[eluser]fedeisas[/eluser]
[quote author="Ollie Rattue" date="1306443374"]
...
No need to apologise. I am learning Spanish at the moment. Hopefully I will go Argentina next year 
...
[/quote]
OT: Hey, that's great! If you happen to visit my city (Tucumán) I'll buy you a beer!
If I was to build a large web app (such as Basecamp), UAM is the least of my worries. Most of web apps are unique systems that offers an unique service. I'm not saying that your idea sucks, I'm just saying that is gonna be almost impossible to build something flexible enough.
Also, I'm not really sure that other community's are more "startup oriented". We are all here, using a framework, because we recognize the need of building apps faster (RAD: Rapid Application Development). It has been discussed several times in this forum and the Codeigniter's UserVoice the need of putting authentication out of the box. Actually, some PHP frameworks already have UAM.
If you want to make business out of this, you really need to take a look at the business model behind BonFire. They give you the base files of the starter project and sell modules as plugins.
But, we can't forget this is a framework for developers. This is not Wordpress. This is not aimed for newbies who want to drag and drop a folder and magically get it working.
Anyway, I also think this is a very interesting discussion. Looking forward to other's opinions.
[eluser]Ollie Rattue[/eluser]
[quote author="fedeisas" date="1306474586"]If I was to build a large web app (such as Basecamp), UAM is the least of my worries. Most of web apps are unique systems that offers an unique service. I'm not saying that your idea sucks, I'm just saying that is gonna be almost impossible to build something flexible enough.[/quote]
UAM - I have never heard this acronym before. I assume you mean authentication.
I still disagree. Every SAS app needs a billing system. Nothing is unique about this. They are all the same. To build a decent billing system with plans, upgrades, downgrades, cancellations, and recurring billing will take anyone a couple of days. This is just one feature of the starter kit.
[quote author="fedeisas" date="1306474586"]Also, I'm not really sure that other community's are more "startup oriented". We are all here, using a framework, because we recognize the need of building apps faster (RAD: Rapid Application Development). It has been discussed several times in this forum and the Codeigniter's UserVoice the need of putting authentication out of the box. Actually, some PHP frameworks already have UAM.[/quote]
Ruby on Rails is definitely more "startup oriented". The number of successful SAS web apps (could list 20 off the top of my head right now) on ROR far outweighs CodeIgniter (of which I can only think of a few). This is so much the case that Buffer was cited as evidence that web apps don't have to be built on ROR. For whatever reason ROR caught the imagination of startup web app community and is the go to framework / language for SAS. CodeIgniter on the other hand doesn't have this image or community. You could see this at CICon conference in Bristol last year. Everyone was talking tech, very little business. Almost everyone was a freelance developer. You go to a Rails conference and people are talking marketing, business, design, and lots of people are running their own startups.
For me CI is about client development. Clients want a known commodity, an established language such as PHP, and aren't as eager to jump on something cutting edge such as Rails.
Interested to hear whether others think this point of view is fair.
[quote author="fedeisas" date="1306474586"]OT: Hey, that's great! If you happen to visit my city (Tucumán) I'll buy you a beer![/quote]
Cheers
[eluser]gigas10[/eluser]
Sounds like a good idea, but honestly it would take me the same amount of time to code all this as it would to learn the in's and out's of someone else's code.
[eluser]Ollie Rattue[/eluser]
[quote author="gigas10" date="1306527403"]Sounds like a good idea, but honestly it would take me the same amount of time to code all this as it would to learn the in's and out's of someone else's code.[/quote]
Yes familarising yourself without someone else's code always takes time but you are overestimating the quantity of time, especially if there is clear documentation and a support network. The web starter kit would represent perhaps 4-10 days of development + research. It wouldn't take you this amount of time to get up to speed with the codebase.
It is however interesting to hear that this is a potential barrier to entry (whether right or wrong is irrelevant). It is definitely an obstacle to overcome in the marketing of this kit.
You only fully understand the problem after implementing the first solution...
Sure with perfect knowledge you could code a recurring billing system very quickly but this is not how development works. You have to do research, weigh up the various options, and code based on your knowledge and assumptions at the time. If you were to build it a second time you would always do things slightly differently. You buy code like this because someone else has been through the process and found out the best way to implement the features. You are buying their knowledge and experience of the problem.
[eluser]regal2157[/eluser]
Sorry, I will apologize firstly for not reading all the prior posts. I read a few, and they pointed out good points.
First and foremost, I feel us as developers, most likely have already built a basic user system and such, which we usually switch over with out own projects, but I'm sure members have already expressed their opinions here about making their own system. I wanted to bring up the other end of the deal. The client who will receive this code. The client may want a custom application built from the ground up, or has certain standards that the web app must be built off of, or other things. For example, I am currently working with a very large company developing internal applications using CI. The user system for them is on a huge complexity level of access rights, clearances, and database connections. I consistently use LDAP, and Oracle for authentication purposes.
Sometimes I feel that if you're even buying a pre-made system, you're going to spend at least half the time it would have took you to code it to learn their system, and even longer to suit it to the clients needs. Clients have to understand, and as a developer, you should warn them, that well built applications are not built in an hour. I know trying to learn other peoples systems to help them debug it sometimes takes me longer than it does to code my own. Since not everyone codes the same, and one thing no two applications have alike are logic. Everyone has their own logic behind processing data.
I wish you luck if you do go forward with this, and you will probably get a few sales, but I highly doubt you'll earn a pretty penny off of this. I know someone said up top about this is why we are all here.. using CI, but just in the framework market, there are hundreds of frameworks that claim to be better than the rest. The reason for all the frameworks is people want their own logic in the system.
[eluser]Ollie Rattue[/eluser]
[quote author="regal2157" date="1306554690"]Sorry, I will apologize firstly for not reading all the prior posts. I read a few, and they pointed out good points.
First and foremost, I feel us as developers, most likely have already built a basic user system and such, which we usually switch over with out own projects, but I'm sure members have already expressed their opinions here about making their own system. I wanted to bring up the other end of the deal. The client who will receive this code. The client may want a custom application built from the ground up, or has certain standards that the web app must be built off of, or other things. For example, I am currently working with a very large company developing internal applications using CI. The user system for them is on a huge complexity level of access rights, clearances, and database connections. I consistently use LDAP, and Oracle for authentication purposes.
Sometimes I feel that if you're even buying a pre-made system, you're going to spend at least half the time it would have took you to code it to learn their system, and even longer to suit it to the clients needs. Clients have to understand, and as a developer, you should warn them, that well built applications are not built in an hour. I know trying to learn other peoples systems to help them debug it sometimes takes me longer than it does to code my own. Since not everyone codes the same, and one thing no two applications have alike are logic. Everyone has their own logic behind processing data.[/quote]
Hey, thanks for joining in the discussion.
There seems to be a bit of a misunderstood as to what this 'kit' provides and who it is for. It is perhaps my fault for not defining the intended market and use properly. This shows that the 'kit' would need to be branded and marketed very carefully to get the point of the product across.
The kit is designed solely for developers starting their own SAS (software as a service) company (think basecamp, createsend, freshbooks). It is for micro-entrepreneurs who are bootstrapping their first for sale monthly subscription web application.
This 'kit' is not designed or intended to help developers with client work, which I agree is bespoke for every project based on the client's unique business needs. For client work CI is a brilliant starting point. For monthly subscription web applications there is a lot of extra 'nuts and bolts' functionality required. This kit fills this gap.
[eluser]eshaa83[/eluser]
i will read all this in detail latter and will search it soon.
Thanks for sharing it dear
[eluser]phpserver[/eluser]
Quote:Ruby on Rails is definitely more "startup oriented". The number of successful SAS web apps (could list 20 off the top of my head right now) on ROR far outweighs CodeIgniter (of which I can only think of a few).
The fascination with ROR lasts for a while and after you find getting the job is more important than anything,many RORers come back to yii and codeigniter,i have seen it happen.
[eluser]olebulow[/eluser]
Im sure there is a need for a web application starter kit with the things you mentioned and i have no doubt that, if priced right, it would be able to be sold a lot. There is a reason why envato has success with their codecanyon, graphicriver and shit. For me, sometimes i would like to buy something standard that i now worked and tweak it to fit my needs. Why should we always reinvent the wheel when we can re-use stuff..  Just my two cents.
Ole
[eluser]Ollie Rattue[/eluser]
[quote author="olebulow" date="1307197832"]Im sure there is a need for a web application starter kit with the things you mentioned and i have no doubt that, if priced right, it would be able to be sold a lot. There is a reason why envato has success with their codecanyon, graphicriver and shit. For me, sometimes i would like to buy something standard that i now worked and tweak it to fit my needs. Why should we always reinvent the wheel when we can re-use stuff.. Just my two cents.
Ole[/quote]
Thanks for your 2 cents. Out of interest could you give me your gut feeling on what a suitable price point would be for this? I thought between $500-$1000. Interested to hear what potential customers think...
|
