Marketplace Extreme Frustration
Permalink
Hi All,
I think this is my first post here but I've used Concrete5 for many years on and off so I'm not new here. I love the system and I now use it for pretty much all of my websites.
I don't make a new site often but each time I do I get increasingly frustrated at the lack of maintenance in the Marketplace area. There's no way to tell whether an add on is five years old or five days. And when invariably an add on fails in some way you have to trawl though numerous posts in various threads (which I'm very grateful for) to find a solution, if there is one. In many add ons the demo link goes to an out of date page that doesn't have the add on and in many cases the developer has provided the add on free but no longer wants to develop it. And you can't really blame them for that.
I know it sounds like a rant but it really isn't. It's just that I think there needs to be a way of reporting defunct links, add ons that aren't up to date and to move add ons that are really old and outdated (broken) somewhere else so that it is less confusing and time consuming.
I know there is a review system, forums etc and I really appreciate all of that. I purchase add ons and themes as well as gratefully making use of the free ones. When I'm making a site, however, I relly need to have an understanding from the outset as to whether an add on is going to take an inordinate amount of time to incorporate or if it will be a breeze to install.
Right now the Marketplace isn't giving me that confidence, even to the extent that I'm reluctant to purchase some of the add ons even after doing a lot of research into whether other members are satisfied with them or not.
The date that the add on was originally uploaded and last revised should be a requisite also.
There are some amazing add ons here that the originator has apparently abandoned and the members are extremely helpful to each other in revising them and getting them going again. It's a real shame that this work couldn't be incorporated back into the add on even if the original developer has abandoned it. I guess that is not allowed under terms and conditions but it really ought to be.
I'm almost ready to suggest that there should be a premium add on area, so that we would know that we could absolutely rely on it and get support.
I know that many of you are programming wizards and I hope you don't see this as a complaint but I just see so many opportunities where I could make a website in a few hours but it ends up taking several weeks (for those of us who aren't such great programmers).
One item that has sparked this email recently is trying to get the shoutbox add on to work. There are some great, helpful threads about that but for me it means a few hours reading and implementing instead of a couple of minutes. And to have to maintain records of what I do in case I want to do the same thing on another site in a few months. But it doesn't only apply to shoutbox, I'm finding the same with many addons. Maybe there should be a button to make a donation for someone to update the old addons (in such a way that it is then made available to others).
Thanks for listening, what do you think?
I think this is my first post here but I've used Concrete5 for many years on and off so I'm not new here. I love the system and I now use it for pretty much all of my websites.
I don't make a new site often but each time I do I get increasingly frustrated at the lack of maintenance in the Marketplace area. There's no way to tell whether an add on is five years old or five days. And when invariably an add on fails in some way you have to trawl though numerous posts in various threads (which I'm very grateful for) to find a solution, if there is one. In many add ons the demo link goes to an out of date page that doesn't have the add on and in many cases the developer has provided the add on free but no longer wants to develop it. And you can't really blame them for that.
I know it sounds like a rant but it really isn't. It's just that I think there needs to be a way of reporting defunct links, add ons that aren't up to date and to move add ons that are really old and outdated (broken) somewhere else so that it is less confusing and time consuming.
I know there is a review system, forums etc and I really appreciate all of that. I purchase add ons and themes as well as gratefully making use of the free ones. When I'm making a site, however, I relly need to have an understanding from the outset as to whether an add on is going to take an inordinate amount of time to incorporate or if it will be a breeze to install.
Right now the Marketplace isn't giving me that confidence, even to the extent that I'm reluctant to purchase some of the add ons even after doing a lot of research into whether other members are satisfied with them or not.
The date that the add on was originally uploaded and last revised should be a requisite also.
There are some amazing add ons here that the originator has apparently abandoned and the members are extremely helpful to each other in revising them and getting them going again. It's a real shame that this work couldn't be incorporated back into the add on even if the original developer has abandoned it. I guess that is not allowed under terms and conditions but it really ought to be.
I'm almost ready to suggest that there should be a premium add on area, so that we would know that we could absolutely rely on it and get support.
I know that many of you are programming wizards and I hope you don't see this as a complaint but I just see so many opportunities where I could make a website in a few hours but it ends up taking several weeks (for those of us who aren't such great programmers).
One item that has sparked this email recently is trying to get the shoutbox add on to work. There are some great, helpful threads about that but for me it means a few hours reading and implementing instead of a couple of minutes. And to have to maintain records of what I do in case I want to do the same thing on another site in a few months. But it doesn't only apply to shoutbox, I'm finding the same with many addons. Maybe there should be a button to make a donation for someone to update the old addons (in such a way that it is then made available to others).
Thanks for listening, what do you think?
While I sympathise with your problem, and especially with the time wasted being more of an issue than a few dollars spent, the marketplace already has mechanisms for discerning the quality and up-to-date support status of addons.
You can look at the reviews and review dates and at the version information. You can look at the sites using the addon.
If its not an addon or developer you are familiar with, you can click the link to directly ask a pre-sales question about versions, compatibility, your application or whatever. You can also post a question on the general forums and see who else has used an addon.
Asking a pre-sales question serves 2 purposes:
1. You get an answer that removes a bit of technical uncertainty
2. You find out how on the ball the developer is in supporting the addon.
If you get no answer at all, even allowing for a developer being on holiday for a week or two and you have sent a reminder in case the message went astray, then using the addon really is at your own risk.
If, having used an addon you find it isn't what you expected, post a support request and give the developer a chance to help you.
If they don't answer a support request, give them a poke by PM just in case the c5 message system has gone astray (it does), and if you still don't have any response, post a review that says 'no support'. That way you have left a note for anyone that follows and as a reminder to yourself.
If more users left 1* reviews about unsupported and broken old addons, then more users would be warned and less would waste their time.
You can look at the reviews and review dates and at the version information. You can look at the sites using the addon.
If its not an addon or developer you are familiar with, you can click the link to directly ask a pre-sales question about versions, compatibility, your application or whatever. You can also post a question on the general forums and see who else has used an addon.
Asking a pre-sales question serves 2 purposes:
1. You get an answer that removes a bit of technical uncertainty
2. You find out how on the ball the developer is in supporting the addon.
If you get no answer at all, even allowing for a developer being on holiday for a week or two and you have sent a reminder in case the message went astray, then using the addon really is at your own risk.
If, having used an addon you find it isn't what you expected, post a support request and give the developer a chance to help you.
If they don't answer a support request, give them a poke by PM just in case the c5 message system has gone astray (it does), and if you still don't have any response, post a review that says 'no support'. That way you have left a note for anyone that follows and as a reminder to yourself.
If more users left 1* reviews about unsupported and broken old addons, then more users would be warned and less would waste their time.
JohntheFish and mnakalay,
I don't disagree with either of you regarding the value of the reviews and other community support features. However, wishful thinking I suppose, I wish there were some mandatory way to indicate more clearly whether add ons are being used successfully, in particular for the free add ons.
Support for paid add ons has been superb in my experience but some of the free ones are so useful! I really appreciate add ons (and themes) where the developer has included detailed documentation, such as Pro Blog and the C5mix themes.
Unfortunately, making websites is not my main job, I wish it were. It's something I do in my spare time to make ends meet. So I don't have extensive coding knowledge or much free time for research. I don't think I'm unusual in that regard and I've used many CMSs over the years. All of them that were within my budget had similar issues and I completely understand why such diverse and useful projects are so difficult to co-ordinate and maintain.
Now I've come over all nostalgic for MaxWebPortal, I spent many an hour playing with that in the olden days! :D
Regarding shoutbox in particular I'm carefully looking at the following thread where mhawke has been incredibly helpful to other members in nee and hoping that I might be able to use it. I'm tempted to purchase Cometchat just to save time but it doesn't quite do what I want, whereas shoutbox is exactly what I need
http://www.concrete5.org/community/forums/customizing_c5/shoutbox-b...
I'm also looking to stream videos from my site but the built-in features and the free addons are not proving to be very useful so far. I'm looking into Video JS Player as a possibility at the moment. It looks good but the live demo doesn't work and the most recent review is six months old. I would buy an add on but I don't know which will suit my needs without trying it or doing a similar amount of research without the benefit of having access to the add on as I would with a free one.
But these are two of many topics I'm researching right now and I don't have much time for the research.
The most valuable lesson I can take from your replies is to leave some feedback myself, so I'll get on with doing that.
Thanks for the responses.
I don't disagree with either of you regarding the value of the reviews and other community support features. However, wishful thinking I suppose, I wish there were some mandatory way to indicate more clearly whether add ons are being used successfully, in particular for the free add ons.
Support for paid add ons has been superb in my experience but some of the free ones are so useful! I really appreciate add ons (and themes) where the developer has included detailed documentation, such as Pro Blog and the C5mix themes.
Unfortunately, making websites is not my main job, I wish it were. It's something I do in my spare time to make ends meet. So I don't have extensive coding knowledge or much free time for research. I don't think I'm unusual in that regard and I've used many CMSs over the years. All of them that were within my budget had similar issues and I completely understand why such diverse and useful projects are so difficult to co-ordinate and maintain.
Now I've come over all nostalgic for MaxWebPortal, I spent many an hour playing with that in the olden days! :D
Regarding shoutbox in particular I'm carefully looking at the following thread where mhawke has been incredibly helpful to other members in nee and hoping that I might be able to use it. I'm tempted to purchase Cometchat just to save time but it doesn't quite do what I want, whereas shoutbox is exactly what I need
http://www.concrete5.org/community/forums/customizing_c5/shoutbox-b...
I'm also looking to stream videos from my site but the built-in features and the free addons are not proving to be very useful so far. I'm looking into Video JS Player as a possibility at the moment. It looks good but the live demo doesn't work and the most recent review is six months old. I would buy an add on but I don't know which will suit my needs without trying it or doing a similar amount of research without the benefit of having access to the add on as I would with a free one.
But these are two of many topics I'm researching right now and I don't have much time for the research.
The most valuable lesson I can take from your replies is to leave some feedback myself, so I'll get on with doing that.
Thanks for the responses.
You mentioned that I have been helpful with the Shoutbox add-on so I thought I would chime in. My work help with Shoutbox was mostly fuelled because I personally had a need for it at the same time that someone else was looking into it as well. And the project interested me. And the project was within my capabilities. A happy coincidence that is required for me to do any free, creative work.
In an free, open-source community, developers come and go depending on the demands in their 'real life'. The 'appreciation' expressed for free software doesn't pay the rent and so a lot of free stuff was either built while the developer had a lull in their pipeline or it was something that was developed for a client who paid them for their time and so they feel no great loss in giving it away for free afterwards. That's basically how the major advances in concrete5 are financed. Some paying client needs 'workflow' or 'advanced permissions' and so the core team sets out to build the client's feature and then the free codebase benefits. It's like F1 sponsors paying the freight for Goodyear to develop better tires so the rest of us can afford the advances in tire technology.
With 'free' comes some baggage. Documentation is boring to write so hardly anyone does that for free. Hence, the documentation is not as good as it would otherwise be if there were paid help crunching out fresh documentation with every version. If you paid $500, $1000 or $15,000 per copy, much of the baggage you are dealing with would disappear but it would be replaced with other, more onerous baggage that comes with proprietary software. There is no free lunch.
Franz and the crew are well aware of the baggage that 'free' brings but under the current revenue model, they have to decide where they should spend their development money. It's a constant balancing act between all the demands of such a huge project. There are no 'right' answers, just compromises that have to be sorted out all day, every day. They walk a very #CCC line.
Say, for example, you know nothing about car repair and you walk into a shop and start asking for help with your car. You stand a pretty good chance of getting ripped off. An effective solution is not to demand that all mechanics suddenly become honest. What is effective is to bone-up of your knowledge of auto repair so you know enough not to get ripped off. If you aren't inspired to do that or if your own 'real life' precludes you from taking the time to learn more about this stuff then I'm afraid you will continue to be disappointed.
I would also love to have a perfect marketplace but as others have mentioned above, there are already mechanisms available. If the core team's development time is going to be re-allocated to solve these issues then bugs in the code won't get addressed as quickly. I know which choice I want them to make.
In an free, open-source community, developers come and go depending on the demands in their 'real life'. The 'appreciation' expressed for free software doesn't pay the rent and so a lot of free stuff was either built while the developer had a lull in their pipeline or it was something that was developed for a client who paid them for their time and so they feel no great loss in giving it away for free afterwards. That's basically how the major advances in concrete5 are financed. Some paying client needs 'workflow' or 'advanced permissions' and so the core team sets out to build the client's feature and then the free codebase benefits. It's like F1 sponsors paying the freight for Goodyear to develop better tires so the rest of us can afford the advances in tire technology.
With 'free' comes some baggage. Documentation is boring to write so hardly anyone does that for free. Hence, the documentation is not as good as it would otherwise be if there were paid help crunching out fresh documentation with every version. If you paid $500, $1000 or $15,000 per copy, much of the baggage you are dealing with would disappear but it would be replaced with other, more onerous baggage that comes with proprietary software. There is no free lunch.
Franz and the crew are well aware of the baggage that 'free' brings but under the current revenue model, they have to decide where they should spend their development money. It's a constant balancing act between all the demands of such a huge project. There are no 'right' answers, just compromises that have to be sorted out all day, every day. They walk a very #CCC line.
Say, for example, you know nothing about car repair and you walk into a shop and start asking for help with your car. You stand a pretty good chance of getting ripped off. An effective solution is not to demand that all mechanics suddenly become honest. What is effective is to bone-up of your knowledge of auto repair so you know enough not to get ripped off. If you aren't inspired to do that or if your own 'real life' precludes you from taking the time to learn more about this stuff then I'm afraid you will continue to be disappointed.
I would also love to have a perfect marketplace but as others have mentioned above, there are already mechanisms available. If the core team's development time is going to be re-allocated to solve these issues then bugs in the code won't get addressed as quickly. I know which choice I want them to make.
mhawke,
You should develop a 'Shoutbox Pro'. I'd buy one or two :D
Ok, my thread has come across as a complaint and it's really not. And the marketplace has become so vast since I joined that it would now be a major piece of work to implement any kind of formal testing.
I agree with everything you've said and I guess if I was all that altruistic, or had more resources, I would volunteer to test every add-on and provide feedback. I'm certainly going to do more of that.
You should develop a 'Shoutbox Pro'. I'd buy one or two :D
Ok, my thread has come across as a complaint and it's really not. And the marketplace has become so vast since I joined that it would now be a major piece of work to implement any kind of formal testing.
I agree with everything you've said and I guess if I was all that altruistic, or had more resources, I would volunteer to test every add-on and provide feedback. I'm certainly going to do more of that.
I am a bit on both sides of the problem. I build websites and I have add-ons in the marketplace. So I am partly biased.
First concerning shoutbox, the developer has indicated clearly on the add-on's page that it's no longer supported.
I do agree with you however that not all developer are that serious about informing users.
There is actually a system to make sure problem add-on get removed from the market. You contact the core team and tell them which add-on and which version of C5 it doesn't work with.
Concerning free add-ons, although frustrating, the problem really shouldn't cost you more than a little time.
Also, if demo links don't work anymore, you should probably not waste your time. (although I haven't had time to update any demo link for my add-ons since a change of website and I know it looks bad but my add-ons are all very well supported :)
Concerning paid add-ons, you shouldn't be too concerned. If it doesn't work, you'll be refunded.
Also some developers are actually happy to let someone else take over their add-on so you might want to try that if you have good modifications to bring to it.
Anyway, nothing is perfect but I think the market place still has enough quality, well maintained add-ons to allow you to work.