The future of the forum and QuickPDF
Printed From: Debenu Quick PDF Library - PDF SDK Community Forum
Category: For Users of the Library
Forum Name: General Discussion
Forum Description: Discussion board for Debenu Quick PDF Library and Debenu PDF Viewer SDK
URL: http://www.quickpdf.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=675
Printed Date: 23 Nov 24 at 12:05AM
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: The future of the forum and QuickPDF
Posted By: Ingo
Subject: The future of the forum and QuickPDF
Date Posted: 16 Mar 07 at 7:02AM
|
Hi to all! First i don't want to write already today but Marian had written, too and so ... Over a week ago i've had a longer skype-call with Marian. We've talked about the future of QuickPDF and about his work for the library (and for us) .. His statements were: Too much work on the library and no (or only less) money for this. He still wants to support with bugfixes but he need money for living, too. He doesn't want to insert new enhancement into the library. Perhaps he'll offer a special new version with a plugin-option. Who wants a special enhancement will pay for it and get it as a compiled version (perhaps as dll) which can be called from a library interface. If we have great bugs we can send them to the known email-adress and Marian will fix them... But he needs money for doing this. I'll call this "sponsored bugfixing" ;-) I've suggested to him to ask more developer of us for help. Marian answered that all developers have another kind of working and that it's not easy to keep such a team together. I've ever thought that the forum here and all what we're doing here is for us... Every little help from one of us should be a big help for all of us... My suggestions to us: Marian is the only developer really deep into the library. So we should use "sponsored bugfixing" if we have important bugs. If we're making some improvements on the library in our daily work we should post the code-lines again here in the "Change Requests-section" - so all can gain. If we need enhancements for the future we should try doing it like Chicks had done it for us/me with the AES 128 en-/decryption. So we can complete our library furthermore. The problem are the two points of view ... We want to make money with the products made by the help of the library - Marian want to make money with supporting the library. Both views should be okay i think ;-) We're making money with the products... so there's no need to talk about it. How Marian can make money with supporting pdf-libraries? First: Developing an own library as one person seems impossible to me - we all know the story of QuickPDF and the iSED-team. This team was more than one person and they couldn't manage the support. Marian's idea creating new separate enhancements which the users can buy from him and which can be called from inside QuickPDF via a special interface is a good idea 'cause the kernel of the library is the same for all. Real bugs should be fixed by him in his library-sources. He can offer these bugfix-level for a service-fee. If people wait long to jump immediately on a high bugfix-level they should pay more. In the general-section i've created a new poll how we are using the library. We can see already that most of us have solutions out in productive environments. Every day often there're six and up to ten users on the library the same time. Often more guests than members - we should hold these guests... and we're doing a serious job we can change these guests to members. The situation like it is now is a very bad situation. We can't speak from an actual version 'cause it's different for all of us with one or more sponsored bugfixes. Marian should consider my ideas so that i can cool down again ;-) I like this library very much and Marian wants to make money (me too)... and both is possible i think. We're over 450 members here now. I hope that i can read a few answers/opinions here in this thread ;-) To all of us : Over 450 members and always the same few users answering the questions?! It should be a give and a take... We don't need only questions... solutions are welcomed, too... Please, we all should be a bit more active here. Today one of us needs help - tomorrow we need help... We shouldn't forget this ;-) Best regards, Ingo |
Replies:
Posted By: Ingo
Date Posted: 16 Mar 07 at 4:00PM
|
Hi again! Comments are welcome here. In which direction should we go? The next days i'll publish a few polls - so we can see all what most users want ;-) Best regards, Ingo |
Posted By: loufeliz
Date Posted: 16 Mar 07 at 5:40PM
|
Ingo, I am all for keeping it going. I hope Marian is reading this.... please email me at lfeliz at krmrisk dot com with information on how I can purchase the source. I would like to do this prior to March 25th. My real desire is to see if I can get library to work with FreePascal compiler. I would gladly pay upto $50 to $75 a year for continued support and bug fixes. Perhaps $50 to Marian and $20 to this support group. Another idea would be to price the library as follows: Source $500 (allows user to compile VCL and DLL possibly ActiveX ) VCL Only $49 DLL Only $49 ActiveX Only $49 2 of 3 $79 All three $99 Minor updates for one year included. Version update within 6 months of purchase (no charge) Binary Version upgrades $19 for single, $29. for 2/3 bundle, $39 for all 3 Source Updates: Minor updates for one year included. Version upgrades $50. Use this forum for support, perhaps collect $20 per year per user. - Lou |
Posted By: marian_pascalau
Date Posted: 16 Mar 07 at 7:15PM
|
Lou, I have read your post. Your proposal may be interesting if there are many people like you.
Best regards, Marian
|
Posted By: Michel_K17
Date Posted: 17 Mar 07 at 12:44AM
|
Hi Lou, Although I agree with your pricing suggestions, we would have to make the library a minimum of $95 (not $49) so that we can pay iSed back because that portion would be theirs. On top of that, then yes, we could charge for the improvements we made, or for support. Unfortunately, the foundation of the library still belongs to iSed. Cheers! ------------- Michel |
Posted By: ukobsa
Date Posted: 17 Mar 07 at 4:43AM
|
Hi all, here are my (personal!) comments about the current situation: - that Marian wants to earn money for his work on QuickPDF: ok, not nice for the rest of us but understandable from his point of view if he needs money. - if one can also get the source for his / her payed extensions & payed versions: ok, if not I wouldn't never use it in a real production system (what happens, if Marian cannot support the lib any longer for any reasons: then you have a dll but cannot fix anything in it) - I'm not sure about the legal restrictions but I would be very carefull before selling iSED's code. Would I buy it as a company: I personally would not (we are talking about lawyers!) - before splitting a commercial version I would really like to see a last good and cleaned up (something 5.21 isn't) public source version from where it is clear: ok, this is the last original forum source version and from this point one there is a "commercial" version too so that everyone can decide to use and enhance/fix the forum version or use the commercial version. - independent of a commercial version I would really like to see this forum stay alive. - would I buy such a commercial version: personally I would not; at least not immediatly (what doesn't mean that the company I'm working is also thinking this way) "I've suggested to him to ask more developer of us for help. Marian answered that all developers have another kind of working and that it's not easy to keep such a team together." Yes, as far as I'm concerned I have a somewhat different kind of working. I want to keep things simple for all code users of this library and if this means that I have to give up some of my personal settings: ok, but that's programming in teams! That maybe not all of my changes are perfect in the latest detail: well, but they are working in a production environment so far without any greater problems and sometimes I have to find a fix for a problem better sooner then later. My personal wish for QuickPDF: have this forum to be the central place for support and future enhancements where all users are giving support if they can. And I wish that a commercial version doesn't kill this kind of peer to peer support here! Independent from the future directions of this library: Thanks to Ingo, Michel, Marian and all the others for doing their support over the years. Without them we wouldn't discuss here to go to a commercial version! greetings, Ulrich |
Posted By: loufeliz
Date Posted: 17 Mar 07 at 10:47AM
|
Okay. I was thinking iSed would still be involved, but $95 is a good price for library to keep pricing simple. Hopefully this will happen soon as I still would like to get a copy of sources. |
Posted By: bone
Date Posted: 17 Mar 07 at 11:15AM
|
I think that there is a pretty simple solution here. Close some parts of the forum for pay use only, rather only allow registered users to download new compiled and source versions. Michel, being someone we can all trust in this matter, would simply collect the funds for all members looking to join on an annual basis (or quarterly). At the end of each year/quarter, members would vote as to percentages of the "pot" they feel various members of the development staff deserve. Money would then be distributed. In this way, you are entirely paying the developers and Michel for the SERVICE, and NOT the product (as paying for the product can be dubious legally, but paying for access to a private group which maintains the product is pretty legally cut and dry). We would only allow licensed developers to join the paying group. Yearly fee could be something like $100 (makes it easy when dividing up at the end of the year percentage wise). Having done a decent amount of legal work myself, this seems like the easiest way to both pay people like Marian without the situation getting messy or there being possibility for law suit in the event of iSed's return. Thoughts? |
Posted By: bone
Date Posted: 17 Mar 07 at 11:16AM
| (On another note.. Michel, you REALLY need to compact this DB or get it from Access to something like SQL 2005 cuz it takes entirely too long to post.) |
Posted By: Ingo
Date Posted: 17 Mar 07 at 12:06PM
|
Hi again! We're speaking more and more only from a commercial solution. For me this forum here is a platform for quickpdf-users. Helping each other if there is a problem from user to user. For new users the samples-section is a must, too. The reference-download can be inserted there, too. Version 5.21 seems to be the last open version as source and binaries... Okay. That's not that what i want but if most of us want it... Additonally we can create a payable section like bone had written. My opinion about sponsored bugfixing: Sponsoring is okay 'cause there's someone who needs a solution immediately - so he should pay... But these bugfix should be included in any further versions of the library 'cause this is the only way to keep one actual library-version. A regularely service-fee is the best solution i think - Marian gets money for his work and we have an up-to-date library. If there are special new library parts an additional fee can be possible. Still i have a bit stomach trouble with missing sources. There should be a ready solution to get the sources if Marian can't continue his work on the library in the future. It would be too bad if someday our projects have to die the same day when Marian have a serious accident (i don't hope so). Bone's hint in case of access is right. Postings are slow. And from time to time there're strange errors over the day... Best regards, Ingo |
Posted By: bone
Date Posted: 17 Mar 07 at 3:43PM
|
Hi Ingo, Just to follow up. I don't think that the entire forum should be "commercial" or whatever you want to call it. Sure, keep the tips and suggestions area open to the public. I would suggest that only the new code / new versions / new bug fixes area be a place where everyone must "subscribe". You pay an annual fee. Michel keeps some for his costs. Contributing developers receive some for their time. On the DB note, SQL 2005 Express is free from MS now and supports up to 4GB of data. If you are able to install it on your server Michel, it's going to WAY out preform the Access one I assume you're running now. |
Posted By: marian_pascalau
Date Posted: 17 Mar 07 at 5:49PM
|
I have reasons to belive that you don't know the consequences of this discussions. You all should be aware about serios problems or missing features inside this quickpdf library. Of course that nobody care as long as it works for him but keep in mind what is the future of this library.
Please keep in mind that most of the normal problems are already solved. You have a stable version and not to many problems. This is anyway a good base to start with it.
Anyway when you have serios interests you will invest your money. If not there is no need to talk about it. For those of you who sponsored the development of this library where will be minimum 1 Year updates available for you.
If you want to know what you can get from this library there is:
1. rendering performance enhancements.
2. full unicode support for extract pdf text.
3. support and bug correction.
|
Posted By: ukobsa
Date Posted: 18 Mar 07 at 2:24AM
|
Yes, there are missing features in current library and in future there
may be some more (also I personally believe that the PDF spec will not
enhance much more the next time. More probably the XML version). But
some of the problems can also be solved by having a public forum and
some developers who spend some time they have. And the more public feedback we have here on the forum the more this library stays alive! Marian, if you want to have a commercial version to earn money: ok but please do it in a way that doesn't have much negative impacts for the one that doesn't want to go your way! Ulrich |
Posted By: marian_pascalau
Date Posted: 18 Mar 07 at 5:19AM
|
Ulrich, I have never sayed direct that it will be everything commercial. I have sayed that some of my privat research will remain privat and only those who support me will benefit from whem.
If you don't need my support it is not my problem. You have access to our support list as much as I have and there is nothing to keep you away from supporting this library.
The only thing I have asked is that any problem regarding the quickpdf library to go through a central system where we all have a chance to know from it.
But is up to you guys to decide what will happen with this library. As I sayed I have good reasons to believe that iSED will not continue supporting this library (not as it is) and the only future perspective is deciding now and here.
You all should be aware about what you are doind cause I know for sure where I want tomorrow to be. For me is clear that I will not stop development on this library and you will hear for sure again from me.
|
Posted By: Ingo
Date Posted: 18 Mar 07 at 7:22AM
|
Hi! My impression is more and more that both groups (Marian's customers and on the other hand the users who wants to keep the sources open) can't live side by side in this forum? The sound is more and more rough here. I don't like it! Do we need a fundamentally decision? Do we need a second forum? Who should change the forum? ...Or is a split of the forum into two parts the best for all? What do you think? Best regards, Ingo |
Posted By: marian_pascalau
Date Posted: 18 Mar 07 at 8:00AM
|
Ingo, I still have some free binaries to publish. After I have done that I will open myself a separate forum. You don't need to ask such questions, I will go away by myself.
I just want to kindly ask you to wait till I will finish and allow me to publish a link with my new location. After that there will be no disturbance and you will be able to do whatever you want with it, whatever this it may be.
Best regards, Marian
|
Posted By: Michel_K17
Date Posted: 18 Mar 07 at 9:30AM
|
Hi Bones, Yes, you are correct: it is an Access database. I will do a "repair and compact" today - although I am not sure how much that will help. I do not have access to the server to install new programs - the site is hosted with 1&1. I do have with my plan access to a single MS-SQL database, so I can transfer the forum over to that - which should improve the performance. Unfortunately, the transfer will not completely smoothly in that I have to set it up to also support my other forums and other projects that I have running too. It means that I have to rename all of the tables, and change the ASP code as a result. I am not 100% sure, but some of the "slowness" comes from sending the e-mails to the folks that have subscribed to receive e-mail notification. I also changed e-mail engine from CDOSYS (was giving errors) to ASP-Mail. I think the forum got slower when I did that. Anyway, to summarize - I am convinced, and I will transfer to MS-SQL very soon, maybe even next weekend. Cheers everyone! ------------- Michel |
Posted By: Michel_K17
Date Posted: 18 Mar 07 at 9:47AM
|
Hi, I really like the idea of selling a "service" instead of a "product" - but is there a market for something like that when we can't even purchase the library anymore (iSed's site is currently dead - with just a hint of a promise). So, we are 500 members. Say 10% purchase the service, that would be 50 x $100 = $5,000 - I would venture not enough to keep Marian going on this project. And finally, if iSed makes a surprise announcement and does sell and support it's library, then all of sudden the "service" model becomes a moot point. My suggestion is that we take Marian up on his offer for a last and best version of the library - for which we should all be greatful. In the mean time, we can see what iSed does. If by April 1st, iSed still does not have their site up and running then I think it will be time to make a decision about this forum. I would love to sell more copies of the library on behalf of iSed, and to send them the money - just in order to continue growing our community, but the legal aspects are indeed scary. Any lawyers reading this? Can I reasonably expect to not get sued if I sell the library and I send the proceeds to iSed? Note: I am using "I" because I have setup this forum - but would be happy if anybody out there was willing to take that risk. How difficult is it to sue someone in a different country? ------------- Michel |
Posted By: Michel_K17
Date Posted: 18 Mar 07 at 10:58AM
|
Hi Bone, I have compacted the database. If I find the time next weekend, I will make the move to a Microsoft SQL Server database. Thanks for the suggestion. Michel ------------- Michel |
Posted By: Ingo
Date Posted: 18 Mar 07 at 2:22PM
|
Hi Michel! The problem is that (perhaps) we're breaking south african law and if iSED wants to tear us in front of justice, this will be in south africa and i don't want to travel to south africa in this case ;-) I'm sure that something will happens on the original iSED-site. I don't know what but something will happens. Why they should do this announcement? They were very quiet, selling the product and controlling our support here was all they had done. Now this announcement... not from kevin but from Michael - They are still there and i'm sure something will happens. Best regards, Ingo |
Posted By: bone
Date Posted: 18 Mar 07 at 3:50PM
|
Michel, I'm not a lawyer, but do a good amount of legal work and contracts. But if you have to pose the question, you probably don't want to deal with the consequences. From an international law stand point: I would say you don't have anything to reasonable fear as international civil law suits are VERY difficult and expensive. I highly doubt the company has much (if any) money, at least the amount to go after you. Now whether or not it is ethical is for you to decide. The only reasonable fear that I could conceive of is that an American company purchases all rights to it, and then they go after you. I know our company made a very generous an offer a few years ago which feel on deaf ears. We have jumped ship. I only visit this forum out of [morbid] curiosity. The truth of the matter is, iSed is YEARS behind most other libraries. Consistently causes errors with 1.6 and 1.7 v PDF files. We've jumped ship and haven't been happier. It's a big up front time commitment, but just something most people here near to accept. Granted no other solution seems to render as well as iSed, but it doesn't even do that that well, and we now use GS. Personally, I think all of this is a lost cause, UNLESS they decide to come back with a hugely improved new version, which simply I don't see happening. In any case, the service method is the only legal and safe route I can see you taking. |
Posted By: bone
Date Posted: 18 Mar 07 at 3:54PM
|
Now that i think about it more, you could go an "Add-On" licensing route. You require people to provide their own license and prove it (as frankly, people aren't going to buy a dead library, its only for people still using it). Sell the new version like a plug in. Make it clear you aren't selling a QuickPDF license, just the "upgrade" similar to how Arts sells their plugins for Acrobat. That is all. |
Posted By: Michel_K17
Date Posted: 19 Mar 07 at 6:51PM
|
Hi Bone, Thank you for your sensible reply. Although I feel 90% OK (ethically) of sending the money to iSed after selling their library, there are no means for me to ensure that the right owner received it. That, and not having the permission from iSed does not allow me to bridge the gap to the 100% I need to feel comfortable to carry out my suggestion. Like your company, I made an offer to purchase the rights to the library. Probably not as generous as yours, but got no reply. For PDF rendering, I use the FoxIt library: it's been good to me in terms of being accurate, and is by far the fastest rendering engine I have seen. I considered using GS, but the results were mixed: I would have to go to my notes to see what were the issues. You mentioned you were happy with the new library that you are using. Can you tell me which library you switched to? Does it support digital signatures? And thank you for your morbid curiosity. You are right: it's like watching a train wreck in slow motion.  ------------- Michel |
Posted By: bone
Date Posted: 19 Mar 07 at 7:55PM
|
Hi Michel, We use DynaPDF these days. We've steered clear of FoxIt just because of the horror stories we've heard of licensing issues with them. GS is turning out to be difficult too as Artifex gets more and more uptight.... grrrr.. such a close minded company. We actually distribute our own slightly modified version of GS for our customers, but are hoping to be up and running GS free by 2010. Anyways, DynaPDF does support Digital Signatures, which is a big selling point. Just curiously, how is dealing with FoxIt? Are their licensing fees reasonable? We actually end up getting a LOT of business for customization projects from companies that try to work with FoxIt and then decide it isn't worth it when they just drop the ball... Seems silly, let's us bill hundreds an hour for work so I guess we can't complain.... just makes me tentative to do business with them. |
Posted By: Michel_K17
Date Posted: 20 Mar 07 at 7:46PM
|
Yes, DynaPDF does support digital signatures (as you can see on my web site, I am a reseller), but only the PKCS#12 with a 1024 bit RSA encryption - which seems limiting. It is unfortunate that DynaPDF does not offer any rendering options as well, and it has not seen an update in a year (beyond the recent minor correction last week). However, the author is very friendly and responsive - so no issues there. My experience with FoxIt has been half good and half bad. On the half good, I was able to negotiate a license to generate renders for a one time fee with unlimited distribution rights. They compiled a special version of their library with a restriction on how big I can generate the picture - which was OK since I was using it to generate the "preview" feature in PDF reDirect. Afterwards, I contacted them to remove the limitation, again for an additional one time fee, and they agreed. But they stopped responding my e-mails to consumate the deal. I have recently been re-contacted by them, so I can see if they are more likely to play ball now. As for Artifex: how have they become more difficult to work with? ------------- Michel |
Posted By: bone
Date Posted: 21 Mar 07 at 7:01PM
|
Hm... well we may have to take a look at them if we need something like that down the line. Artifex just doesn't see the value of "small deals". We were willing to sign $10k-$50k annual agreements with them, and they just backed out... they apparently only see value in the $100k+ contracts. Very silly really. In any case, still moving forward, just less with them than we originally would have liked. |
Posted By: Michel_K17
Date Posted: 22 Mar 07 at 12:15AM
|
Yes, I had the same problem with Artifex too: they turned down my suggestion for royalty payments as an alternative to the $100K option. That was in 2003. Looks like it is not getting any better. Thanks for the info. ------------- Michel |
Posted By: Xstrul
Date Posted: 22 Mar 07 at 5:51PM
Personally I would be glad if I could purchase the Pascal source to QuickPDF, but it seems I cannot even do that. All I want to do is to convert Multi-Tif documents to PDF, the QuickPDF demos I have tried do this with ease. Since QuickPDf seems do be a dead end för me, are there any other "fairly cheap'" alternatives that converts Multi-Tif to PDF ? On the matter of one member trying to blackmail the fora I applause the decision of the group. /Xstrul P.S But where have the polls gone ? D.S. |
Ingo wrote:Posted By: Ingo
Date Posted: 23 Mar 07 at 1:39AM
|
Hi! I only wanted to know what most are thinking and if the old way is okay for most of us. We've got these answers. I hope soon it's running again here... with more member postings about new code-enhancements, member bugfixes and so on... Marian had done a lot for us and (who konws) perhaps he will do... and the polls were a bit dissappointing for him... so i've deleted them. Best regards, Ingo |