Creating revenue from plugins
-
To protect my plugin I am distributing the sketchup ruby script as an *.rbs
My question here is how well has the plugin store worked for people as far as receiving some money for the efforts. A lot of plugins are free and developers rely on donations. Does that actually work?
Is there a generally accepted way of setting up a plugin with a time trial?
I imagine that there are a lot of mixed thoughts on this.
-
Interesting topic. I'm interested too in this.
I have a hunch, relying on donations is waste of time. It's against human nature paying for something when you have the alternative not having to.
Yet we see topics people say they sent donations but I guess they are few.Maybe Tig and Thomthom's input on this will help, since they made many plugins and have
donations all setup.An alternative is perhaps to have a free-version and a PRO-version.
That way no time trial, and you will make more people happy giving back to the Community
whilst getting YOUR efforts payed for if user wants to upgrade to the PRO-version.
Now there has to be an delibarate balance of features so the user desire to upgrade VS they find your free-version interesting. That goes without saying...That's probably what I would do should I ever get in that situation...
Regarding RBS protected code, how does that work actually? Havent even looked at that.
Don't one have to license the code? Just because one cannot see the code doesent mean it's protected more than it cannot be copied and pasted?And then comes the question, since probably all in here at some point has borrowed code, or gotten help in this forum, can we use part of code provided in topics safely without the risk of getting sued when including it in our library? I'm not talking about stealing long methods, but solutions to problems probably only solvable in 1 way..
-
For the rbs files - download the utility and run it. I created a simple windows batch file to simplify the process. I placed the SketchUpRubyScramblerWindows.exe in a location and scramble a couple of the scripts for my DoorMaker.
All this does is prevent users from reading the script. Beyond that, the script behaves exactly as if it were readable text.
This does not prevent people from running the script without paying for it.
c:\src\SketchUpRubyScramblerWindows.exe c:\src\cabmaker\cabmakerlib.rb
c:\src\SketchUpRubyScramblerWindows.exe c:\src\cabmaker\cabmaker.rbxcopy "c:\src\cabmaker\cabmakerlib.rbs" "C:\Program Files (x86)\Google\Google SketchUp 7\Plugins\GKWare\CabMaker" /Y
xcopy "c:\src\cabmaker\cabmaker.rbs" "C:\Program Files (x86)\Google\Google SketchUp 7\Plugins\GKWare\CabMaker" /Y
xcopy "c:\src\cabmaker\cabmaker_loader.rb" "C:\Program Files (x86)\Google\Google SketchUp 7\Plugins\GKWare\CabMaker" /Y
xcopy "c:\src\cabmaker\gkware_cabmaker_ext.rb" "C:\Program Files (x86)\Google\Google SketchUp 7\Plugins" /YI like some of your ideas - the free and pro version idea should help a bit in the marketing area. Of course running 2 versions will complicate maintaining the code.
The plugin store model might work for the pro version - It certainly works for the free version complete with donations.
There are some articles on the Apple Store model which is similiar - and has 2 sales models - one for commercial use and one for private use.
-
@unknownuser said:
download the utility and run it
Later, I'm not at that stage in working on that problem just yet.
@unknownuser said:
Of course running 2 versions will complicate maintaining the code.
True. Especially if you already have a finished product.
Guess it depends on the plugin code structure. Main focus will have to be on the
PRO version.Anyway, I don't know anything about the subject, just speculating as usual
Plugin store model is a great initiative. Keeping commersial plugins here is a good idea.
It's not just headed for donation-based, but also fixed priced plugins ?
Havent read the fineprints.. -
As far as relying on donations. I've in agreement with you that very few people will actually donate - hopefully I am wrong - at least as it pertains to all those authors relying on that model.
I can say this - I have my own web site which has cabinet making software under trial. I have a 1 second nag screen when the software starts up and it works with a 30 day trial. So far I have it set up that each update resets the trial back to 30 days. I can track downloads by IP address ( although I don't know who they are since I have not asked anyone to register ).
What is really interesting is the number of people who have gone back to the site to download a new version. I see download audit trail for IP address like 0 days, 31 days, 61 days, 91 days etc. These people continue using the trial version and haven't bothered to contact me or pay.
As far as intellectual property rights go - big subject. All through my career I have made a point of developing tools / routines myself. This is to avoid a number of problems including version issues, upgrade issues, compatibility issues with other 3rd party tools etc. Some vendors cap off their software and do not provide solutions when you move to a newer compiler. Having said that - I have licensed current versions of my compiler but still continue to use an older one.
OK - who owns what. We could go on to say that since a lot of us went to school - the prof taught us solutions to many problems. Are they going to sue us? Many forums have very knowledgeable people who do act like teachers. This all gets blurry. There is also the issue where we learn things on other platforms and bring that knowledge here. Does that mean that ESRI owns ideas such as TIN ( Triangulated Irregular Networks ) as they have been at this a long long time. Or what about Dr Franklin or Paul Rourke - they both brought a lot of interesting concepts and solutions to 3D spatial geometry.
And ...
-
Interesting, regarding your trial downloads. That pretty much proves donation buttons won't get pressed often..
who owns what -> Thanks for the input. It made sence.
Still waiting for other peoples input on this. Might be somewhat touchy subject...
-
There was always "shareware" where you feel guilty if you don't. A suggested donation might help. I do NOT donate on every plugin that is offered for free. I may donate after I prove a plugin just indispensable or freakin awesome. Sorry. Or I donate to one of the authors who provide many useful plugins that I use. Who would really pay a donation without trying it-- even then, are they going to navigate back to the store to donate? A payment via a plugin thread with a cookie button would be more likely IMO. But the store is relatively new; perhaps that will catch on as a way to donate.
-
I can only talk from customer side... if I really need/want a plugin and it costs a little bit of money, I'm gonna buy it. There are many people here who deserve a donation that I have not, just because I'm broke often... I think the lower/moderate priced plugin is the best of both world. you can do a free version that doesn't have all the features and leads to a purchase. but if it's too expensive it cuts out a huge market.
is it better to sell a few for more, or a lot for less?
-
Hi,
With the introduction of 'PluginStore' and 'Extension Warehouse' it has become more accessible for developers to share plugins and maybe in the near future these platforms will allow authors to sell them as well. (fingers crossed)
As of right now donations are a welcome addition to 'PluginStore' and even though there are people who have generously donated, this kind of appreciation is considered a rare event. Most of them will thank you by leaving a nice comment and this can be very rewarding as well.
Selling plugins will hopefully inspire developer to increase the production value of their plugins so they can have an edge vs competitors. Not only the code should improve but also the interface, graphics, documentation, ect...
On the other hand I am afraid to see the dark side of competition which I am sure you guys can think of a few.
Cheers!
Advertisement