Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2004 12:39 pm Post subject: Fundraising for Neo/J
As many of you may or may not know, I have been trying to think of ways to raise funds for Neo/J. Many of you may ask "what does Neo/J need funded?". This is a reasonable question as, from a users perspective, everything seems to be running smoothly.
The answer is that it takes an incredible amount of time to develop and release Neo/J. By my estimates, I have spent a couple thousand dollars 2500 hours over the last two years my guess is that Ed has spent, at a minimum, several thousand dollars and several hundred hours during the same time to get Neo/J to where it is today.
But many people have said to me "your labor is not really a cost". While that is true (neither Ed nor I have received any compensation for our work on Neo/J), it is a real cost to me and maybe Ed. Why? Basically, I estimate that it takes about 1200 to 1500 hours a year just to keep Neo/J using the current OOo codebase and adding Aqua controls will add even more. I routinely turn down consulting work and job offers (i.e. real cash) because I have found that working on Neo/J more interesting and, more importantly, I have had enough savings from previous work to not need the extra pay.
The problem is that right now Neo/J's continued development depends entirely on Ed and I being able to afford to live with reduced our paychecks. Realistically, if I could no longer afford to live on less than 1000 hours of consulting each year and I had to get a full-time job, Neo/J development would likely grind to a halt. In a perfect world, this would not happen but this is how most open source projects work. Most successful open source projects are staffed by full-time employees or many of the "volunteer" developers are really employees of some company. This is definitely true for OOo, Linux, and Apache.
So, my thinking is that I need to start fundraising now so that Neo/J has some money in reserve should Ed and I need it to continue working on Neo/J or if we need to make any needed purchases of hardware, services, etc.
Here are the ideas that people have sent me over the last year. What does everyone think of these ideas? In particular, I would like to know if people think any of these ideas would conflict with the implicit goal that I have had for Neo/J - to create and maintain a viable open source version of OOo for Mac OS X:
1. Set up a PayPal account for Planamesa Software (note: Planamesa must have the PayPal account to minimize the tax and administrative hassles for Ed and I) and add a button to the Neo/J download and home webpages asking for donations.
Advantages: Easy and cheap to set up and maintain
Disadvantages: Probably won't generate many donations since nearly every open source site also does this
2. Add a popup dialog to Neo/J like WinZip has that asked if you want to donate to Neo/J and, if so, brings up the donation webpage in your browser.
Advantages: It might generate more donations that idea #1 since it is more noticable to Neo/J users
Disadvantages: The popup may irritate users so much that it hurts the Neo/J cause
3. Put all future Aqua development in a proprietary release of Neo/J and sell it for a small amount of money (e.g. $25) while keeping the non-Aqua version free.
Advantages: I think this has a good chance at generating $25,000 or more each year since many people want an Aquafied version of OOo
Disadvantages: To many people, this is selling out and, as a result,it might hurt the Neo/J cause
I'm a bit wary of PayPal still, but if there were an address and organization name prominently displayed I would gladly send a check. (Perhaps there is; I'm somewhat new here).
For what it's worth, I think option number 3 would irritate users much more than option number 2.
For what it's worth, I think option number 3 would irritate users much more than option number 2.
I am inclined to agree with this assessment. I would look like selling out, even if the expense justifies it and $25 is not that much. StuffIt and Winzip use the number 2 approach, I wonder how they are doing.
Is there any chance of differentiating between home/educational use and commercial/enterprise use? This is done in many shareware programs. Also, some international bank details for direct donations from people outside the US might be good.
FWIW, I'd have sent you a cheque a long time ago if I wasn't living off unemployment benefits (and if we were still using cheques in these parts of the world, but that can be circumvented).
Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2004 3:52 pm Post subject: Contribute back to OpenOffice.org
Here's my take:
NeoOffice was supposed to be a prototype used to test different ways to Aquafy OpenOffice.org. In time, however, it seems that this project is going further and further away from that goal. And a closed Aqua NeoOffice is in my mind a big no no. You might as well say that you ripped OpenOffice.org to make your product.
I do not have any problems with financing some of the development of NeoOffice, but if I and other people start paying money, that basically give us the right to start demanding things too. My demand would be that the Aquafication code be merged back to OpenOffice.org, so that if you guys give up, some other programmer will be able to pick up the ball. Remember, the original goal of NeoOffice was to find ways to produce a native version of OpenOffice.org for Mac OS X, not to become another product entirely.
As far as your choices go, I think #1 is OK, and #2 would be OK if you had the option to dismiss the popup permanently whenever you've contributed or you're sick of seeing it. And #3, having a proprietary NeoOffice, that's out of the question for me and you should feel bad to even mention it. Besides I don't even know if you actually have the right to do #3 (you did get the OpenOffice.org code under the GPL, right?)
For what it's worth, I think option number 3 would irritate users much more than option number 2.
I am inclined to agree with this assessment. I would look like selling out, even if the expense justifies it and $25 is not that much. StuffIt and Winzip use the number 2 approach, I wonder how they are doing.
Is there any chance of differentiating between home/educational use and commercial/enterprise use? This is done in many shareware programs. Also, some international bank details for direct donations from people outside the US might be good.
I actually think selling an Aqua version is a big hassle. Once you start selling a product it can quickly use up all of your time handling complaints, problems, refunds, CD shipments, etc. The same goes for trying to detect commercial/enterprise vs. home/educational users.
For commercial/enterprise users, I would think that I would add a proprietary feature (e.g. centralized patching) that they would be willing to pay for because it saves them labor costs somehow. At the same, to keep things fair, I think such proprietary features should only be features that home/educational don't have a need for.
ovvldc wrote:
FWIW, I'd have sent you a cheque a long time ago if I wasn't living off unemployment benefits (and if we were still using cheques in these parts of the world, but that can be circumvented).
Don't worry about it. I am not trying to guilt people into contributing as that is one thing I really hate when it is done to me. The reason I am discussing fundraising here is that most regular posters are contributing lots of support and testing effort for Neo/J and have given much more of value to Neo/J than a donation could provide. Accorgingly, I wanted people like yourself to have a say in how we keep funding Neo/J.
Joined: May 31, 2003 Posts: 219 Location: French Alps
Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2004 5:57 pm Post subject:
#1 seems OK. The fact that there are other open source project using it does not mean they does not get fund from it.
#2 is OK too, with the "Done already" dismiss option.
#2 is OK too, with the "Done already" dismiss option.
I was thinking about how I would implement #2 without writing more than an hour or two of coding. Instead of displaying a fancy dialog every time that you launch Neo/J (which would be both annoying and several days of programming), I think that I would merely open the Neo/J donation webpage in your default web browser only if Neo/J hasn't shown the webpage in the last week. Also, I would provide very simple instructions for disabling this on both the donation webpage and in a Trinity forum sticky.
I think this approach would make option #2 not very annoying and not nearly as intrusive as making a Neo/J modal dialog. Also, this approach is really easy to implement as I just have to put the following command in the /Application/NeoOfficeJ.app/Contents/MacOS/setup script file:
Code:
open http://www.planamesa.com/neojava/thenewdonationpage.html
Gosh, nagware would certainly turn me off bigtime. What I've noticed works best is when the fundraising is driven by a goal. That is, either via a "bounty hunting" type thing where dollar values are raised to fix bugs or implement features, which are then snatched up by enterprising programmers, or via a "free the code" type of deal (a la Blender3d) with a little thermometer to show progress.
In other words, I think people are motivated by some sort of "end" so they don't feel their money is disappearing into a void.
To this end, I suggest a couple things:
#1. A paypal/CC donation graphic on every page of neoffice.org. Just because other OS projects do this is no reason why NO/J shouldn't as well. Paypal accepts CC payments as well as from paypal accounts.
#2. Implement a simple way to "bid" on a bug or feature. Also be able to show the total amount raised for the project.
#3. In the "About neooffice" add a "donate to this project" button that takes you to #1.
#4. Include information about donations in the documention.
i think this quote:
Quote:
if I and other people start paying money, that basically give us the right to start demanding things too.
should be taken to heart though. One of the things they'll demand is an accounting of where the money is going. This is why I suggest a bug/feature bidding system so people can see that they are making a difference to the project (and how). Also, this may demonstrate that those who show financial support reap the most reward and derive the most satisfaction (thus providing incentive to donate).
Again, I think any kind of nagware or restrictions on the functionality of the app itself would really turn a lot of people off and isn't in the spirit of OS.
Just my couple cents.
pluby wrote:
Max_Barel wrote:
#2 is OK too, with the "Done already" dismiss option.
I was thinking about how I would implement #2 without writing more than an hour or two of coding. Instead of displaying a fancy dialog every time that you launch Neo/J (which would be both annoying and several days of programming), I think that I would merely open the Neo/J donation webpage in your default web browser only if Neo/J hasn't shown the webpage in the last week. Also, I would provide very simple instructions for disabling this on both the donation webpage and in a Trinity forum sticky.
I think this approach would make option #2 not very annoying and not nearly as intrusive as making a Neo/J modal dialog. Also, this approach is really easy to implement as I just have to put the following command in the /Application/NeoOfficeJ.app/Contents/MacOS/setup script file:
Code:
open http://www.planamesa.com/neojava/thenewdonationpage.html
I actually think selling an Aqua version is a big hassle. Once you start selling a product it can quickly use up all of your time handling complaints, problems, refunds, CD shipments, etc. The same goes for trying to detect commercial/enterprise vs. home/educational users.
I think you're quite right, don't even get into it. It would sap all of your time and probably put off a lot of people. Fact is that NeoOffice/J has moved beyond the prototype stage, but in terms of investement and in functionality.
Maybe just putting in the EULA that you should donate if you use the software commercially (quid quo pro) would work. After that, it is up to the system engineers.
I recall that I had an illegal copy of Acrobat once, which I showed off to my aunt. She then took it to her boss at the law firm she works at. He liked it and now they have licensed Acrobats for the whole office.. I think I made Adobe some $$ there.. This might be the way that NeoOffice/J sneaks into offices around the world.
pluby wrote:
For commercial/enterprise users, I would think that I would add a proprietary feature (e.g. centralized patching) that they would be willing to pay for because it saves them labor costs somehow. At the same, to keep things fair, I think such proprietary features should only be features that home/educational don't have a need for.
Centralized patching would be good for enterprises. I'd be careful about the aquafication stuff, and just limit the proprietary feature to management tools (again, putting the onus on corporate users who actually have an IT budget).
pluby wrote:
Don't worry about it. I am not trying to guilt people into contributing as that is one thing I really hate when it is done to me. The reason I am discussing fundraising here is that most regular posters are contributing lots of support and testing effort for Neo/J and have given much more of value to Neo/J than a donation could provide. Accorgingly, I wanted people like yourself to have a say in how we keep funding Neo/J.
I know, and thanks . As for putting in that automatic link to the webpage; I don't mind nagware as long as it is not very intrusive. I'd say go for it. It is the easiest way of doing it and I'd prefer you not to spend too much time on moneyraising.
I do agree with our Guest who basically said the process could be sexed up a bit (showing totals, pointing to bugs recently fixed) that will give people a feeling their money is not going down a black hole.
As a way to remove the link to the webapge, you could have NeoOffice look for file that says how much you have donated, with a warm thank you. Like a tiny patch, to be downloaded from the fundraising page. And then display it in the About box.
hands down, start with the paypal account. set it up, if anything it is a way for donations.
shogun and I were discussing this in depth before july make me drop off the planet (i miss broadband). the basic idea we came up with, the idea that I think had the most merrit was this.
we set up a foundation. like mozilla.
a non-profit with the goal of helping fund OSS for the Mac. Naturally, Neo/J would be the first program we'd fund.
probably a little bigger than what you guys were thinking of, but why not? open office is bigger than any other OSS. and if it got enough, we could do other programs, or whatever.
just because the product is free, doesn't mean the programmers shouldn't get paid. (your time is worth money patrick. ed, your time is worth beer)
anyway. that was the thought. i have some experience in setting up businesses in MD, so i could start the paperwork... but i wouldn't want to go at it alone.
hands down, start with the paypal account. set it up, if anything it is a way for donations.
Definitely. And include bank details for people who dislike or cannot use Paypal .
jakeOSX wrote:
a non-profit with the goal of helping fund OSS for the Mac. Naturally, Neo/J would be the first program we'd fund.
Not a bad idea, except that you would have to start out very clear about
-the mandate (what exactly do we wish to support?)
-distribution (how do we decide how much goes to whom?)
jakeOSX wrote:
just because the product is free, doesn't mean the programmers shouldn't get paid. (your time is worth money patrick. ed, your time is worth beer)
Of course, we're talking really suave Belgian beer here, not Budweiser...
hands down, start with the paypal account. set it up, if anything it is a way for donations.
Done. I set up a PayPal account for Planamesa Software yesterday.
ovvldc wrote:
Definitely. And include bank details for people who dislike or cannot use Paypal .
Good point. BTW, since I have a PayPal "business" account, it can accept VISA and Mastercard directly.
ovvldc wrote:
jakeOSX wrote:
a non-profit with the goal of helping fund OSS for the Mac. Naturally, Neo/J would be the first program we'd fund.
Not a bad idea, except that you would have to start out very clear about
-the mandate (what exactly do we wish to support?)
-distribution (how do we decide how much goes to whom?)
This is roughly what I was thinking of when I suggested setting up a user's group. Organizing such a group a non-profit organization is highly recommended as ovvldc's points are written into bylaws of the non-profit and/or there is a governing committee that makes such decisions (hopefully the process of election of the governing committee members is specified in the non-profit's bylaws).
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2004 9:00 am Post subject: Re: Contribute back to OpenOffice.org
Boukman wrote:
And #3, having a proprietary NeoOffice, that's out of the question for me and you should feel bad to even mention it. Besides I don't even know if you actually have the right to do #3 (you did get the OpenOffice.org code under the GPL, right?)
Before you talk so imperious, you might want to ask why I mentioned it. The reason is that, even if Neo/J isn't sold for money, other OOo variants already are. This approach was done by the company that did the OS/2 port and, AFAIK, a couple of Israeli companies sell OOo variants to the Israeli government.
While I don't necessary like the idea of selling Neo/J, it is an idea that has been suggested to me several times so putting it out for public discussion is not unreasonable. And I definitely do not feel bad for mentioning it. After all, supressing bad or uncomfortable ideas is what happens in many workplaces.
Anyway, how can they companies release proprietary versions of OOo? Here are the licensing facts: OpenOffice.org is released under SISSL and LGPL. Under SISSL, Ed and I, in theory, could have made Neo/J proprietary. Because of this, Ed and I both felt that SISSL is a major weakpoint of OOo's licensing model.
So, instead, we used OpenOffice.org's LGPL license to release Neo/J under GPL. We used GPL to ensure that if some other company enhances Neo/J, they will be required to open source their changes so that the changes can be rolled back into Neo/J. There are several companies that are eager to make a proprietary version of OOo or Neo/J for the Mac and by releasing Neo/J as GPL, we are trying to keep the OOo for Mac from fracturing into several different proprietary versions.
Gosh, nagware would certainly turn me off bigtime. What I've noticed works best is when the fundraising is driven by a goal. That is, either via a "bounty hunting" type thing where dollar values are raised to fix bugs or implement features, which are then snatched up by enterprising programmers, or via a "free the code" type of deal (a la Blender3d) with a little thermometer to show progress.
In other words, I think people are motivated by some sort of "end" so they don't feel their money is disappearing into a void.
To this end, I suggest a couple things:
#1. A paypal/CC donation graphic on every page of neoffice.org. Just because other OS projects do this is no reason why NO/J shouldn't as well. Paypal accepts CC payments as well as from paypal accounts.
#2. Implement a simple way to "bid" on a bug or feature. Also be able to show the total amount raised for the project.
#3. In the "About neooffice" add a "donate to this project" button that takes you to #1.
#4. Include information about donations in the documention.
i think this quote:
Quote:
if I and other people start paying money, that basically give us the right to start demanding things too.
should be taken to heart though. One of the things they'll demand is an accounting of where the money is going. This is why I suggest a bug/feature bidding system so people can see that they are making a difference to the project (and how). Also, this may demonstrate that those who show financial support reap the most reward and derive the most satisfaction (thus providing incentive to donate).
Again, I think any kind of nagware or restrictions on the functionality of the app itself would really turn a lot of people off and isn't in the spirit of OS.
Just my couple cents.
I hate nagware too. I thought about option #2 last night and realized that I don't need to clobber users over the head with a donation page. Instead, I could something completely different that is more useful to users:
1. During Neo/J startup, check if there are any new patches available on the Neo/J download site. If not, do nothing.
2. If there are new patches available, using the "open" command to display the Neo/J patch download page in your default browser. This does not block startup of Neo/J. Instead, launching Neo/J just adds an extra browser window to your screen with the Neo/J patch download page.
What does this have to do with donations? Technically, nothing at all. What is does do is non-intrusively notifies users that a new patch is available (a service to the user) without more than an hour or two of coding. Of course, a donate button is on the download page (per your suggestion #1) but that is not the driving factor for display of the web page.
I like the idea of having fundraising oriented towards specific goals. While I think that a bug/feature bidding system is a bit much to implement now (my existing list of missing features is already quite long), I think I orient the fundraising around the three big features that are already on our list for 2005:
1. Aquafication of buttons, etc.
2. Upgrading Neo/J to OOo 2.0
3. Upgrading to Java 1.5
Features #2 and #3 aren't very sexy but they are absolutely necessary for keeping Neo/J viable. #2 gets OOo bug fixes and new features into Neo/J and #3 ensures that Neo/J will be able to run on upcoming release of Mac OS X.
All times are GMT - 7 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4Next
Page 1 of 4
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
. As for putting in that automatic link to the webpage; I don't mind nagware as long as it is not very intrusive. I'd say go for it. It is the easiest way of doing it and I'd prefer you not to spend too much time on moneyraising.
