COLLABORATION OR ONE MAN BAND ?

j_o_h_n said:

If it's a custom job for one customer then I would just give them the source code and charge them accordingly.
Sorry if I am misunderstanding your situation.

Click to expand...

yes.. this a solution... but a high cost solution too..

But in this way.. the developers will not have the training needed

Click to expand...

Right. But he/she will have the time to study it and accept or decline the offer from the customer holding the code. I want to put in touch two parties: the customer and the new programmer. They may like each others or not. They may find an agreement or not. Absolute freedom for both parties.

if the code is on hands of end-customer - that means can bypass you anytime... you are loosing...

Click to expand...

The source code will be exclusively mine until that "fatal" day. Or, in those cases where the customer buys the source code from the beginning, rules will be set up in the agreement between us. In my case, one key point is that I have to like the customer as much (or even more) than he/she likes me.
If something sounds uncertain, that one is not the customer for me.
Money is important, but peace of mind and quality of life is a priority (for me).

...you mean have the code after death or accident or disappear.. hmmm.. what about if the customer is gangster ?

what about if the customer is gangster ?

Click to expand...

Not the kind of customers I have and who I look for

Anyway, let's think of someone that bought our source code, had an agreement with us not to use it in any way until us go out of business ( a agngster could kill us in order to make this piint apply..heheh), but at some point decides to hire someone else and pass him our work.
What we could do? Lawyers and courts? Hire a better gangster than him? Forget about him and consider that we earned enough from the initial sell?
Consider the possibility to enhance our original product and make it a strong competiotion fro whatever they would come uo with?

Magma said:

yes.. this a solution... but a high cost solution too..

Click to expand...

So it should be for a custom job, even without supplying the source code.
I read once that if 50% of your potential customers aren't put off by your price then you're too cheap.
This customer appears to want jam on it.
A custom job, support, all at the cost of an off-the-shelf product.

But the problem here is not the money...

Is the life of code after "death" ...sorry... after "developer disappear or a long time of holidays"... or if get rich !

I think that no-one here selling custom-code at low price... but if... i am sure he knows why better...

How (always) i work...?
I always sell first the execution.. (source code only if customer need it... this will be an extra-extra-extra cost)
Then the "edits" need after request... not the bug-editing ofcourse...
Then a support-plan if needed

Ofcourse all these change if customer need something different... or has an idea - how he want to work - open to discuss it...

I read once that if 50% of your potential customers aren't put off by your price then you're too cheap.

Click to expand...

An interesting point, indeed. Price is not all, obviously, but this point is somewhat valid.
Recently a potential customer declined my offer for a project because it was too costly for them. They were honest on this point. And my estimate was honest too. So we agreed to see each other in a couple of months in the hope their business progress so good to discuss again and eventually start the project.

BTW, I even offered them to help evaluate any different solution that they may find on the market. It really is not a problem with me. If they could be satisfied by an existing product on the market, why force them to go the bespoke software path? I want them to be happy, with or without me. And I will keep to be happy with or without them.

udg said:

..If they could be satisfied by an existing product on the market, why force them to go the bespoke software path?

Click to expand...

This is the right way... congrats

When something not exists... we are creating... when exists, creating something better !

Magma said:

But in this way.. the developers will not have the training needed... only will know the end-result, how the customer works... and not the background... will be a "Kinder" suprise (this is not an ad) At the other hand is someway secure... But if the code is on hands of end-customer - that means can bypass you anytime... you are loosing...

edit: I am thinking that you mean have the code after death or accident or disappear.. hmmm.. what about if the customer is gangster ?
View attachment 128096


Agree!


Agree!


I am sorry telling that.. A g r e e ! hope not but it is true - b4x not spread a lot - need universities to use it...

...hmmm

Click to expand...

Source code in escrow with a 3rd party (A Lawyer) removes access to the source code UNLESS there is a legitimate reason to release the source code to the customer/support programmer. Verification of the fact would start with the original author of the software. (Hopefully this goes towards solving the "customer is a gangster" problem)

CONCERNS
One of the concerns that seems to be reiterating through this discussion, is the point that a new programmer taking on the support role, of software they have never seen before, may pose a number of problems in understanding.
Recently I purchased a couple of Samir's projects, along with the source code. The main purpose was to use the projects as a learning platform for B4X. I have learned heaps and have also been able to modify some of them, just to see if I would "break" what was originally working on delivery. Fortunately, I have been able to understand, modify, and run a modified version of the project successfully. (I am by no means an expert B4X Programmer - In fact, some of the posts I read fly straight over the top of my head). But what I am able to do is try to understand something that works, and use it to my advantage. We all do this regularly, when we use code snippets we download from this forum. Its a bit like being given a successful book which you are allowed to change in parts to create a variation to the story AS AGAINST being given a dictionary, and be told to write a successful book from scratch - right? I suspect that almost all of the contributors to this forum would be able to pick up almost any project, understand it, and make a few modifications while maintaining the integrity of the project. And, hey, what you don't understand you can always come back to the forum and ask a sensible question. I would guess that most of you would relish the challenge to understand another's project - particularly if you have a paying customer anxious for you to succeed.

What is the bigger problem, is that the version held in escrow, unless managed with the ultimate possible accuracy, can sometimes NOT reflect the exact source code that the customer is using. (Minor changes sometimes may be either forgotten, or not submitted "until next time ?") If a programmer and their customer are considering escrow as the path to follow, then they also need to be meticulous in submitting FULL versions of source codes on a VERY regular basis to the escrow party. Verification of escrow submission presented to the customer on a regular basis, would give the customer the confidence that they are working with a very professional organisation.

Every "brain" thinks different, ofcourse they are some rules in B4X (ide/language) but also breaking rules for example inline java into it (fantastic).

I think that the programmer of source-code can check if the "ready-to-use" programmers are ready for his source-code with conversation.

I would think of creating a GitHub private repository and pass the login credentials to someone on escrow.

aeric said:

I would think of creating a GitHub private repository and pass the login credentials to someone on escrow.

Click to expand...

That's clever.

aeric said:

I would think of creating a GitHub private repository and pass the login credentials to someone on escrow.

Click to expand...

Yep !

Escrow isn't cheap.
This site linked below charges $2500 in year one and then $1500 every year after that.

This is a very interesting topic. It's something I've been thinking about since I started developing, and that was in 1985, so I've been thinking about it for a long time.
I've always had that conversation with every new client and I've always told them that the source code goes in a compressed file in the "source code" directory, inside the application.
Nobody, as far as I know, has ever "hacked" the code and sold it elsewhere.
I think that the day I am not available because... I hit the lottery, I will keep the software, except the day I end up in hell (or heaven, who knows), then the customer will have to look for another software and try to transfer the data.
I doubt very much that someone else, another developer, will have the time to try to learn what my software does, it will always be easier for them to try to retrieve the core data (customers, suppliers, items, sales, etc.) and adapt it to their software.
To have an effective contributor to our software it should be someone who has been working with that code for a long time, because they tend to be very customised for each client. It is very difficult for anyone to open our code and find the solution to a problem or add a new functionality to it, it takes a lot of time and I don't know if that is worth it for most people. Even if you are a great developer, like all of you.






Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

If you can't afford support staff you are working to cheap. My partner and I are in our 70s. We had to add staff. And the interesting thing is that OUR customers, now that they are dealing with these younger staff, are loosening their purse strings.

We were willing to work cheap and our customers have known it and taken advantage of us. The new kids are better at extracting money than we have been.

I personally send all my library to my customers, every month. I don't think I can go on for a long time. Today I turn 67. I have 50 years in IT. Till I'll be able to support them it's ok, but sources are useless without me???. But don't take IT away from me. It's a matter of life???.

Most of the times I work against my customers' own repositories. In my case, they are not buying me a product but my time/skills (by worked hours or by previous time estimation) to contribute to new or already existing projects which belong to them (this happens for both firmware and apps)
They are usually very specific products/areas and I am usually hired from tech companies R&D departments. I don't conceive, at least in my case, feeling myself the owner of something that has been requested by a specific customer unless it is something that I already have done.

As much, if the project requires some resources/utilities that I had already previously developed (and it is not the central knowledge area for which I was hired), when possible I make a lib of it and the delivered source code just uses this lib.

If I owned a base software product, which I could personalize for each customer, then my approach would be different.

vecino said:

This is a very interesting topic. It's something I've been thinking about since I started developing, and that was in 1985, so I've been thinking about it for a long time.
I've always had that conversation with every new client and I've always told them that the source code goes in a compressed file in the "source code" directory, inside the application.
Nobody, as far as I know, has ever "hacked" the code and sold it elsewhere.
I think that the day I am not available because... I hit the lottery, I will keep the software, except the day I end up in hell (or heaven, who knows), then the customer will have to look for another software and try to transfer the data.
I doubt very much that someone else, another developer, will have the time to try to learn what my software does, it will always be easier for them to try to retrieve the core data (customers, suppliers, items, sales, etc.) and adapt it to their software.
To have an effective contributor to our software it should be someone who has been working with that code for a long time, because they tend to be very customised for each client. It is very difficult for anyone to open our code and find the solution to a problem or add a new functionality to it, it takes a lot of time and I don't know if that is worth it for most people. Even if you are a great developer, like all of you.






Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Click to expand...

I love your idea for smaller applications. All in one place - Very neat ! One of my application's source code zips down to about 5.5GB which requires special treatment - I like Aeric's suggestion to lodge the code on GitHub Private Repository.