Jump to content

Community

RPG-support

Members
  • Posts

    2,742
  • Joined

 Content Type 

Profiles

Downloads

IPS4 Providers

Release Notes

IPS4 Guides

IPS4 Developer Documentation

Invision Community Blog

Forums

Store

Everything posted by RPG-support

  1. The number of products and the commodity turnover value speak themselves. On the Play Market, but not here.
  2. The minimum licence cost is something about 30 USD. This is more about the entrance cost rather than legitimate access check. Anyway open access will be alive automatically whereas restricted access will be strugling to survive. This is the opinion.
  3. They will develop products for their customers who has the licence.
  4. Then I am little bit confused by the screenshot above telling that renewal will provide the full access to the Marketplace. Yes, I am suggesting that developers without the licence may upload files to the Marketplace to make competition, to increase the number of products and to make it as popular as Google Play Market. And the users without licence may purchase to increase the commodity turnover. It is not possible to stop the pirates because they will always find the way. Better to increase the number of the normal people in the circle.
  5. Play Market (Google) has thousands products (mostly free) and it is free for everybody.
  6. Opening Marketplace for everybody will increase the number of products in it. This will make IPS products more attractive.
  7. When we are on the Google's Play Market then we are free to download without the entrance fee. It is incorrect in principle to connect questions of the free market (Marketplace) with the questions of piracy and licensing. The questions of piracy and licensing may be solved by other means: police, edvertisement and good quality of the software. And the contributors should not depend on all thiss stuff. Since all this (police, edvertisement and good quality of the software) is not the problem nowadays, I think that it is not proper to force customers to purchase or renew the lisence (something they may be do not need now). It is good idea to make it PER CONTRIBUTOR thing as the interim measure on the way to the free democratic market.
  8. May be it is the time to make your store free without need to have the active license in order to purchase something. You are getting the tax from the every purchase there and from the every money transfer. For example, you do not pay the entrance fee when you are going to the supermarket. So, make your shop like the supermarket.
  9. Yes, they are. I already deleted them again by the sql requests you gave the last time. I think you should continue to inform the IPS staff that the bug exists.
  10. This is obviously not so as shown on the Gmail example above. I do not agree with the " wasting perfomance" argument. Until there are not particular figures showing the difference in perfomance, your argument is not telling the truth. Don't you agree that adding images into the separate folders (1 Gallery category = 1 image folder) will help to check the permission rules (including image url) on the per category/folder basis?
  11. Facebook is not only the case, there is also Gmail. Otherwise your example is the user's opinion but not the general practice. The general pratice is going towards increasing of security whereas IPS is not. Below is the clear example. This screenshot is showing the url of the attached to the letter image in Gmail. Obviously this url can not be used to share the private information (image) in Internet. And here is the the url of the image attached to the personal message in the IP Suite. Obviously this url can be used to share the private information (image) in Internet.
  12. I like to be stubborn in the sense resolute. Thank you for your complement. You think that there are 2 opinions only: 1) users and 2) developers. But there are another points o view in the world. World is not as small as your close understanding of the matter of this topic. So there are another points of view: 3) comon sence and 4) general accepted practice of doing things. From the point 3 (comon sence) - bugs may be noticed by the users also even if the developers are not following the comon sence in the product planning and development. From the point 4 (general accepted practice of doing things) - all major companies accept security bugs from the users. For example FB paid the user for finding the secuity breach wich allowed to see the private photos of the another user. Thank you for your time. Your posts made the situation more clear and the understanding of the problem more deeper. Have a nice time!
  13. Let us change the accepted by default practice when bug reporter has to go to the feedback forum and left the opinion. Most opinions are without the company feedback on the feedback forum. From the general user point of view the reported situation is not the expected software behaviour but rather the unwanted flaw in the software wich is in accordance with the bug definition (see above). So, make your workers report the bug themselves instead of always telling people to left the opinion.
  14. Expected result and the opinion are the same in this context. Because users may also have opinion and expected result. This is not the matter of the deep wise philosophical jugglery of words. You simply do not want to see the obvious things: See images group permission is the thing that intended for hiding images. But it is hiding the php pages at the moment, not the images.
  15. But this (bold text) does not mean that the flaw in the software is the bug by the developers' opinion only as you claimed.
  16. Sometimes people change category permissions. And the url will work always even if you do not want this now. This does not mean that we should not take actions to prevent personal data leakage on the software level. What people do is the problem of the site owner and moderators but they should have properly protected software. So, your logic is only partially good.
  17. Bad users want software without bugs but wise developers do not see any bugs. Is it strange? Google pays for bugs to general people, not to the developers. What in the "see images" group permission rule you do not understand? This is your dream I think. This is obviously not so. I do not think that my message is wrong. It is correctly posted in the correct place: company feedback.
  18. Well, this was your idea to check the definition. Here it is coming: There is no any "developers' point of view" in this ↑ I do not try to change the definition of the bug since it suits well to this case. I am just saying that this is not free of cost software and people may know the truth: there is no security in uploading their personal photographs to the so called protected categories.
  19. Your team has its own corporate undestanding of what the bug is. On the example of 2 obvious security breaches which were not considered the bugs.
  20. 3.1.11 Again you are installing the dupliucated language strings. When will you stop to ruin my site?
  21. May be you make mod permissions?
  22. Please, consider making a new widget for all applications. This widget will show if the community is active or not for the members and visitors. This widget may show in the time graph: total number of files in the Downloads; total number of posts or topics in the Forum; total number of products in the Nexus; total number of albums or images in the Gallery; total number of blogs or entries in the Blogs; total number of articles/records in the Pages; total number of visitors in the Chat; total number of events in the Calendar. Below are some examples created in Photoshop on the basis of the already exisiting graphs in the ACP.
  23. This language key doesn't exist any more or did not exist as I can see. 4.1.12.1.
  24. You may embed any code you have as well as link to youtube, etc. This application does not have embeded player. If you have one on your server, then you may ajust the embed code and paste it into this application.
  25. You need to change the color of the text to white in your custom theme. The background is actually white but your background image make it not white.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We use technologies, such as cookies, to customise content and advertising, to provide social media features and to analyse traffic to the site. We also share information about your use of our site with our trusted social media, advertising and analytics partners. See more about cookies and our Privacy Policy