Status update followup

I’ld love to see the new model actually working since i’m in the process of adapting a similar model for some of mine projects. What is certain is that unfortunately the donationware model rarely works and some times developers have to set a barrier and say “need the full stuff ? Give me some cash please”.

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 :)

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

“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?

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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?

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.

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. :)

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…)

@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

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? :)

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.

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,

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 …

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!”

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—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.

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

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

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

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

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 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.

Also sorry to get off-topic with this, but thanks for the response.

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 ?

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!

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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”

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,

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.

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 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

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!

@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.

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.

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.

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!

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 ;)

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!

—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.

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.

What in the name of Jerry Brightonhammer was that all about?
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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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. ).

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.

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.”

Yeah disappointing. This is no longer the project it started out being – not even close.

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.

I too agree that it’s a real mistake for activecollab to move to a commercial model. The hype you engendered would never have come about had it not been for the community getting behind your “open source” declaration.

It’s totally possible for you to develop a “for profit” service to work in conjunction with an open source application. Offer commercial support, or customisation services. Develop long term strategies (Firefox anyone) – don’t be short sighted and just slap a price on it so you can put a couple of dollars in the bank next month. If money is your goal, the longevity of your product is key. And you won’t get longevity without the support of the community.

Pretty ribbons don’t make your proposed free version anything but dressed up crippleware. Clearly this is PR, aimed at appeasing the “students”, “teachers”, and non-profits who you don’t stand to make money from anyway.

So disappointing. You’ve insulted the community that helped foster the awareness you’re now benefiting from.

“The hype you engendered would never have come about had it not been for the community getting behind your “open source” declaration. ... So disappointing. You’ve insulted the community that helped foster the awareness you’re now benefiting from.”

Why do people feel so entitled to demand “free as in no cost” from “free as in freedom” software!? Educate yourself on why the GNU license was created in the first place. The developer of this project never at any time said “activeCollab will be free of charge for ever and ever”.

activeCollab 0.7.1 and previous are free of charge, and will always be free of charge, and if you like it you may download it. You may use it for free. You may build upon it to fit your own needs. All of the time, effort, and money that were poured into the current version are being given away at no charge. You aren’t being cheated out of anything, and I cannot for the life of me understand why some people are reacting that way.

So if you’re pissed that someone actually decides that they’d like to change the business model for their business (and it is a business), I think you need to understand that it’s their right and duty to do what’s best for the business (not the open source community).

So in your idealistic world, you may say “Well then I think someone should create an alternative or fork the project or built on 0.7.1 and give it away for free”... Great! Put up or STFU.

uber_nostrum@hotmail.com

Er, ubernostrum:

Your quote: “The developer of this project never at any time said ‘activeCollab will be free of charge for ever and ever’”

The quote from the developer of this project: “activeCollab will always be free but there will be commercial support as soon as we hit 1.0 for people who need a little more that community support.”

There was no version number on activeCollab there, right? And a mention of commercial support for 1.0 implies that there would not be a commercial charge for 1.0. So, I guess you’re just plain wrong.

I think the outrage that we’re reading about, and that I feel, is simply because of his statement I’ve quoted there. Ilja has simply changed his mind and therefore rendered his first statement a falsehood. Trust is very important in any relationship, whether its an open source community or a business group.

Imagine a person who enlists and leads a group of people to follow his work and contribute to it with the idea that they’re all in a collective of interested souls with a like-minded approach to process and result. That’s anything from a hobby group, to a softball team, to a small business. But a business (as opposed to an open source enterprise) usually has some contracts in place to prevent one member of the team (even the leader) from changing the rules, or walking off with the whole suitcase. If a group is created for the public good, there’s really no way of walking off with “the public good” so such contracts aren’t quite as necessary. Enlisting a team with the plan that is very clearly defined on this site and then changing that plan before v1 is a betrayal. Sorry ubernostril, it wasn’t a business. It was a community that suddenly became a business.

dotproject.net is an open source management project that has reached v2.1 without anyone suddenly getting greedy, picking up their chips and running away.

oh pleeeeeeese.

“Trust is very important in any relationship…”

Did you think you were married to Ilija because you used his free software? If you don’t want to call it a business, fine. Then you shouldn’t call it a “relationship” either.

All of those expressing “outrage”, “disgust”, etc. don’t have a rational leg to stand on. What if Ilija were to become terminally ill? What if the entire aC team were offered a job requiring their full time commitment to something else? Would you still say that you have been “betrayed” because he doesn’t continue to provide new, free versions for you? You need to face the fact that the key element needed for your argument here is that someone else should continue doing something with their own time and life for your benefit, at no cost. You are trying to trumpet up the notion that your mere “attention” to the site has some value when the real reason you are here is to get something free from someone else. You aren’t sitting around thinking “who am i going to bless with my commentary and attention today? what free internet project deserves my gracious following? i hope the people i choose really appreciate that im using their work for my gain!”

Bottom line, you go ahead and pick up the latest free version and continue developing it at your own expense and offer it for free. Problem solved. No harm done.

flashlackey, well said. You addressed some things I left out (or didn’t express properly in my previous post).

flenser, your quote:
“Imagine a person who enlists and leads a group of people to follow his work and contribute to it with the idea that they’re all in a collective of interested souls with a like-minded approach to process and result.”

makes no sense in this situation. Ilija specifically limited contributions to the official development of the project (other than plug-ins which will always work in the current version). How did you (or anyone else) “contribute” to the project? As flashlackey states, do you really believe that your downloading and using a free application is contributing? Do people flood the forums with bug reports because they wish to altruistically see activeCollab more stable? Or do they flood the forums with bug reports because they want free support for their free software?

From the beginning Ilija limited community involvement in development, and that was a good thing. It’s prevented freeloaders from having any justification in arguments such as yours. Now, let me specify something, because that comment can be taken out of context. By freeloaders, I don’t mean those who use open source software and contribute nothing back to the project. Freeloaders are those that use open source software and contribute nothing back to the project and cry and moan and complain about the project as if they have any investment in the project at all.

uber_nostrum@hotmail.com

Do you think we are missing something? Tell us!

well yes i think you are missing something. People like me came to aC because it was an OpenSource alternativ to Basecamp. Now what do you say ? Lite and pro version ?

Well, if i really need a good and simple project management software i think i will go back to basecamp (wich is by the way, the world best in it’s category).

Honestly what are you thinking ?

Imagine a lite and pro version for openoffice….. what about gimp and others…. lol
Do you really think that we want to pay for those softwares ?

I hope you will make a few bucks from your pro version and that after you realize that Ac can’t compete with backpack you will release it to the community.

I agree completely with woody. So many people come to activeCollab as an alternative to Basecamp… I know the only reason i started using it was because it turned up in a google search for “Open source alternatives to basecamp” By switching to a pay setup, I feel you will be alienating your target market. I really hope you reconsider implementing a pay structure. I’ve seen this happen many times before. It will start where the free version is decent at first, but the feaures will just keep dropping until it’s barely useable and everyone is forced to pay. It’s great for you as you will be making money, but it is not great for the community which you started out wanting to help.

Uber:

It doesn’t matter who I am or what my goals are regarding this software. Open source software has to be USED by someone. That someone can donate, can customize the code, or just use it. They might use it because it’s free, or because it has better features than a commercial app. But don’t make distinctions between what I owe anyone for coming to this site because I want a good open source management app. Your definition of freeloader is ridiculous. An end user does not have to contribute money or coding to an open source project. By simply using a version, a “freeloader” is (a) making it worthwhile by putting it to use, (b) acting as a source for beta and bug testing, and© acting as a source for enhancement ideas that come from putting the app to use in the real world. You think I have no investment in the project? How about if the project is running my tiny non-profit volunteer business? Wouldn’t you say I’m pretty invested in it? What have you, ubernostrum, invested in this project? Coding hours? Money? Or just sage advice? Who are you to discriminate between “investors” in a community that is created around an open source app? Do you use Firefox? Did you know that’s an open source project? Have you ever updated since a pre-release version of it? Do you regularly update it? Have you ever participated in its coding? Have you ever sent any buckage to the Mozilla Foundation? Do you know what open source is? Have you ever used PHP? Have you noticed that that app is updated regularly and is free of charge? Have you ever participated in that app’s coding processes? Ever sent The PHP Group any money? What would you do if the PHP Group suddenly said the next full version would be a cost version, and a stripped-down version would still be free? Quietly stick with PHP5 for the rest of your life, or be a little outraged? Judging by your outrage at anyone else’s outrage on this forum … I bet you’d be outraged.

Flashlackey: if you can’t think of any relationships other than marriage or business, you need to get out of your room a little more often. For instance, we have a little relationship here, don’t we, tense as it may be? We’re not married and we’re not paying each other for anything. But there’s still some trust here, right? Trust, for instance, that I won’t tell the world that you beat off into your roommate’s skin moisturizer bottle without telling him. Oops. Sorry. Betrayed that trust. See what I mean?

Furthermore, re: my above comments to ubernostrum, using Ilija’s app for free is the whole point. It’s free. And it needs to be USED or why does it need to exist? The value that I’m adding to it is that I’m USING it.

Finally, my main, unadulterated point: if you use software under circumstances that are clearly defined by the developer, your ongoing use of the software becomes dependent on the circumstances he has defined. If you use a pre-release version of the software, and you encounter bugs or feature inefficiencies, you hope that eventually, later versions will solve those problems. If you use a pre-release version and spend time loading in all the projects and tasks, etc., that your company relies on to function, you look forward to ongoing releases that make the app even more useful. You certainly don’t look forward to being told that what was going to be 100% free will no longer be and that you might have to drop the software and go look for something else and load it up with your entire business project management data. Consistency, reliability and integrity are important aspects of open source programming, wouldn’t you say? Or is it just every man for himself?

I’ve gotten off on some tangents because, basically, ubernostrum failed to acknowledge the first part of my first post, preferring to continue his arrogant rant about how much more he knew about the word “free” than mere mortals. So here again is uber’s main misconception that was the foundation for his entire screed:

“The developer of this project never at any time said ‘activeCollab will be free of charge for ever and ever’”

And I pointed out that the developer of this project said this: “activeCollab will always be free …”

So until uber comes up with something to say that isn’t founded on a misconception, I’d say uber can follow his own directions and STFU.

Because the developer offered a detailed post and bullet list to explain why the app would be free for ever and ever. Which are justification for, and assurances about, the project that are necessary to create trust in users, contributors, and donors. Perhaps the point should be that Ilija was stupid and naive to promise that and to enter into a defacto contract with his burgeoning community. He didn’t know that things might change for him. But the fact is, he did the stupid thing and committed to something he shouldn’t have. But he committed. Now, he’s doing another stupid thing, which is betraying the people he committed to. Some of those people don’t feel betrayed, and that’s fine. They can keep using AC 0.7 on their servers with Apache 0.3 and PHP 0.0.2 since they never care about updating or upgrading.

(I realize ahreno has said all this much more eloquently, politely, and concisely than I have.)

One more thing: I don’t want any of this disparagement to reflect on Ilija’s work. AC is great and he has done a great thing. It’s his business sense and community responsibilty I’m criticising.

thank you flenser for confirming your lack of class. rather revealing as to what kind of disjointed (and wierd) thoughts you have rolling around there.

”(a) making it worthwhile by putting it to use, (b) acting as a source for beta and bug testing, and© acting as a source for enhancement ideas that come from putting the app to use in the real world.”

a. how does you putting it to use make it worthwhile to anyone except your self and perhaps your clients/employees? does ilija not deserve a model that makes his work worthwhile to himself?

b. again, motivated by self interest. you report bugs because you want them fixed for yourself.

c. see b.

allow me to ask, why dont you take the current version, develop it yourself (or hire some people to do it) and offer it to the community? please answer this.

This will be my last post on this subject, because clearly flenser doesn’t care to actually read what I’m saying. Anyway, your notion that by merely using activeCollab contributes in some way is laughable.

“And it needs to be USED or why does it need to exist?”

Are you serious? If a tree falls in the woods, and nobody is there to hear it, does it make a sound? If my grandma had balls would she be my grandpa? Do you see any similarities between these questions? If you’re trying to say that in some philosophical realm you’re actually the cause (and not affect) of the success of activeCollab you’re more delusional than I thought!

And I thought I was very clear about my “freeloader” statement, specifically by clarifying in detail what I meant. Turn down the TV, put on your glasses, put down the beer, and read carefully…

My own definition of “freeloader” in this case is someone that meets all 3 criteria below:
1 – Doesn’t contribute financially
2 – Doesn’t contribute developmentally
3 – Complains about anything relating to the project

Now. If you meet criteria 1 and 2 (which I do, for most any open source software) you are not a freeloader. So to answer your question, do I know what Firefox, PHP, etc. are? Yup, sure do! I use the most current versions all the time. Do I go to the forums and submit bugs? Yep, sometimes. I submit them cause I want them to fix the bugs so that I can have a more stable version myself (no to better the project).

Here’s the next question… Do cry in the forums when they develop something in a way I don’t agree with, or make decisions that I don’t agree with? Nope, that’s crossing the line, because frankly it’s their own damn business! And unless I’m a part of that business, I don’t need to open my mouth and complain. Why? Because they were gracious enough to give me a free product without asking for anything in return and I should be happy and grateful and not act like a screaming, punk ass, chubby, spoiled 4 year old who didn’t get a fifth serving of cake.

Anyway, I’m sure you’re a nice guy though in real life. I just hope your neighbors don’t ever ask for their lawn mower back. I’d hate to see how you take them to court for not letting you use it for free whenever you want.

Hey,
I love what you’e doing!
Don’t ever change and best of luck.

Raymon W.

Ilija. I agree, this bitch-fighting is unproductive. It does however illustrate how passionate people are about activecollab.

Nobody is suggesting that you shouldn’t benefit from activecollab – financially or otherwise.

But here’s an idea. Open it up. There are countless, brilliant developers – such as yourself – who would relish an opportunity to work along side you on a brilliant project such as activecollab. You don’t need keep your doors closed to keep a hold of your baby (Linus Torvalds?). There’s no reason the project can’t power forward while you continue to pay your bills with your day job.

Get some business advice – not just from the small business advisory centre around the corner from your house (who know’s zip about web startups), or from your mate who works for an ad agency. You need to communicate with your peers. Talk to someone at Joomla.org about how to run an organisation around an open source application – man! those guys have been to hell and back for that application.
http://www.joomla.org/content/blogcategory/13/29/

Talk to someone from a venture capital organisation – seriously, you have arguably one of the best “open source” rivals to Basecamp. You should be able to generate some interest. You just might land yourself some angel $$$.

Once you put a price tag on activecollab – you change the whole ballgame. 37signals have resources you just can’t compete with right now. Don’t put yourself in the same pond with them.

As a free application, you get free promotion and support through an obviously supportive community. There’s nothing like free beer for making friends ;) You’ll more exposure through open source hype than you could pay for as a commercial application. Changing your model to get immediate trickle income will cost you more than you realise.

Stick to your original plan Ilja – keep it free and open source. Get some help if it’s too demanding for you timewise and financially.

Hell, I’ll manage activecollab.com for free if you like – with you in control of course. I can send you a resume if you want to see my credentials. That will free you up a little.

I bet people start lining up to help (for the love of it) if you just give them a chance.

Rethink the commercial shift mate.

Jason Ferris

You cited some great examples there mate. And clearly your committed to your decision. I hear you loud and clear.

I do wish you the best of luck going forward. I (along with many others) will just have to wait and see which way the wind blows. Arrrrrrr :)

No whining here—just sharing my view with others. I came to aC after using BaseCamp and dotProject. aC’s slimmed down approach compared to dotProject convinced me to stick with the early version despite a few key shortcomings. With this announcement and “clarification”, I’m less than enthused about the development roadmap for this PM app.

Tomorrow, I begin replacing it with dP, Drupal, WordPress, or some such software that I know has a strong developer community around it and seems committed to an open license. Like others, I do wish you well. As a developer, I respect your work and your decision. I may even come back to aC if the 1.0 version makes it worth my while and the license works for me. But the hurdle just got higher for this user’s acquisition.

Now, off to shopping for that replacement. Hopefully dP’s next interface really does make inroads into simplifying the maintenance of a PM portal…

The result will be that people will not use ActiveCollab but will fork the OpenSource version.
How can you make such a great software and then be gredy and kill it?

@Ilija – It’s not a matter of what you name the version, it’s a matter of sticking to what you say. If you’re going to say you will fix certain bugs at no charge, I expect you to follow through.

If you went ahead and implemented the fixes you said you were going to, I would have no problem paying for the commercial version. (And I have no issue with you changing the path of aC, just that you’re now breaking previous commitments.)

Now, judging by results, I have reason not to trust you.

Create good software, treat your customers with respect… and you will attract the resources you need to be financially successful. You don’t have to renege on promises to be successful.

The original purpose was for this project to be an open source, free PHP rewrite of basecamp (paid) functionality. “Free” being the whole pupose of starting the project.

Keep it free and open source! Get the community involved in owning the code!

What a sell out you are!

Hi Ilija,

I for one am excited about 1.0 and plan on purchasing the commercial version. Maybe you’ve answered this before, but do you know when you’ll announce a price?

I also wanted to post my expected price for the application. I don’t know if you’ve already done market research (as far as what people will probably be willing to pay) but I think I fit an average “small business owner / manager”.

First off, I am the type of person that understands the value of other people’s time vs. my own. I could fork the current version and develop everything I need. (It would take me many months and cost me a lot of money). I could try to use Basecamp again (which is bloated and expensive for what I would use it for). I could hire someone to fork the current version (again, costing lots of money).

So to have you invest that kind of time and money to meet a need that I have, I measure it against any alternatives. Looking at those costs, I can find a price that meets my needs. For me, I would purchase a commercial version for between $75 – $100 (with no direct technical support other than community forums). I’d probably pay a little more if it came with email / chat support (with faster response). Also, for that price, I would expect free upgrades within it’s version number. (For example, 1.x upgrades would be free with bug fixes and maybe some small new features here and there). Whereas I would pay $30-$50 for a full version upgrade to a 2.x version.

So anyway, those are the prices that would convince me to purchase a commercial version. Of course, if you price points are lower than those I wouldn’t complain! ;)

uber_nostrum@hotmail.com

Ilija, in the start of ActiveCollab you stated that AC’s direction was somewhat the opposite of BaseCamp. Now you’re headed the same direction.

Please think ahead! Making it payware will only halt the development and just inspire a more OS-oriented mind to create basecamp software, just like you did, but this time 100% GPL.

If you take the same direction the Wordpress guys took, you will be rewarded on in every way, not just the “i need cash now, kthx”-way.

“Invest in yourself. Material things come to those that have self actualized.” (cl)

What about University Use?

We have been using aC for 6 months or so for a large research multi-disciplinary research project. University’s can often afford an initial outlay – but monthly fee’s for outsourced data storage is an issue. I thought it was said that the Lite version can be self hosted (which is a key feature). I don’t think it has been explicitly stated that the Pro version will also be self hosted.

Paying for a Pro version may be OK IF it can be self hosted. If not, go with the market leader with a proven track record rather than a start-up.

I’m an open source developer (drupal) and my philosophy is that open source rules. I’ve even been getting money through it because I’m a drupal guru and companies are heading in that direction. So it’s working great for me.

The ONLY way that a win-win could be achieved here is by taking 1 of the following paths:

1. Providing a one time payment for the web app and all its future updated, and if that’s not possible, to simply provide a payment for the app and its updates that spans over a long period of time (like 1-2 years?)

2. To continue development on the project as open source, and to become a specialized company in it and in its plugins. This somewhat modules the zend-php case. Zend is a specialized PHP company, yet PHP is still the all famous open source project! By doing that you will harvest your advanced code/API know how to provide plugins faster than the masses.

3. To continue development on this project as open source without going commercial and create a special status for paying users like dedicated support, live help, installation of the app, customizing the code, etc…

I really don’t know which one you should take, but without going in one of these paths you’re risking the loss of the golden open source title :-( I’m not saying this is bad or good, I’m saying you’d no longer be open source. I don’t use linux because windows is expensive (cracked versions are sold at $1 on the streets here!), I use it because it’s open source and I think open source beets the crap out of commercial products (sooner or later).

If you lay out a path for testing all of the above alternatives and make that known to the community then they will have to understand it if you move up to the more non-open source alternatives eventually. You shouldn’t judge them as not-gonna-work before trying them out. I would go with trying out 3, 1 (one time, then long spans), and finally 2.

Good luck!

Hi, ActiveCollab is a great project and has a big potential for the free software world, but I think you should really consider releasing your code at least under the Affero GPL version, which guarantees the free software freedoms for your web users as well… GPLv3 will do it partially and the web today is not free There are other alternatives such as Telematics Freedom

later,
giovani spagnolo

Looks like this project has lost it’s two most important assets:

1. Trust of your community.

2. Being an open and free alternative to BaseCamp.

I am still very disappointed about the whole change and bad communication (to prices yet, no clear business plan for your customers to plan ahead). Most of all I regret donating my money to this project. Although I have no problems paying for commercial software on one side and supporting OpenSource projects on the other – I still still somewhat ‘cheated’ by the change of plan and direction.

I agree with many comments here about other OS projects making some money in other ways – without alienating their community.

This change will forever stick to this product and community – a brilliant pr disaster. The only thing that will keep people is an excellent product … and a clear price plan – which has yet to be seen.

Anyone planning a fork?

@ubernostrum:

Why do people feel so entitled to demand “free as in no cost” from “free as in freedom” software!? ... and some other comments …

If someone announces a new project as free and then switches in midgear – that’s fine. But developers and business owners like me have to plan ahead. When an (important) suddenly becomes ‘expensive’ you might no be able to afford the extra cost – and it is always a royal pain in the ass to shift data, projects and clients from one tool to another.

So ‘trust’ and ‘integrity’ as several others have pointed out ARE essential.

When I look at a new tool (free or commercial) I first and most try to find out if I can trust ‘these people’: Are they serious about the project? Do I get good value for my money? Does it make sense to donate money or time? Can I rely on the tool and it’s developers? How do they handle problems and the (business) relationship?

I think that most critics here have absoloutely NO PROBLEM if Ilija Studen makes some serious money from this. Good for him! But he should have built upon the existing model of a free alternative to BaseCamp – and rather added commercial services to expand his own product. Instead he opted for an ill-communicated turn before he even had a final product. This was simply not a smart move, also not well communicated and prepared.

Once again from my perspective as a business person: can I rely on such a person for an essential tool for my work? He already has shown that he makes disruptive turns / decisions.

I for example quit BaseCamp, because the company hardly responded to some requests from european and other users for more international support. Also some design / interface decisions where forced upon customers without warning or possibility to keep the old version. Mostly I was annoyed (in the early stages of BaseCamp) about the lack of a good backup tool / fallback solutions – essential for any business tool – especially if your clients are directly embedded in it and I have important projects in progress that rely on that tool?

For me it is the same:
The only reason I’m using this software is because it is open source.
If this changes, I will not go for the 1.x versions.

Then I will stay with the 0.7.x or move to some other application.
I worked with dotproject, but that was way to powerful and complex for my customers. aC has just 10% of the features dotproject offers, but this lightwight softeware is what i was looking for.

I dont think that it is a good idea of switching to be a commercial program. There are so examples out there (joomla) where it is for free and works best.

That way you have a big community working on pathces and plugins. If you start making money with it, most programmers (like me) will not post pathes or plugins, cause there is always the bad taste that my work fills the budget of somebody else.

DONT GO COMMERCIAL !!!

The problem is…what will keep the developer from changing his mind again. Will the free ‘lite’ version be kept? Will an open plug-in system be kept active? Can we trust that the project will continue or will we be sold out again in the future? I have lost trust in this project. After having suckered many users (or actually beta testers as it turned out) to use, contribute, and worst even to recommend aC to others based on the great promise that it showed as an open source project. I have personally recommended aC to many people and I will have to answer many questions soon.

There were other ways to go about future development and making money. I don’t think you chose the best method. Your marketing adviser is not doing a great job. You could have done this in a much less abrasive manner and had avoided all the negative press (I have seen posts in several development forums discussing this issue with general discontent). But it is your decision.

What will make the difference to me will be the plug-in system. If it is really a useful api then I predict that the community will be quick to provide open source plug-ins to fill the the gaps between the pro and lite versions (I hate the term lite, it makes me think of useless apps missing the key feature in order to get you to want to pay…much like the BaseCamp method…another poor marketing decision). That is why I fear that it will end up being limited, if the gap is closed then less people will go Pro. Can we trust that their will be a true commitment to keeping the lite version alive at all?

openCollab sounds great. There is some space for someone to shine here. Due to the aC controversy this would get much attention.

Those who donated money should be offered a free version of Pro. This is the very least that you should do, they believed in your cause and you changed your mind, you should show them some appreciation.

“Zar i ti sine Brute”
Znam da je zivot u Srbiji tezak, ali zar nisu sva programerka resenja na kojima si razvijao Collab upravo Open Source bila i ostala. Onda kada si ucio svoje prve programerske redove kao i sada kada imas ovako lep i znacajan doprinos samoj zajednici Otvorenog Koda.

I am sorry for Serbian post but emotions that I feel I can say only on Ilija and mine native language because my English is not so good.

Warning:
The third party plugins could be the downfall of this product. I have seen Mambo, Joomla, and other projects crippled by a diversity of third party plugins. Many plugins are poorly written and are not updated with each new release. When the end user relies on the functionalities of these plugins, they hold of doing security updates and new release updates waiting for the plugins to catch up. Joomla currently has about 1,000 plugins. Who has time to sort through all this junk? If an app has about 10 useful plugins, and they can be added to the core for next release if really popular, this will keep the software focused. If you allow everyone and anyone to add to this, the software becomes cumbersome, outdated, and unfocused. Be careful with the plugins. It can be the downfall of this project over time.

i’m really disappointed guys. Here I am (presumably like countless others) come to help you…and this happens.

there are so many other ways you guys could have gone. i don’t want a version for a 20-year old mother. I don’t want to be ‘used’ as a free resource to enhance your commerical product and I can’t shake that terrible feeling of being misled in the run-up to 1.0.

It’s how I really feel.