Marketplace is bad for the developing process

[Murmel]

When I use the suite software I see many things which  think are mandatory in a suite. (In my opinion of course :-).)

You may point out that there is a marketplace where I can find all this stuff.

That's true, but I don't want to pay for must-have plugins, more important, I don't want to be addicted to many other persons I don't know.

Why?

There is no quality control of these person within the software project and I don't know if this plugin will destroy my community. It's like shareware or open source. Try it and let's see.

I love buying software, because I know that the developers tested it before and are sure that this peace will work also in the next update.

For the marketplace software I ask myself: Is it still in the next version? Is it buggy? Is it a security hole? Will it delete my forum? ....

 

 

 

Maybe even worse.

I see many postings like: Yes this should be in the standard, a definitely missing feature, I love this add-on,....

 

If there is an add-on in the market, there is no need to put that in the developmentment, right, because you would take away the possibility to earn money for the programmers if you would adapt it in the core to fast. No money, no programmers ;-).

 

I struggled about this because I tried to install a plugin and it wasn't working on my installation (security settings of my firewall probably).
All the features of the standard installation are working, but not that add-on. I don't blame the developer of this add-on. Why should he do the free support for a key feature which is missing?

What did I try?

The European Cookie Law :-)

There are 318,9 Millionen (2014) people in the USA and 742,5 Millionen people in europe. But there is NO Cookie Law in the software. It's mandatory for the europeans!

BTW: That's the main reason why the shop add on will never be successful here, it's simple against the law ;-), as far as I see. So no matter what you develop.
It's just for a few people living in the USA ;-). 

 

 

 

Now back to my example with the cookies. I have to trust someone in the forum that he is doing the job. 

Thanks really "-FP" for doing this, but this has to be standard! But I am afraid now it will not, because you did that job for 742 million people. I bet you never thought about this high number :-).

 

More Examples?

Account Deactivation, come on everybody should do this. A very good idea is here.

 

and

Better Advertising System (Ads per Forum and not only globally). Still not for 4.x.

 

Please don't misunderstand me. Thanks for the developers of the add ons and thanks for the software generally, I really like your hard work.

I bought the complete suite and some plugins, but I also had to throw away a lot of work, because the plugins weren't updated (yet) for the version 4.x.

They are free in their policy, they don't have to, but I hate also to be addicted to a small plugin. I want to update when a new version is out.

 

HTH

Murmel

 

 

 

 

[AndyF]

There have been many discussions on the 'Cookie Law' on these forums.

Regarding Marketplace files, they *are* tested prior to approval to verify they work on the version indicated and that they are what they are described as. Upgrading them is down to the individual authors of those files naturally.

 

[Day_]

Frustrating thing about the cookie law is you have exactly what we need already built in, dismissable notices for upgrades. If we just had access to this it would solve all our problems, you wouldn't even need to call it Cookie Law, just notices that all admins could use.

It would have been useful when we upgraded to 4.1 with the editor cache issues, I had countless emails with members unable to post despite posting an announcement.

Instead we're now forced into using external javascript for the cookie law, the one of which I used suddenly stopped working, no idea when, I only noticed by chance in the web inspector the other day, turns out Silktide changed the JavaScript URL.

I've seen all the discussions on here and IPS's refusals, the law isn't very clear I'll give you that but now Google insist we have this installed if using Adsense. It can't be just a handful of Europeans using this software with Adsense? 

Funny thing is you will have a COPPA setting for a law that only effects US users.

Does feel like European users are being shown the middle finger here slightly. I'll let you off tho as IPS 4 is amazing apart from this and that daft unread dot.

[chilihead]

9 minutes ago, daveoh said:

I'll let you off tho as IPS 4 is amazing apart from this and that daft unread dot.

Agree lol.  

[NewRockRabbit]

1 hour ago, daveoh said:

Frustrating thing about the cookie law is you have exactly what we need already built in, dismissable notices for upgrades. If we just had access to this it would solve all our problems, you wouldn't even need to call it Cookie Law, just notices that all admins could use.

Funny thing is you will have a COPPA setting for a law that only effects US users.

Does feel like European users are being shown the middle finger here slightly.

Yes, I've followed all the arguments but the IPS stance doesn't make logical sense to me. We just need the ability as Admins to set a dismissable notification, IPS don't need to provide any content for it and its use wouldn't be restricted to cookie notices. We just need an empty dismissable notice section to which we could add our own (eg cookie) information.

[recifbox]

i'm not a coder but i think it's not that hard to add, Invision put a tool on our hand and let us put the legal stuff by our side on this tools :

for example admin side it's one check box to add (enable/disable cookie law) with a empty text area  to put text and url to a complete page or something else we need to complete .user side it's only a few code to add with a yes or no (that validate in database if user have accepted it).

like this we can do what we want on it and you have just simply resolved it for lot of us European

and like we are gentleman we can also speak to add something more on our 6 months renewal for the help here ?

 

 

[kar3n2]

On 30/11/2015 at 10:37 PM, NewRockRabbit said:

Yes, I've followed all the arguments but the IPS stance doesn't make logical sense to me. We just need the ability as Admins to set a dismissable notification, IPS don't need to provide any content for it and its use wouldn't be restricted to cookie notices. We just need an empty dismissable notice section to which we could add our own (eg cookie) information.

that would be a great idea