business concept is solid and meets all of the requirements of the freeloaders who are screaming that some one else’s time might actually have value. What a lot of narcissistic children. Not only CAN aC compete with 37Signals…they WILL compete with 37Signals if on no other basis than they have a self-host solution…but the value doesn’t stop there. There are enough of us who are more interested in functionality and workable supported solutions than getting something for nothing. I for one don’t have the kind of free time you must have if you can keep ping-ponging project management solutions just because A version won’t be free in the future.
bq[fr].Why are geeks so completely useless at business ?
It seems the Sugar business concept is solid and meets all of the requirements of the freeloaders who are screaming that some one else’s time might actually have value. What a lot of narcissistic children. Not only CAN aC compete with 37Signals…they WILL compete with 37Signals if on no other basis than they have a self-host solution…but the value doesn’t stop there. There are enough of us who are more interested in functionality and workable supported solutions than getting something for nothing. I for one don’t have the kind of free time you must have if you can keep ping-ponging project management solutions just because A version won’t be free in the future.
Bloom, you’re missing the point. People are upset not only because aC will not be fully free in the future, but because aC was taking up cognitive space that might have been filled by someone else if it hadn’t claimed it was open source. So, for example, if there had been NO “open source” basecamp clone then someone would/might have started one, but instead they just started using aC and helping by leaving comments and participating in the community. In fact a lot of people tried to submit patches and help out but were told they couldn’t. Maybe people should have gotten the message that Ilija wasn’t going to stick with it but he never actually said he would change the license and not everyone has time to scour the forums investigating open source products for signs of selling out.
I mean, what happens to BaseJumpr, the service based on aC that actually wrote important functionality that Ilija didn’t port back into the system cause he was too busy? I’m sure they’ll find a way but this inconsistency will hurt them because they were assuming the same thing as me, that aC would continue to put it’s best face forward as a quality open source product. I for one hope Basejumpr takes the lead and starts opencollab, and from what they’ve said, if anyone does start opencollab up they’ll be willing to help out, a true open source money-making business if i ever heard of one.
I mean, what happens to BaseJumpr, the service based on aC that actually wrote important functionality that Ilija didn’t port back into the system cause he was too busy? I’m sure they’ll find a way but this inconsistency will hurt them because they were assuming the same thing as me, that aC would continue to put it’s best face forward as a quality open source product. I for one hope Basejumpr takes the lead and starts opencollab, and from what they’ve said, if anyone does start opencollab up they’ll be willing to help out, a true open source money-making business if i ever heard of one.
Ilija,
A good life lesson: apply you micro/personal decisions at the macro/world level to test their credability and fairness. What would happen if I killed my neighbor? Everyone would kill their neighbor, I’d be dead. Maybe killing our neighbors isn’t a good idea. See? It’s the basis for ethics and many justice systems worldwide.
What would happen if every open source project closed source and formed an LLC? What would happen if you had to pay for PHP, Linux and MySQL? What would happen had you not been able to start activeCollab without purchasing PHP, Linux, and MySQL? My guess is nothing. How do I know this? Because something tells me you’re broke – that’s why you just sold out. Would you have started activeCollab if the overhead was $3000 for proprietary software? NO.
That’s the point of open source. If you life decision doesn’t work for everyone involved, it’s not open source. Ilija, your life decision does not work for everyone. You have leveraged the efforts of others in opensource to your fiscal advantage. That is unethical and dissonant to the tone of the free community at large.
From a business perspective (my angle), this is not a good idea and will probably not turn over. While you have created a Basecamp duplicate, you now are competing with 37S. The size of the market has not increased, but for your friends listed above who are willing to pay you instead of 37S. Therefore, both you and Basecamp will share the same market. I hope you have some drastic improvements with features or price over Basecamp. Price is by far your best bet in my opinion; however, without a thorough market analysis (which you certainly did before making such a large decision on behalf of your users) it’s tough to say. My prediction is that basecamp’s traffic won’t be decreasing.
If nothing else, I’d hurry up if I were you. 37S has this great way of locking people in.
However, I hope you prove me wrong. I hope your new product is 1000x better, I hope it has a working API, and I hope you make money. I just fear that you’re gonna crash and burn.
Bon chance mon ami – Jerzy
PS – remove your “Coming Soon” sidebar on the homepage. Nothing is coming soon to the activeCollab project. The activeCollab project is DEAD. You could rename it “Coming Soon to the Redheaded Stepchild of activeCollab, closedCollab” or something…. :)
Who wants to start openCollab with me? Seriously.
A good life lesson: apply you micro/personal decisions at the macro/world level to test their credability and fairness. What would happen if I killed my neighbor? Everyone would kill their neighbor, I’d be dead. Maybe killing our neighbors isn’t a good idea. See? It’s the basis for ethics and many justice systems worldwide.
What would happen if every open source project closed source and formed an LLC? What would happen if you had to pay for PHP, Linux and MySQL? What would happen had you not been able to start activeCollab without purchasing PHP, Linux, and MySQL? My guess is nothing. How do I know this? Because something tells me you’re broke – that’s why you just sold out. Would you have started activeCollab if the overhead was $3000 for proprietary software? NO.
That’s the point of open source. If you life decision doesn’t work for everyone involved, it’s not open source. Ilija, your life decision does not work for everyone. You have leveraged the efforts of others in opensource to your fiscal advantage. That is unethical and dissonant to the tone of the free community at large.
From a business perspective (my angle), this is not a good idea and will probably not turn over. While you have created a Basecamp duplicate, you now are competing with 37S. The size of the market has not increased, but for your friends listed above who are willing to pay you instead of 37S. Therefore, both you and Basecamp will share the same market. I hope you have some drastic improvements with features or price over Basecamp. Price is by far your best bet in my opinion; however, without a thorough market analysis (which you certainly did before making such a large decision on behalf of your users) it’s tough to say. My prediction is that basecamp’s traffic won’t be decreasing.
If nothing else, I’d hurry up if I were you. 37S has this great way of locking people in.
However, I hope you prove me wrong. I hope your new product is 1000x better, I hope it has a working API, and I hope you make money. I just fear that you’re gonna crash and burn.
Bon chance mon ami – Jerzy
PS – remove your “Coming Soon” sidebar on the homepage. Nothing is coming soon to the activeCollab project. The activeCollab project is DEAD. You could rename it “Coming Soon to the Redheaded Stepchild of activeCollab, closedCollab” or something…. :)
Who wants to start openCollab with me? Seriously.
Please allow me to step in and point out the absurdity of a couple of concepts to pop up here.
There is no valid argument behind complaining that future versions of aC will adopt a cost model. Those trying to make such arguments should be embarrassed for themselves. Is there no shame?
What a lark this “cognitive space” idea is. It doesn’t stand up to two seconds of scrutiny. The version of aC developed as free remains free. That version can still be taken and developed on by others. No “cognitive space”, time, perspective, etc. has been lost on anyone. Giving things out for free creates no obligation to continue giving things out for free. If it’s of great concern to anyone posting complaints here. Save your breath and use it continuing a free version your self.
What right do any of you open-thumpers have to decide for someone else how they should spend their time, whether or not they should seek compensation for their work or in what form they choose to do that in? It’s none of your business. Again, if you want a permanently free version, take what has already been generously offered as free and permanently work on it yourself. Or, better yet, take some time to sit in a dark room without your usual kool-aid and think about why the reasons you can’t or won’t do that are perhaps in line with the reasons why the aC team can’t or won’t.
The aC team has not done anything to harm anyone here. Just the opposite, they provided something for free for some time. Changing that model is, in no way, an infringement on any agreement or obligations to anyone here.
If this post seems a little harsh, thats because it is. I just can’t stand the audacity of some people to believe they should have a say in what other people do for them just because they once did something for free. Call it a peeve. I guess it should be expected that the lowest common denominator will show up and send insults such as ‘sell out’. Whats next? Death threats?
There is no valid argument behind complaining that future versions of aC will adopt a cost model. Those trying to make such arguments should be embarrassed for themselves. Is there no shame?
What a lark this “cognitive space” idea is. It doesn’t stand up to two seconds of scrutiny. The version of aC developed as free remains free. That version can still be taken and developed on by others. No “cognitive space”, time, perspective, etc. has been lost on anyone. Giving things out for free creates no obligation to continue giving things out for free. If it’s of great concern to anyone posting complaints here. Save your breath and use it continuing a free version your self.
What right do any of you open-thumpers have to decide for someone else how they should spend their time, whether or not they should seek compensation for their work or in what form they choose to do that in? It’s none of your business. Again, if you want a permanently free version, take what has already been generously offered as free and permanently work on it yourself. Or, better yet, take some time to sit in a dark room without your usual kool-aid and think about why the reasons you can’t or won’t do that are perhaps in line with the reasons why the aC team can’t or won’t.
The aC team has not done anything to harm anyone here. Just the opposite, they provided something for free for some time. Changing that model is, in no way, an infringement on any agreement or obligations to anyone here.
If this post seems a little harsh, thats because it is. I just can’t stand the audacity of some people to believe they should have a say in what other people do for them just because they once did something for free. Call it a peeve. I guess it should be expected that the lowest common denominator will show up and send insults such as ‘sell out’. Whats next? Death threats?
Are you concerned of libel issues on the basis of “look and feel” given that this product is designed to (for the most part) match BaseCamp? Sure they aren’t saying anything now, it’s open source. But when you start profiting off of a creative design that is arguably theirs (regardless if you reverse engineered it or programmed it from the ground up), then you will undoubtedly face legal consequences, it’s just a matter of when they decide to sue you.
I think this post is awesome. You address a lot of common concerns that come up. It reminds me of the same things people say about people who “get famous”
-you’ll forget us
-you will change what you value
-you will become one of “them”
-you will not be generous or charitable
Ilija, nice job taking the initatiative to do something different. The thing I LOVED about Activecollab is that I could install it on my server. Yes, all mine! For me, that was a huge advantage since I could run it offline using a server running on my workstation or inside vmware.
All haters should chip in $1.00.
All that is occuring here is that the people who made aC decided to make it better. Just like the first engineers who improved upon the first airplane. There is no reason there can only be “Basecamp”. In the 80’s movie theatre owners said VHS would drive them out of business, nope…didn’t happen. Dog breeds are another example of people trying different things who have different preferences.
Talk is very cheap.
Opinions don’t get things done, actions do.
Let’s check back with some of the naysayers in the fall of 2007 and see what they’ve built or created. I expect it to be much closer to “nada” than “Prada”
-you’ll forget us
-you will change what you value
-you will become one of “them”
-you will not be generous or charitable
Ilija, nice job taking the initatiative to do something different. The thing I LOVED about Activecollab is that I could install it on my server. Yes, all mine! For me, that was a huge advantage since I could run it offline using a server running on my workstation or inside vmware.
All haters should chip in $1.00.
All that is occuring here is that the people who made aC decided to make it better. Just like the first engineers who improved upon the first airplane. There is no reason there can only be “Basecamp”. In the 80’s movie theatre owners said VHS would drive them out of business, nope…didn’t happen. Dog breeds are another example of people trying different things who have different preferences.
Talk is very cheap.
Opinions don’t get things done, actions do.
Let’s check back with some of the naysayers in the fall of 2007 and see what they’ve built or created. I expect it to be much closer to “nada” than “Prada”
I use activeCollab to manage my open source project. I did this because Sourceforge.net sucks, as do all the other free/open source project management solutions.
Ilja, if the “open source” version doesn’t suit our project’s needs, would you consider giving us a free license?
You see, the reason I chose activeCollab is because it’s the only affordable solution that doesn’t suck. If I now have to pay to get that functionality, well, I can’t pay, I’m using it to built an open source project.
Ilja, if the “open source” version doesn’t suit our project’s needs, would you consider giving us a free license?
You see, the reason I chose activeCollab is because it’s the only affordable solution that doesn’t suck. If I now have to pay to get that functionality, well, I can’t pay, I’m using it to built an open source project.
Ilja,
I’m a professional brand strategist, and while nothing is ever certain, I also feel that this is a bad move.
Essentially you’ve divided your following into three camps. For, against and don’t care. A terrible decision.
What you should have done (or should do… its not too late)__
—> Start a completely seperate, differently branded commercial service that offers professional services
—> Leave your existing open-source model the same and continue to develop the project in concert with the community
————————-
Sugar is not a great model to follow. It’s not.
A better example would Bryyght[dot]com, a commercial company hosting Drupal CMS. The people there are still very actively involved in the original open-source project.
Overall, you should choose your steps wisely. While you’re the driving source behind the project – NOBODY fully owns their own brand.
A brand is owned by the community that are a part of it. Without customers, a brand is nothing.
JH
I’m a professional brand strategist, and while nothing is ever certain, I also feel that this is a bad move.
Essentially you’ve divided your following into three camps. For, against and don’t care. A terrible decision.
What you should have done (or should do… its not too late)__
—> Start a completely seperate, differently branded commercial service that offers professional services
—> Leave your existing open-source model the same and continue to develop the project in concert with the community
————————-
Sugar is not a great model to follow. It’s not.
A better example would Bryyght[dot]com, a commercial company hosting Drupal CMS. The people there are still very actively involved in the original open-source project.
Overall, you should choose your steps wisely. While you’re the driving source behind the project – NOBODY fully owns their own brand.
A brand is owned by the community that are a part of it. Without customers, a brand is nothing.
JH
People using open-source software are not customers.
Definition of customer: “a person who purchases goods or services from another; buyer; patron.”
Rather, without income, a business is nothing. Unless a person is infinitely wealthy, they cannot afford to spend many of their working hours on a job that pays nothing. Charging for a product is perhaps the oldest business model in the history of business. I’d say that it has proven to be valid and an effective way for people to justify dedicating time toward making a quality product.
I think the camps are divided as follows:
– Those who consider aC worth paying for. – Those who do not. – Those who would rather that others do work for them for free than to do it themselves.
Definition of customer: “a person who purchases goods or services from another; buyer; patron.”
Rather, without income, a business is nothing. Unless a person is infinitely wealthy, they cannot afford to spend many of their working hours on a job that pays nothing. Charging for a product is perhaps the oldest business model in the history of business. I’d say that it has proven to be valid and an effective way for people to justify dedicating time toward making a quality product.
I think the camps are divided as follows:
– Those who consider aC worth paying for. – Those who do not. – Those who would rather that others do work for them for free than to do it themselves.
Perhaps you didn’t read what I said Flashlackey.
I think its great that he starts a commercial business.
What’s not intelligent is using the open source brand to funnel this business though. The stated purpose was activeCollab was to provide an open-source alternative to Base Camp.
It is written in the brands genealogy that it should be free.
Let me repeat it for you again, just so you do not miss it: Open the commercial business, but brand it separately.
And in this, the offering should be on SERVICE, not software. Because as it was stated from the beginning… all aC is is a knock-off of someone elses commercial offering.
//
And to be clear, the comment about customer was meant for the commercial version, not the open source version.
I thought that would be clear, because as you so condescendingly stated, a customer is one who purchases good from another. A buyer, a patron.
Read it again, with this clarification in mind.
I think its great that he starts a commercial business.
What’s not intelligent is using the open source brand to funnel this business though. The stated purpose was activeCollab was to provide an open-source alternative to Base Camp.
It is written in the brands genealogy that it should be free.
Let me repeat it for you again, just so you do not miss it: Open the commercial business, but brand it separately.
And in this, the offering should be on SERVICE, not software. Because as it was stated from the beginning… all aC is is a knock-off of someone elses commercial offering.
//
And to be clear, the comment about customer was meant for the commercial version, not the open source version.
I thought that would be clear, because as you so condescendingly stated, a customer is one who purchases good from another. A buyer, a patron.
Read it again, with this clarification in mind.
I understand your position completely. I only found activeCollab today, I downloaded it and installed it and has a happy bunny. But then I read this post about it’s future. Like I said I do understand your reasons and think it is fair enough but…
Could some other group of people not just take activeCollab as it stands now and continue to develop it as an open source project ? If anyone wants to do this I would be very interested in being involved. Is this doable under the current licence agreement ? Please let me know.
stuart (at) eatpixels dot com
Could some other group of people not just take activeCollab as it stands now and continue to develop it as an open source project ? If anyone wants to do this I would be very interested in being involved. Is this doable under the current licence agreement ? Please let me know.
stuart (at) eatpixels dot com
Jason,
I re-read the post with your “clarification” in mind. Sorry, no real difference except for a few chuckles when I realized how condascending your post was.
“condascending” checker:
“I’m a professional brand strategest” (look out! supreme wisdom on its way!)
“A terrible decision.”
“What you should have done”
“Sugar is not a great model to follow.” (the reason why: “It’s not.” just trust the brand strategist!)
“Overall, you should choose your steps wisely.” (a la you are not acting wisely now)
—-
let me repeat this: an open-source, free alternative to Basecamp WAS and IS provided. if the plan as recently described is carried out, there will continue to be a free version.
if his approach is, as you nicely put it, “not intelligent”, what’s wrong with him making that decision for himself? if true, it will simply create the opportunity for someone else to build openCollab on their own. if thats truly an intelligent thing to do, why dont you take advantage of the opportunity and organize it your self? what is stopping anyone else from doing that? can you please explain why you are or are not taking advantage of that?
furthermore, we’ve been told numerous times that the new UI for aC is completely different than the current version. if the UI is different, the way it is used is different and the features are different (and they are), then it is no longer, as you put it, a “knock off”. it is, in fact, a different product competing in the same niche as Basecamp.
lets face it. the only gripe here is a worry that desirable features released in the future will cost something to take advantage of. i dont buy yours (or many others) commentary as being some kind of benevolent business advice.
Stuart,
Yes. At least as I understand it. It’s doable. You guys should get crackin. It seems that a lot of people need a lot of features quick!
I re-read the post with your “clarification” in mind. Sorry, no real difference except for a few chuckles when I realized how condascending your post was.
“condascending” checker:
“I’m a professional brand strategest” (look out! supreme wisdom on its way!)
“A terrible decision.”
“What you should have done”
“Sugar is not a great model to follow.” (the reason why: “It’s not.” just trust the brand strategist!)
“Overall, you should choose your steps wisely.” (a la you are not acting wisely now)
—-
let me repeat this: an open-source, free alternative to Basecamp WAS and IS provided. if the plan as recently described is carried out, there will continue to be a free version.
if his approach is, as you nicely put it, “not intelligent”, what’s wrong with him making that decision for himself? if true, it will simply create the opportunity for someone else to build openCollab on their own. if thats truly an intelligent thing to do, why dont you take advantage of the opportunity and organize it your self? what is stopping anyone else from doing that? can you please explain why you are or are not taking advantage of that?
furthermore, we’ve been told numerous times that the new UI for aC is completely different than the current version. if the UI is different, the way it is used is different and the features are different (and they are), then it is no longer, as you put it, a “knock off”. it is, in fact, a different product competing in the same niche as Basecamp.
lets face it. the only gripe here is a worry that desirable features released in the future will cost something to take advantage of. i dont buy yours (or many others) commentary as being some kind of benevolent business advice.
Stuart,
Yes. At least as I understand it. It’s doable. You guys should get crackin. It seems that a lot of people need a lot of features quick!
@Jerzy
Please do not start applying half baked formulations of Kant’s categorical imperative to notions of open source. You do both a disservice. Your charge that Ilija is “unethical” for profiting off the backs of others is completely undermined by your call to others to develop OpenCollab on the basis of his work.
It is also baseless because you imply that he has a duty to continue with his previous model because others made the bet that it would always be so. And their duty is to whom? The community? Think again. They contribute because of their own self-interest calculation. I have tried to trace out the premises of your ethics charge, but they are so twisted as to be incoherent. Just whom has he “sold out” to? Free riders always accuse the holder of value with riding for free when they are asked to pay up.
Ilija may succeed or fail with his new model, but that is up to the market. Open source, whether you care to see it or not, is a market as well – one with a currency of good will – but a market nonetheless. Ilija was competing with 37S with the very first release, just at a different price. If his currency has now run out, time will tell.
You owe him your gratitude for his work so far. That is your duty. You owe him.
Please do not start applying half baked formulations of Kant’s categorical imperative to notions of open source. You do both a disservice. Your charge that Ilija is “unethical” for profiting off the backs of others is completely undermined by your call to others to develop OpenCollab on the basis of his work.
It is also baseless because you imply that he has a duty to continue with his previous model because others made the bet that it would always be so. And their duty is to whom? The community? Think again. They contribute because of their own self-interest calculation. I have tried to trace out the premises of your ethics charge, but they are so twisted as to be incoherent. Just whom has he “sold out” to? Free riders always accuse the holder of value with riding for free when they are asked to pay up.
Ilija may succeed or fail with his new model, but that is up to the market. Open source, whether you care to see it or not, is a market as well – one with a currency of good will – but a market nonetheless. Ilija was competing with 37S with the very first release, just at a different price. If his currency has now run out, time will tell.
You owe him your gratitude for his work so far. That is your duty. You owe him.
Among all of the comments on duty and honor and the like, it is nice to see some common sense peak it’s head up once in a while.
The fact is, Ilija owes the “community” nothing, and we owe him nothing. When it comes down to it, ActiveCollab is a piece of software, a piece of property, and that property belongs to him to do with as he likes. Personally, I have to agree with those who are slightly jaded about the open source community. Generally, a really good piece of software is created, but then gets dumped because motivation, stamina, and funding runs out all at the same time, leaving the software far short of it’s potential. Lets face it, free is great, but software developing is a time consuming process, and yes, developers have to eat like the rest of us.
I could get into a philosophical discussion of the benefits and evils of open source, but philosophy has never been my thing. I’m a realist, and when you look around at the open source community from the real world perspective, you find out that the open source community has simply become a feeding ground for the carnivores of the software world. Stopping short of a Tim Robbins’esque style speech, the open source world is like the garden for those who are looking for that new kind of plant to breed. They find a plant they have never seen before, cross breed it with something they already have to make it stronger, and then sell the seeds to the highest bidder. It’s not evil, it’s just business.
It is nice to see that he is however going to offer the ability to buy the software and install it on your own server. Though initial cost would be high, it would save money in the long run. I for one, am going to keep a close eye on this project, no matter what forms, variation, or permutation of it may arise. The fact is that with all it is currently lacking, it is still very good software that fills a particular niche in the Project Management Market that hasn’t been met too often. Management without set process is an essential tool for industries in which the process that a project uses may change due to variable out of your control. ActiveCollab allows you to do that.
Iljia, kudos for the effort, and I hope the new model works.
The fact is, Ilija owes the “community” nothing, and we owe him nothing. When it comes down to it, ActiveCollab is a piece of software, a piece of property, and that property belongs to him to do with as he likes. Personally, I have to agree with those who are slightly jaded about the open source community. Generally, a really good piece of software is created, but then gets dumped because motivation, stamina, and funding runs out all at the same time, leaving the software far short of it’s potential. Lets face it, free is great, but software developing is a time consuming process, and yes, developers have to eat like the rest of us.
I could get into a philosophical discussion of the benefits and evils of open source, but philosophy has never been my thing. I’m a realist, and when you look around at the open source community from the real world perspective, you find out that the open source community has simply become a feeding ground for the carnivores of the software world. Stopping short of a Tim Robbins’esque style speech, the open source world is like the garden for those who are looking for that new kind of plant to breed. They find a plant they have never seen before, cross breed it with something they already have to make it stronger, and then sell the seeds to the highest bidder. It’s not evil, it’s just business.
It is nice to see that he is however going to offer the ability to buy the software and install it on your own server. Though initial cost would be high, it would save money in the long run. I for one, am going to keep a close eye on this project, no matter what forms, variation, or permutation of it may arise. The fact is that with all it is currently lacking, it is still very good software that fills a particular niche in the Project Management Market that hasn’t been met too often. Management without set process is an essential tool for industries in which the process that a project uses may change due to variable out of your control. ActiveCollab allows you to do that.
Iljia, kudos for the effort, and I hope the new model works.
Wow. Disappointed. ac was unique in that it was free. As one of first people to download it i’m torn you guys deserve to make money as the app is awesome but i think that many people feel that the project was a open source one and thus that generated you a lot of attention. How many people would have contributed if they knew that your business model was similar to 37 signals… they offer a free version as well. And self hosted is not enough of an incentive. Breaking trust can be regained and I hope you do right by the community that is around you. You dont owe them and they dont owe you except in their contributions. If the deal was it was going to be a commercial project from the outset then I think there would be no outcry.
I wonder how Ilja pays for his food. If he has a “day job”, less time for this and it won’t continue to be great. If he can work on this, and honor the committment to free and paid versions, everyone wins. the PHP Link Directory is one model. The 2.0 version is free. the 3.0 version is modestly priced.
it costs money to live. the only shame would be if there ceased to be a free version; that would be a slap to all who have contributed. but if there is a free version, a business version, an API, and continued development, there will be something good for everyone.
it costs money to live. the only shame would be if there ceased to be a free version; that would be a slap to all who have contributed. but if there is a free version, a business version, an API, and continued development, there will be something good for everyone.
Hi Iljia,
Thank you for all the effort so far. It is useful to see software developers who are thoughtful, write good software and can wear a business hat all at the same time!
I am glad to see the new branch will support PHP4. Although I can use either 4 or 5 on my web host, having to set some of my sites to use php5 just to run aC only often broke other scripts.
While I like “free,” and I strongly support open source-type licensing, I think it is definitely smart to make money while you valiantly help your “neighbors.” It is good because it puts food on the table, makes funds available for future products and—if an affiliate program is offered—gives others a way to earn additional income. A model that combines both free and commercial is used by JROX. They offer an uncrippled free version of their software, up to a certain number of clients … then they charge a reasonable price. No one seems to complain, and I’d guess are actually happy to pay when they (prosperously?) reach the limit!
While it is not wise to tune out the naysayers, it is wise to move forward under your own convictions … That gives the rest of us inspiration!
Thank you for all the effort so far. It is useful to see software developers who are thoughtful, write good software and can wear a business hat all at the same time!
I am glad to see the new branch will support PHP4. Although I can use either 4 or 5 on my web host, having to set some of my sites to use php5 just to run aC only often broke other scripts.
While I like “free,” and I strongly support open source-type licensing, I think it is definitely smart to make money while you valiantly help your “neighbors.” It is good because it puts food on the table, makes funds available for future products and—if an affiliate program is offered—gives others a way to earn additional income. A model that combines both free and commercial is used by JROX. They offer an uncrippled free version of their software, up to a certain number of clients … then they charge a reasonable price. No one seems to complain, and I’d guess are actually happy to pay when they (prosperously?) reach the limit!
While it is not wise to tune out the naysayers, it is wise to move forward under your own convictions … That gives the rest of us inspiration!
Hmmm, I can appreciate certain aspects of everyones feedback, read this email I received from one of our senior managers, I work for one of the largest communication companies in Australia.
——Hi Adam,
Could I get a login to this. I would like to show some people here, what a opensource portal platform can deliver vs our other products in this space——eom
I need to inform him that this is what an Opensource platform used to be able to deliver..
We were discussing using ActivCollab nationally, and investing funds to have certain critical features finished, and providing the resulting code free for others to use..
It was great to see the leadership in my business taking notice of the benefits of the OpenSource methodology instead of their usual stance of “If we invest money in development we do not want our competitors using it for free.”
Very ironic that I need to now request approval for funds to get developers to finish the 0.71 version in our environment and inform them that they won’t see 1.0 from the original developer because he is taking it commerical ;)
——Hi Adam,
Could I get a login to this. I would like to show some people here, what a opensource portal platform can deliver vs our other products in this space——eom
I need to inform him that this is what an Opensource platform used to be able to deliver..
We were discussing using ActivCollab nationally, and investing funds to have certain critical features finished, and providing the resulting code free for others to use..
It was great to see the leadership in my business taking notice of the benefits of the OpenSource methodology instead of their usual stance of “If we invest money in development we do not want our competitors using it for free.”
Very ironic that I need to now request approval for funds to get developers to finish the 0.71 version in our environment and inform them that they won’t see 1.0 from the original developer because he is taking it commerical ;)
Though I won’t immediately have any time to actually work on development, I’d be happy to host and manage the new fork of the open source version to make sure that an open source version lives on. If I were to do that would you be willing to carry the announcement here Ilija?
I am trying to think of some products that have been successful with this change. MoveableType comes to mind, but they lost tons of market share in the transition. I guess that doesn’t hurt too much as they are now quite rich!
Though I can see the need for $, the whole draw was “free, open Basecamp”, if your draw had been “better Basecamp” or “php Basecamp”, I doubt so many that flocked to your software would be so disappointed.
Thanks for letting me know before we had too much time invested.
Back to BaseCamp, but good luck to you guys!
Though I can see the need for $, the whole draw was “free, open Basecamp”, if your draw had been “better Basecamp” or “php Basecamp”, I doubt so many that flocked to your software would be so disappointed.
Thanks for letting me know before we had too much time invested.
Back to BaseCamp, but good luck to you guys!
—additional thought…
It is possible you were a bit optimistic on donations for a product that is at such an early stage? We were most definitely looking to contribute once we installed a version ready for prime-time.
Just my 2 cents.
It is possible you were a bit optimistic on donations for a product that is at such an early stage? We were most definitely looking to contribute once we installed a version ready for prime-time.
Just my 2 cents.
For peole looking for a free, opensoure alternative, there’s an interesting project called Epiware. It has a lot of features, and while the user experience may not be the most polished yet, the team is very happy to have code contributions and quick to help if something doesn’t work quite right. Their business model is based on support, and it seems like they have every intention of remaining open. (Disclaimer: I’m not affiliated with them in any way, but I do use their product and therefore have a vested interest in its future.)
I do not think it’s very good form to advertise another project just because we are a little concerned with the direction this developer has chosen to take.
This is a forum for discussion on aC, wherever it may be heading, it is a credit to Ilja that he allows this open discussion.
This is a forum for discussion on aC, wherever it may be heading, it is a credit to Ilja that he allows this open discussion.
What in the name of Jerry Brightonhammer was that all about?
I dont’ know but it doesn’t make sense to me.
I dont’ know but it doesn’t make sense to me.
Further reflection. After two days of reflection and a re-reading of the posts here, I can see the wisdom and the necessity of including a commercial product. I would like to add a strong “thank you” for the fine work on this free project to date.
My audacity in objecting to a commercial model for software that we use for tracking commercial projects is embarrassing in retrospect! What was I thinking? We will follow your progress with great interest and we are optimistic that an even better tool, with funds for sustained development, will be the result of the commercial product addition.
My audacity in objecting to a commercial model for software that we use for tracking commercial projects is embarrassing in retrospect! What was I thinking? We will follow your progress with great interest and we are optimistic that an even better tool, with funds for sustained development, will be the result of the commercial product addition.
WTF? First you say: All nice open-source and get lots of help by the (FLOSS-loving) community and now you turn around and show them your back?
You should really rethink your ethics.
You should really rethink your ethics.
Perk, you are an exceptionally big person to be able to re-consider and then to take the time to post a public correction. Bravo, sir.
Here here… I agree with flashlackey, good show Mike.
It is interesting how panicked the Open Source community gets when something like this happens. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against open source. I’m just saying that with a few exceptions, the responses of the open source supporters on this comment page have been knee jerk, emotional reactions.
The open source community has nothing to worry about, there will always be plenty of free stuff out there. But when a piece of software gains the quality that would make it desirable as a commercial product, there is nothing wrong with taking the next logical step and making a commercial version of the product. Look at the myriad of Linux versions there are out there. Most of the popular flavours have Open Source, AND commercial versions.
I am still in full support of Ilija’s move.
It is interesting how panicked the Open Source community gets when something like this happens. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against open source. I’m just saying that with a few exceptions, the responses of the open source supporters on this comment page have been knee jerk, emotional reactions.
The open source community has nothing to worry about, there will always be plenty of free stuff out there. But when a piece of software gains the quality that would make it desirable as a commercial product, there is nothing wrong with taking the next logical step and making a commercial version of the product. Look at the myriad of Linux versions there are out there. Most of the popular flavours have Open Source, AND commercial versions.
I am still in full support of Ilija’s move.
Hmm.. surely if the “business” edition just has more features than the “personal” edition then a suite of plugins would be all that is needed to bring the “personal” up to the “business” level.
I agree with a comment made higher up in the comment list, the only reason activeCollab is where it is now is because it offered an unhosted, free version of Basecampe offered by 37signals.
I like activeCollab, but like many I am afraid of where it is going to go with this licensing model.. but then again we could all be belowing this WAY out of proportion.
We essentially have no control over what the developers decide to do. Their time and effort has gone into this product, not ours. So lets just sit back, watch what the developers do and then lets just decide what to do.
Don’t like it? Go make your own.
I agree with a comment made higher up in the comment list, the only reason activeCollab is where it is now is because it offered an unhosted, free version of Basecampe offered by 37signals.
I like activeCollab, but like many I am afraid of where it is going to go with this licensing model.. but then again we could all be belowing this WAY out of proportion.
We essentially have no control over what the developers decide to do. Their time and effort has gone into this product, not ours. So lets just sit back, watch what the developers do and then lets just decide what to do.
Don’t like it? Go make your own.
Flashlackey,
Anything is possible – and if you go back and read both my posts you can see that I am not debating open source vs commercial. Though you keep bringing it back to that…
Perhaps you just like to argue. Or perhaps you have a vested interest in this discussion? You certainly seem on the defense.
//
I mention my career because it is directly relevant to my opinion. As far as not citing evidence for my views, I don’t feel I need to write a dissertation on the matter, not even a professional report. I am not on the job here, I am simply stating my mind.
Whatever your background is, I doubt it is in brand identity, brand strategy or any sort of marketing. I doubt you’re an analyst. I doubt you’re in finance. I wonder if you have any business management background at all. You wouldn’t be so willing to promote such risks if so. Not if you had any sense in you, anyhow.
Time will prove whether or not this was wise, but I place all my bets on failure.
There are simply not enough differentiation points between activeCollab and its ahem competitors.
The true fundamental flaw is that the majority of the aC audience used the software because it was free. How do you convert that type of demographic to paid membership? The one good things aC had going for it (its loyal brand audience) has been scattered in various directions.
It may be wiser to actually walk from the whole deal, than to try and build a business out of it. To make a business work, aC will require a significant investment of development and service (read, by way of a significant capital investment).
Perhaps aC has an angel or venture capitalist firm willing to pump in a lot of flow to get it to a salable product. I would be surprised (for strategy reasons sparkled in the texts above)... but its certainly not impossible.
Perhaps aC has a few other aces of its sleeve. Innovations and usability improvements that blow its ahem competitors completely out of the water. That would certainly give this move more foundation. I’d invest in that.
Anything is possible. But from what I have seen in terms of development since the beginning – I would be surprised if aC has any of that going for it.
Anyhow, that’s all I have to say on the matter.
Of course every once in a while I’ll curiously check over here and see what’s new. If you have an amazing rebuttal and can tell me something I haven’t already heard – please feel free to respond.
But really… who cares? If you object to my opinion, that’s absolutely fine. As I say, only time will truly tell.
Anything is possible – and if you go back and read both my posts you can see that I am not debating open source vs commercial. Though you keep bringing it back to that…
Perhaps you just like to argue. Or perhaps you have a vested interest in this discussion? You certainly seem on the defense.
//
I mention my career because it is directly relevant to my opinion. As far as not citing evidence for my views, I don’t feel I need to write a dissertation on the matter, not even a professional report. I am not on the job here, I am simply stating my mind.
Whatever your background is, I doubt it is in brand identity, brand strategy or any sort of marketing. I doubt you’re an analyst. I doubt you’re in finance. I wonder if you have any business management background at all. You wouldn’t be so willing to promote such risks if so. Not if you had any sense in you, anyhow.
Time will prove whether or not this was wise, but I place all my bets on failure.
There are simply not enough differentiation points between activeCollab and its ahem competitors.
The true fundamental flaw is that the majority of the aC audience used the software because it was free. How do you convert that type of demographic to paid membership? The one good things aC had going for it (its loyal brand audience) has been scattered in various directions.
It may be wiser to actually walk from the whole deal, than to try and build a business out of it. To make a business work, aC will require a significant investment of development and service (read, by way of a significant capital investment).
Perhaps aC has an angel or venture capitalist firm willing to pump in a lot of flow to get it to a salable product. I would be surprised (for strategy reasons sparkled in the texts above)... but its certainly not impossible.
Perhaps aC has a few other aces of its sleeve. Innovations and usability improvements that blow its ahem competitors completely out of the water. That would certainly give this move more foundation. I’d invest in that.
Anything is possible. But from what I have seen in terms of development since the beginning – I would be surprised if aC has any of that going for it.
Anyhow, that’s all I have to say on the matter.
Of course every once in a while I’ll curiously check over here and see what’s new. If you have an amazing rebuttal and can tell me something I haven’t already heard – please feel free to respond.
But really… who cares? If you object to my opinion, that’s absolutely fine. As I say, only time will truly tell.
Take-home message: Don’t expect much in the way of donations to a pre-1.0 project. The business users are where most donations should come from. Individuals working with an early-release project are contributing as beta testers.
My point is that the free business model can’t be expected to work without mature code, tested and with business features. Then you’ll see adoption from commercial interests and some payback. Without alienating the community of “little guys”.
Perhaps I am naive, and this was the business model all along. i.e. Build a community for the free software during early development and testing, then close it up just as the project matures.
So best luck to you. If the closed model doesn’t work out, you can open source it again.
I’ll be keeping an eye out for OpenCollab, until then my needs are met with the Google services (Docs, Gmail, calendar, Picasa, etc. etc. ).
My point is that the free business model can’t be expected to work without mature code, tested and with business features. Then you’ll see adoption from commercial interests and some payback. Without alienating the community of “little guys”.
Perhaps I am naive, and this was the business model all along. i.e. Build a community for the free software during early development and testing, then close it up just as the project matures.
So best luck to you. If the closed model doesn’t work out, you can open source it again.
I’ll be keeping an eye out for OpenCollab, until then my needs are met with the Google services (Docs, Gmail, calendar, Picasa, etc. etc. ).
Perhaps I am naive, and this was the business model all along. i.e. Build a community for the free software during early development and testing, then close it up just as the project matures.
That was not original plan. Original plan was to build a software and make money from support and customization services. After a while we agreed that that would not be the best way to go. We will let other teams do custom development while we keep our focus solely on activeCollab.
Jason,
I can appreciate your last comment. I certainly agree that we can only speculate on what will happen. My general contention here has only been that it is the right of the aC team to adopt this model and that others have no grounds to reprimand or insult them for it.
We will have to agree to disagree on the separate point of whether or not this was a “good” decision. I believe that there is strong demand for this type of product. If aC turns out to be an equivalent or better product than baseCamp and provides a more competitive pricing model along with the ability to install on your own server, I don’t see how it will not turn a profit.
“The true fundamental flaw is that the majority of the aC audience used the software because it was free. How do you convert that type of demographic to paid membership? The one good things aC had going for it (its loyal brand audience) has been scattered in various directions.”
You don’t convert them. You filter them. Of course you are going to lose some users simply because they don’t get it for free. That would be true for anything in the world that has any value to people.
That it was free is not the “one thing” it has going for it. It is installable on a separate server, already has some improved features over baseCamp and looks to be improved much further. It also sounds like it will be priced more competitively than baseCamp. Those are at least three things it has going for it. I would wager a fourth as well in that it has a following. Despite the whining taking place here, I bet that those who have declared “off to baseCamp” attitudes will at least come back to take a look at the new version and pricing model when it is released. As you know, that is a favourable marketing condition to be in versus having no following to begin with.
Since many thousands of people are already paying x amount for baseCamp, it is reasonable to conclude that many thousands of people will pay less than x amount for aC.
To satisfy any curiosity you might have about myself, I have been owner and CEO of a business for over four years now. Many of our clients are fortune 500 companies and my work does revolve around marketing. Not that any of that should make my observations or arguments more substantial. I like to think that those should stand on their own.
I can appreciate your last comment. I certainly agree that we can only speculate on what will happen. My general contention here has only been that it is the right of the aC team to adopt this model and that others have no grounds to reprimand or insult them for it.
We will have to agree to disagree on the separate point of whether or not this was a “good” decision. I believe that there is strong demand for this type of product. If aC turns out to be an equivalent or better product than baseCamp and provides a more competitive pricing model along with the ability to install on your own server, I don’t see how it will not turn a profit.
“The true fundamental flaw is that the majority of the aC audience used the software because it was free. How do you convert that type of demographic to paid membership? The one good things aC had going for it (its loyal brand audience) has been scattered in various directions.”
You don’t convert them. You filter them. Of course you are going to lose some users simply because they don’t get it for free. That would be true for anything in the world that has any value to people.
That it was free is not the “one thing” it has going for it. It is installable on a separate server, already has some improved features over baseCamp and looks to be improved much further. It also sounds like it will be priced more competitively than baseCamp. Those are at least three things it has going for it. I would wager a fourth as well in that it has a following. Despite the whining taking place here, I bet that those who have declared “off to baseCamp” attitudes will at least come back to take a look at the new version and pricing model when it is released. As you know, that is a favourable marketing condition to be in versus having no following to begin with.
Since many thousands of people are already paying x amount for baseCamp, it is reasonable to conclude that many thousands of people will pay less than x amount for aC.
To satisfy any curiosity you might have about myself, I have been owner and CEO of a business for over four years now. Many of our clients are fortune 500 companies and my work does revolve around marketing. Not that any of that should make my observations or arguments more substantial. I like to think that those should stand on their own.
Woah, i need to follow the forum a little more! Whats this about a commercial version??
Yeah, what’s this SUDDENLY about a pro version? Your site starts with this: “activeCollab is an easy to use, web based, open source collaboration and project management tool. Set up an environment where you, your team and your clients can collaborate on active projects using a set of simple, functional tools. 100% free!” And the 100% free part links to a thorough explanation of why ac is free. Now all of a sudden you’re going to be creating a pro version and a lite version? Now all of a sudden “BaseCamp without paying for it” is a thing of the past? Now all of a sudden you’re going on about your deliberations of what to develop for a 20 year old’s mom vs. a business user?
I do think you’re missing something all of a sudden: Your integrity. Maybe next time you want to risk your credibility completely, you’ll announce your intentions outright on your homepage, instead of suddenly, out of the blue, remarking casually and obliquely about your “crucial questions.”
I do think you’re missing something all of a sudden: Your integrity. Maybe next time you want to risk your credibility completely, you’ll announce your intentions outright on your homepage, instead of suddenly, out of the blue, remarking casually and obliquely about your “crucial questions.”
Yeah disappointing. This is no longer the project it started out being – not even close.
Consider my interest over.
Consider my interest over.
Well, it has become a trend now a days. Companies that fail open source their software to survive. Similarly, people use open source to get the necessary free PR so that they can capitalize on it later. Shameful and Disgusting.
Vang
2007-03-04 9:31
Although most people think that a private core is bad for the project, I think that it’s actually beneficial since it’s a huge motive for the development team. Go for it mate :)