Steph40

My take so far reading through all of this...
Don't lose your marketplace developers.  They're a key to your success and help build your suite of products.  It's a win for customers in getting more robust features, it's a win for developers in earning revenue, it's a win for your company/product suite in both revenue and features that can be adopted.  It's a tough balance to be had, but I can certainly see a credit system whereas developers are credited back license costs once they contribute X (whatever X is deemed to be).  This incentivizes them, and should be coupled to a quality metric to ensure they aren't just throwing something out on marketplace to get the credit but that their offering provides verifiable value to the consumers. There is a huge gap in affordability between hobby sites and business sites.  To have the same pricing model apply to both only serves to make it unaffordable for hobby sites entirely.  If IPS has an interest in being the forefront of online forums/CMS and gain correlating exposure, this approach is leaving hobby sites out of the equation and that is a net loss for IPS in gaining visibility which translates to future sales/adoption by new hobby/business sites (penny wise, dollar foolish).  Not to mention the immediate loss and future visibility from hobby sites that migrate to another solution and popularize it will negatively impact future IPS sales/adoption.  IPS needs to find a way to balance the affordability based on the target customer, but not at a reduction of features (as that inhibits marketplace incentive and adoption if that feature set can be found elsewhere) Support.  You need to address the turnaround SLA for support and customers need an appropriate path to solving site critical issues within a reasonable SLA without it costing $1250 or waiting 3+ days for a resolution to take effect (note, not 3 days to respond, but 3 days to resolve it and have the site properly operational). Unquestionably, the PR around this specific case needs (and is getting) review.  Moving forward IPS needs to do a far better job in broadcasting the roadmap of these changes and provide their customers the opportunity to assess them, which avoids customers being cornered ala "big bang" like we've seen here. I can see MANY are quite upset by these changes for a variety of reasons, but I also see opportunities for IPS to revise their approach for their benefit and for their customers' benefit.  It's a complex situation, and there are fair arguments on both sides, however there is a big void in the balance in the current solution and it WILL unquestionably adversely affect BOTH IPS and its customers.
- "cannot see the forest for the trees"

I honestly think I'm done here.

I am concerned that you might think that the feedback is "send an e-mail a few hours before changing the look of your web site (and oh-by-the-way-side-note-pricing-models-for-existing-clients-go-into-effect-immediately-with-no-significant-advance-notice)."
The feedback is that you should have provided notice on revised pricing models, inclusive of what those revised prices would be months before implementing those changes so that organizations could make appropriate changes in their expected operational expenses.
Speaking for our organization, there's no issue with the changes other than you didn't give any notice to revise our operational forecasts and planning, and our renewal is also in November. Thankfully, we have the ability to reallocate funds unexpectedly, yet not all of your customers are in that position, and it's rather poor form for what we consider a partner in our organization's ongoing success.
I receive an e-mail from a streaming video service that their monthly price will go up one dollar with more than a month's notice. It's just inexcusable to have tied this all into throwing a new shade of paint on your sales site.

This, to me, is the worst thing - I'm unaffected, I can plan for February, I can cover things.
But when you have someone who suddenly sees a "slight" rise in what they have to pay in a few days compared to what they had previously budgeted for? That's not on.

Thanks for this ! We noticed too. We'll get it sorted asap ;] 

WOW I'm going to make pop corn before I read those 2 pages of entertainment.

It’s a community forum. Official IPS support is only guaranteed through support tickets. So all answers here are purely voluntary and a favour of other Invision Community users. We will decide if it’s worth our time to answer and we also might consider HOW the questions is asked. The tone on of certain people here might not be all that motivating to give helpful answers. 
But anyway: In the end, all of these functions are possible attack vectors. For potential attackers (just like potential burglars) its usually a case of “once you’re in, you’re in”. There is nothing specific that happens, when you leave your backdoor open and there is nothing specific that happens to have these commands active. But IF they are being used in a malicious way, then the results are potentially very serious. Essentially, your server can be taken over and used for all kinds of bad things. So if your site doesn’t need those functions anyway, it’s best to have them disabled. It’s highly appreciated that IPS has a warning function for that. 

Because you never sign up for anything? I don't see the issue.

Pete left the invision community, but you can get the latest version of the addon here now ...
https://invisionify.com/files/file/25-who-was-online-hours/

I’ll take a look when I have to release a new version. 

Excellent job with the update, thank you.

What's New in Version 1.0.1
New Features
Add background color for slides Add logo for dark and light themes Compatible with PHP8 Fixed :
CTA Enable / Disable 

haha, I still had 1.2.0 on my computer but it totally breaks acp so @FostersAny plan to update?

I would renew if updated.
dam it renewed hoping to download and test forgetting that 4.3 download are not there anymore.

Any chance this can be updated @Fosters?
It is just what I need 😉

Will take a look now and release a fix, if necessary.

It is in the client area, not the download area:

Try this
 

@Adriano Faria When I activate this app I get:
ParseError: syntax error, unexpected '[', expecting identifier (T_STRING) or variable (T_VARIABLE) or '{' or '$' (0) #0 [internal function]: IPS\IPS::autoloader() #1 [internal function]: spl_autoload_call() #2 /home/site/public_html/system/Task/Task.php(718): class_exists() #3 /home/site/public_html/system/Task/Task.php(198): IPS\_Task::constructFromData() #4 /home/site/public_html/applications/core/interface/task/task.php(56): IPS\_Task::queued() #5 {main} BACKTRACE
 
#0 /home/site/public_html/init.php(1004): IPS\_Log::log() #1 [internal function]: IPS\IPS::exceptionHandler() #2 {main}  

Sent a message with a fix while I review the whole app.

Done thank you

And fixed again... Ya know, when IPS let us add fields to IPS application tables, this mod was a dorky simple set-it-and-forget-it thing. Now, ugh.
Put simply, I spaced that interacting with records would actually end up re-saving the category as well, and on the front-end, with the background image merged into the Category object that means when those edits/saves occur, it tries to save the Category with refreshed information and hits that background image and tries to save it in the Category table and the field ain't there, etc...
I fixed this, ate lunch to give some space, then gave it another run through. I believe I've done all the front-end testing possible. I've hit all the mod actions in record view and category view, plus new records saves, edits, and deletes. Commenting and Reviews on records cleared as well. 
If this still errors out after this (I don't believe it will but...) I'll need to rip off the band aid and make you guys edit your templates.
Instead of $category->pcimage to get at the thing it would be something different. Probably a template plugin like {pci=$category}.
Sorry for the hassle. Available when its available (3.0.6)

Fixed. I've asked for an accelerated review to get the patch out there.
The hitch was in how these are now added to Categories. It gets merged into the object and that's all well and good front-side, but troublesome with saves on the admin side. I got no idea how I missed this 🤷‍♂️ as it's rather apparent when hit. Effectively a one-line addition to fix.
Anyhoo, now that this is set for 4.5/4.6 I'll make a point to look at supporting thumbnail versions of the images and adding an additional field for an array of images which you can then throw at a carousel or something.

It looks like it’s released this morning…Hallelujah! Thank you @HeadStand
 

My issue isn't related to patches but to releases and twice now my concerns were glossed entirely over by IPS staff. I give up, go ahead and delete this posting.