Marketplace Closure

[ReyDev]

23 minutes ago, Daniel F said:

they are now even able to implement much better approaches which would have probably been forbidden in our marketplace because of our guidelines.

I can imagine what great things can be done by removing these restrictions 🙂

[Marc Stridgen]

37 minutes ago, MediaDiGi said:

I don't have access to financials, but from your latest actions, I see that you want to focus on the enterprise customers that take a cloud-managed plan because that's where the money is. And also, enterprise customers only install a few add-ons. 

It's worth noting here, that the decision is quite simply market driven. It's not that enterprise customers only install a few add-ons. It's actually that the majority of customers of any type don't install any at all. Enterprise will actually tend to go for custom solutions from developers for their own needs. 

[ReyDev]

As a developer who has years of development experience and I am familiar with various techs that I could use in the development of apps but I didn't due to their limitations by IPS. I am sure that this method will help to make IPS more powerful and eventually users will use it and who will have a powerful board. Also, this method increases the competition between developers, and better apps are produced. If you look at other platforms and CMSs like WordPress, you will see that there are many developers for an app and you can choose the best one after comparing them. Many of the apps in the market can be better developed and released to the public, but considering that other developers have done it, I didn't do it so it doesn't affect their sales.

For example, I was recently working on an LMS project, which was quite similar to the apps available in WordPress and other CMSs. When I found out that IPS itself had published the same, so I stopped the development, because I didn't know if this app would get permission to publish after the completion of the project. But I can continue to develop them now. also, I have made a lot of custom apps and plugins (+70) that I could publish in the market according to the agreement I had with the clients, but I didn't take the risk due to IPS restrictions, and now I'm thinking about publishing them. there are even apps whose value is less than $10 and some do not need renewal. We can manage them in this way.

[PlanIt Geo]

I'm very upset InvisionCommunity is not pushing to be the #1 forum software available. Years ago it was vBulletin, they faded because they didn't adjust with times and ipb overtook them. Now  InvisionCommunity is in a GREAT position to expand and they decide to start "closing" features. From a business perspective, it makes no sense and your clearly missing data.

I've been in the crypto space for 8 years now working NUMEROUS blockchain/crypto/defi projects. You know what they ALL have in common? They ALL use DISCOURSE (EWW) because they're unaware of other real enterprise compatible options. I wouldn't eve CONSIDER closing the marketplace until you've tapped into the very massive market you obivously haven't tapped into.

The companies that ARE using Discourse and i present them InvisionCommunity, they feel they've been duped after realizing what i quality forum is. The marketplace is a HUGE sell point and i mean BIG. Companies wants to feel they can customize different features within their own world/ecosystem and the marketplace is the best way to do that. 

If you expect enterprise grade companies to want to HUNT DOWN 3rd part addons and feel secure as opposed to current setup, i truly believe i can help InvisionCommunity and would like an e-mail i can reach.

 

[Charles]

I respect your unique viewpoint but I am afraid I do not see that in practice 🙂 

We have many enterprise clients on our platform and they specifically do not want anything third-party. They see it as a security risk. When I speak to prospective clients they never ask about such things.

In fact, most enterprise clients specifically disallow any outsourcing or external code being added to their community setups in the contracts we have with them.

We get people switching to use from Discourse all the time. Again, I can see how you might see it that way in your specific case but, on a broader scale, it is just not what we experience.

[Kenneth Baker]

6 hours ago, Daniel F said:

3rd party devs are still able to provide such update checks and notifications.

But as MediaDiGi wrote, from the way the current design of the Providers Directory looks like the only way for us to see new updates is go thru dozen of pages one by one and manually check if something new was posted

And impossible to see which are new modifications because there's no central location for that either

To me it looks like we'll have a community which almost impossible for new devs to enter the club since if its up to us only to decide who isnt suspicious then not many clients will be willing to be the first to buy something from a dev who just signed up recently

[Cedric V]

I understand that the shutdown of the Marketplace is a huge shock to everyone, thinking it's the end of the world when it's honestly not. 

 

3rd party developers will still be able to offer their applications, and with the help of @Joel R building a directory, that is bound to be good. Have a little trust everyone.

 

Also worth noting: Other forum software developers don't maintain an official marketplace and don't review codes or anything that is being released. It's entirely on the BUYER's responsibility to check for recommendations, reviews, sales, and reputation of the 3rd party developer. As always, think and do research before you buy and if it's too good to be true then it most likely is.

[Matt]

38 minutes ago, Kenneth Baker said:

To me it looks like we'll have a community which almost impossible for new devs to enter the club since if its up to us only to decide who isnt suspicious then not many clients will be willing to be the first to buy something from a dev who just signed up recently

If I was a new developer trying to gain trust, I'd spend some time in the community being helpful and getting to know people. You can quite quickly gain trust this way and then start to offer your services and products.

[Daniel F]

1 hour ago, Kenneth Baker said:

But as MediaDiGi wrote, from the way the current design of the Providers Directory looks like the only way for us to see new updates is go thru dozen of pages one by one and manually check if something new was posted

No, your ACP is going to show the same notification and badge as you see now if they implement their own version check. 

[Robert Angle]

14 hours ago, ReyDev said:

For example, I was recently working on an LMS project, which was quite similar to the apps available in WordPress and other CMSs. When I found out that IPS itself had published the same, so I stopped the development, because I didn't know if this app would get permission to publish after the completion of the project. But I can continue to develop them now.

This is worth noting, actually. I'm not a developer, but I think I remember seeing something about a non-compete clause with Marketplace submissions. For example, when it was announced Status Updates were going away, there was concern that current Marketplace rules would prevent a developer from creating a Status Updates application. Invision responded that they would alter the terms so such an app could be created.

Well, here's the altered terms, lol. With no central Marketplace, developers can create anything they want, even if it does what the core software pretty much already does, but perhaps with a different enhancement or twist.

[Hisashi]

@Lindy I sincerely see other ways for you to do this.

As I said earlier, the marketplace is a great showcase that connects developers to IPS customers without leaving here. Having this removed makes life difficult for your clients in trying to find resources quickly without having to go to thousands of developer websites.

My idea is, remove the paid market and keep a free market so that developers can maintain this showcase, so they start offering two versions of the product. A free one, where the user could get it directly from the IPS website, and the paid (full) version that would be described within the product and the user would be redirected to the developer's store. Where he would have all financial responsibility for the product.

Example 1

Example 2

 

IPS could go another route, which in this case would be to charge a small fee to developers who publish resources with a limited free version. And keep the market for developers who support the community with completely free resources.

Many of these resources are made with good heart and are freely available in the market, such as translations that connect people all over the world, and all of these will be "lost".

Edited August 17, 2023 by Hisashi

[WP V0RT3X]

I think this is the best decision IPS has made in years. The only thing customers will lose is some comfort, but the bottom line is that it is the best for all. 

What you are suggesting is that developers have to release 2 versions. Means a lot more work and then have to pay to release a free version. Why should someone do that?

Quote

Many of these resources are made with good heart and are freely available in the market, such as translations that connect people all over the world, and all of these will be "lost".

I promise you nothing will be lost, there will be even more. More applications, more translations... more freedom. Not on this website, just on another one.

[LiquidFractal]

On 8/16/2023 at 12:01 AM, Charles said:

The Marketplace has lost us money for many years especially as people just are not as interested in "mods" like they were decades go.

Really?  I'm no expert but I find the last part of this sentence hard to believe given that there are many gaps in IPB functionality which necessitated the Marketplace community in the first place.

[LiquidFractal]

On 8/15/2023 at 11:53 PM, Matt said:

That's correct, you'll go through to the developer's own site. It's likely that you have more than just one modification from a single developer, so it may be less.

So unless I'm missing something, this means that if a developer doesn't have or is somehow unable to start their own independent website then they have no way to maintain their apps/plugins?

[LiquidFractal]

On 8/16/2023 at 1:14 AM, Clover13 said:

Meanwhile, clients either have no way to validate new devs work like IPS previously did to guarantee the safety of the app/plugin.

I'm not sure what you mean here.  As far as I know IPS never "validated" the "safety" of any third-party app; they only checked to make sure that devs weren't using existing code contra IPS rules.  The "safety" of 3rd-party apps has never been Invision's responsibility (and for good reason!).

[CodePixel]

4 hours ago, Hisashi said:

PS could go another route, which in this case would be to charge a small fee to developers who publish resources with a limited free version.

This will go the same route it went before, although this looks like a good idea, again - this puts IPS in place where they have to be a middle-man which costs time and effort for very little amount of money which is just simply not worth it. Imagine you having a company and people would require you to work almost for free, would you do it just for the community?

[LiquidFractal]

On 8/16/2023 at 10:59 AM, Robert Angle said:

I could care less if I am getting a 3rd party app/plugin or theme from outside the marketplace, but it was nice to have a one stop shop to search for what's available.

I think this pretty much sums it up for me...although some smaller/beginning devs who may not be able to afford their own websites may fall off the map, and some devs may raise the prices of their apps in order to cover the costs of "going independent" with their own online presence.

But maybe this will also help prune some of the apps out there that charge unrealistic renewal fees that aren't warranted by the nature of the app/what it offers....

[LiquidFractal]

On 8/16/2023 at 6:02 AM, Joel R said:

More broadly, to anyone who is hesitant about these changes, there are some pros and cons: 

- More independence, more variation, and total flexibility for developers and themers.   They can build their own core, their own gallery, their own package of plugins.  You can't do any of that in the current Marketplace.  I expect to see some truly experimental and innovative approaches to how developers and themers work with IPS 5. 

- More independence, more variation, and total flexibility in how they charge.  Providers can charge crypto, they can offer a bundled set, they can offer discounts, they can set their own policies for chargebacks and refunds. 

- Trust will be deeper, not wider. The IPS Marketplace gave a broad stamp of trust to all providers for meeting standard IPS coding. But for clients, this is an opportunity to deepen ties to one or two trusted developers and take our most important apps private and control our own development pipeline.  I do believe the biggest developers will still offer - and can make healthy income - off a broad portfolio of single purpose mods, but those by itself aren't going to dramatically fulfill your community's specific needs.  

These are all pros though 😉....what are the cons you see?

[LiquidFractal]

5 hours ago, Hisashi said:

My idea is, remove the paid market and keep a free market so that developers can maintain this showcase, so they start offering two versions of the product. A free one, where the user could get it directly from the IPS website, and the paid (full) version that would be described within the product and the user would be redirected to the developer's store.

How many devs have the time or are willing to go to the trouble to develop free/paid versions for each of their products?  This would run @Adriano into the ground methinks.....

[Charles]

39 minutes ago, LiquidFractal said:

Really?  I'm no expert but I find the last part of this sentence hard to believe given that there are many gaps in IPB functionality which necessitated the Marketplace community in the first place.

Luckily we are the experts in seeing usage trends 😉

34 minutes ago, LiquidFractal said:

I'm not sure what you mean here.  As far as I know IPS never "validated" the "safety" of any third-party app; they only checked to make sure that devs weren't using existing code contra IPS rules.  The "safety" of 3rd-party apps has never been Invision's responsibility (and for good reason!).

Trust me. You have no idea how many problematic things we prevented from being published in the Marketplace over the years.

PSA: you might want to use multi-quote when doing many replies 🙂 

[LiquidFractal]

Just now, Charles said:

Luckily we are the experts in seeing usage trends 😉

33 minutes ago, LiquidFractal said:

OK...I guess you mean something different from "mods" than what I had in mind. 🙂 

As for "safety," yeah, I was under the impression that the "caveat emptor" stipulation you had pretty much freed you up to check for code violations and that "safety" per se wasn't your primary concern.

[CodePixel]

Just now, LiquidFractal said:

"safety" per se wasn't your primary concern

if IPS Staff didn't check if apps/plugins are safe for end user, can you even imagine how many more problems would they have from community owners that used said app/plugin and got hurt by it, even more chargebacks, even more tickets/emails, even more problems.

Would you want that for your company?

[Clover13]

32 minutes ago, LiquidFractal said:

I'm not sure what you mean here.  As far as I know IPS never "validated" the "safety" of any third-party app; they only checked to make sure that devs weren't using existing code contra IPS rules.  The "safety" of 3rd-party apps has never been Invision's responsibility (and for good reason!).

I think that's quite a bad gap to have.  With PII on the line, it's important to check for any potential vulnerabilities that could put it at risk.  IPS clearly has a security and PII focus in their own code (right?), meanwhile you're saying they blindly host apps/plugins in their own Marketplace with the only requirement being not exhibiting any IP theft, while at the same time facilitating the sale of unchecked code?  Why is that a good thing to not be their responsibility?

Clearly, IPS is moving entirely away from any level of responsibility (IMO a case could be made they do indeed have responsibility in their current Marketplace).

Now, how much of an issue this WILL be is debatable.  How much of an issue it CAN be is not.  Third party code is a risk and always will be.  We can rely on trusted developers, which is great for those who exist already and have built up such trust.  It's quite bad for new developers trying to enter the game and raise the level of competition and quality in applications.  We are still taking risks using unchecked third party code.  I am trusting the IPS Marketplace, reviews, etc on my own sites currently, but it certainly doesn't make me feel warm and fuzzy inside knowing it hasn't been vetted at a code/exploit/security level.  It's more of a "I kinda need this functionality and sure hope nothing bad happens" and that honestly isn't a good mode of operation. 

I'd be curious to know what IPS has observed with their corporate clients.  Yes they are built in house or by private consultants, but that doesn't mean it's immune from human error, outdated libraries, exploits, etc.  Are they doing any level of suite wide testing to guarantee their own security?

[Clover13]

10 minutes ago, CodePixel said:

if IPS Staff didn't check if apps/plugins are safe for end user, can you even imagine how many more problems would they have from community owners that used said app/plugin and got hurt by it, even more chargebacks, even more tickets/emails, even more problems.

Would you want that for your company?

Chargebacks and tickets are the least of their concern.  Legal issues jump right to the front of the line.  Again, this could be an added reason for them to effectively exit all responsibility by closing their Marketplace.  They reduce their own cost of maintaining it and eliminate their own risk (as noted in their own notes in the Provider directory).

[LiquidFractal]

4 minutes ago, Clover13 said:

you're saying they blindly host apps/plugins in their own Marketplace with the only requirement being not exhibiting any IP theft, while at the same time facilitating the sale of unchecked code?  Why is that a good thing to not be their responsibility?

I said my assumption was that it wasn't their primary responsibility.  Again, I'm no developer but I presumed that checking each and every single line of 3rd-party code for both code violations and safety would be unreasonable.  Besides - there are (well, were) plenty of warnings for people who know how to read that 3rd-party apps/plugins aren't (well, weren't) IPS's responsibility.

I realise that people who don't pay attention will still message, but I always thought those were easily dismissed (quite frankly, I think a potted email would have done the trick, which I've seen on umpteen million other websites in different contexts).  In the end, though, I don't think anything can eliminate the question of vetting - whether Invision did it or a 3rd-party dev does it.  Whether there's a Marketplace or not, it comes down to reputation and trust.

And yes, I'd love to know some more (demographic) information about IPS that IPS will never give out. lol