[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 134486] UI: Branding: LibreOffice Personal edition

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.documentfoundation.org]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=134486

--- Comment #51 from oiaohm at gmail.com ---
(In reply to Michael Meeks from comment #48)
> (In reply to Oiaohm from comment #47)
> > We don't need to cause this Visual Studio problem with Libreoffice.
> > The base version need to be install-able by all.
> 
> That is the current state, and the state after the change.

The first marketing document proposal was doing  Personal edition not for
enterprise and that idea does not work and I have listed why.
> 
> > because they run into the intermit issues where staff members are
> > using different versions of Libreoffice into unique issues.
> 
> Have you filed any of these ? I've read and worked on support tickets a lot
> and I don't recall seeing one; though I'm sure you can find one or two in
> our 10k open tickets at TDF if you hunt =)

Of course this the problem of you working where you and and me working on
installations building systems and providing after installation support.

The reality is we are going to file zero of these bugs we fix them by putting
everyone on the same version.  If the current edition community of libreoffice
has a issue that effecting production then you file bug report.   This response
is what you have to do with MS Office and stack of other programs and there is
no point filling bugs over this stuff with them.   This of course results in
business using CIB and Collabera versions of LibreOffice going back to mainline
community for collaborative issue reduction and once they are back to mainline
community why should they keep on paying CIB or Collabera.

Basically this is a class of bug that you are not going to find in the 10k open
tickets at TDF us supporting systems have decades of dealing with closed source
where you do the same fix to this problem when it appears over and over again
and don't bother filing anything.   There is no point filing anything either
because boss will not pay us to answer any developer questions on these kinds
of bugs because its fixed by syncing everyone version and once it fixed from
the business point of view not a problem to the boss so you cannot justify
working on it.  Yes it means you have zero time to make sample documents to
demo these bugs either.


> 
> > Yes ecosystem people need to make money they need to be able to sell
> > stuff like extensions addons ... to end users with the least number
> > of unique versions.
> ...
> > Currently we don't have a market place for parties to sell closed source
> > addons to LibreOffice to LibreOffice users also we have no where to sell
> > access to the latest and greatest templates....
> 
> You seem to be advocating an open-core with proprietary extensions, that's
> not a model I personally like at all - it tends to focus all investment in
> the proprietary periphery not the core. It is not very un-scalable to lots
> of players, and it hinders those who want to work to improve the core. You
> also seem to advocate a proprietary app-store built into LibreOffice, also
> something we ruled out when we started.
> 
The reality here is you already have a open-core with proprietary extensions
model.   The thing is its a non cooperative open-core with proprietary
extensions.  Yes the OxOffice, "NDC ODF Application Tools", CIB and Collabera
Office suites all based libreoffice each have unique vendor only extensions.  
Of course we have the Linux distributions maintaining their custom versions as
well.   So libreoffice is well and truly in non cooperative open-core with
proprietary extensions hell all ready.  We also have developers of extensions
not getting the money the need to maintain them or mainline them this is a
ecosystem problem.

Cooperative open core does at times make things harder for developers like you
Michael because you are now required when you want to change things not just
get the approve of your company but get approve of everyone working on the
project.   But this makes it better for end users working cooperative with each
other because they don't run into the problem of different versions with
incompatible implementations as much any more because less different versions
exist.

But there is also a upside to this lets say you were in fact selling support on
the community version of libreoffice core with your own companies extension. 
End users are not going to run into the same cooperation problems of
incompatibles and migrating away to a unsupported version is not going to
improve their current issues.   The unsupported and the support version are
doing things exactly the same way because they are exactly the same thing in
this model.   This will stop CIB and Collabera bleeding as many users back to
the community version.  Part of being a support company is retaining your
customers there is a problem I am seeing that explains why you will have a very
hard time retaining your customers.

If the extensions are done in a compatible way a party may buy from both CIB
and Collabera at the same time this also depends on something like a appstore
to vet the quality of extensions that end users can trust that they will work
with each other without causing isues.   This basically promises more
profitability to the ecosystem members while removing end user problems that
are currently undermining the profitability of the ecosystem.

Remember a party paying to to fix a fault in core code is still going to exist
because a fault in the core code is going to be harming their workflow.

Appstore model on extensions is kind of horrible but this would allow
foundation to take in money from those providing closed source extensions of
course I can understand from Collabera point of view not likely the idea of
basically being taxed by Appstore to fund the foundation.    The blender cloud
model is more than this.

> > Yes there is a lot of possible money to be made this route without requiring
> 
> Perhaps.
> 
> > is a path to lots and lots of money possible more the ecosystem currently
> > is making as well providing funding in areas Libreoffice need it in
> > yesterday to compete with MS Office head to head in a big way.
> 
> Clearly finding an effective way to fund ongoing LibreOffice development is
> what we're looking for. Anyone who has been involved in TDF governance is
> unlikely to believe that it will act like a dynamic business though.
> 
Blender cloud you really do need to look closely at.   Yes the appstore was
ruled out early with Libreoffice.   The reality is that idea need to be
relooked at.   Blender cloud is not just closed source extensions.   Its like
the LWN.net where you get early access to newer content by paying as well.

You said the appstore has been ruled out but it has a lot of carrot and stick
options.   The profit each year from the appstore commissions can in theory be
split between what the foundation needs and those companies and individuals who
in fact worked on the core code.   Yes the percentage of commission taken for a
item listed in appstore can be based on involvement in core project more
involvement less percentage taken.

There are ways to carrot and stick out open-core with proprietary extensions
model with a appstore/cloud the proprietary extensions are served up to end
users that its in your best interest to work on the open-core.   If you do a
open-core with proprietary extensions without a appstore/cloud with a good set
of carrot and sticks to work on the open-core the results are not good.   But
there is also money to be made just for you pay you get early access to items
that will be free latter.

Yes setting up a appstore so it works right will require some serous work on
the rules.   Early libreoffice really had enough problems doing a lot of the
basic organisational things.   I think Libreoffice board and resources are now
big enough that the idea could be revisited and now down properly.  
Appstore/cloud done properly will bring income directly to the foundation
instead of the foundation having to ask for money all the time.   The
foundation can also have a rule that profits from the appstore/cloud has to be
invested in core project work.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.