I am going to go out on a limb here:
The license is specific to the number of developers using the product so as long as the marketing guys do NOT do any coding then I, being the only developer, am the only one needing a license and the new Indie works for me.
Please correct me if this a wrong interpretation.
Hi there,
This is a very good question and a few other developers are in the same situation than you.
If the company marketing the software is not working on the source code, then they won’t need to buy a JUCE license. If they are maintaining the code, then they will need to buy a license.
Hi again,
I’m afraid this is a wrong interpretation of the Indie license.
The Indie license is specifically targeting sole traders – or one-person companies. If your company employs more than one person, you won’t be eligible to the Indie license, regardless of the number of people who code.
Thanks. I am NOT part of any company or organization. It is me, alone.
When I do develop some software that is marketable, then I wish to approach a company to do that part of it. They will NOT have any code rights, except the right to market the binaries I produce. I was just wanting to be sure that if I sign a marketing agreement with someone that I do not suddenly become a non-Indie and then come under the GPLv3. They will pay royalties.
I did not make it clear and even using the term small organization is wrong. There is no company, etc. Just me. I used to have a company with 12 employees but it sort of fell apart because I was not being a proper manager and people were doing their own thing. The saying no smoke, no fire is wrong, because sometimes the fire does not smoke and then suddenly goes crazy.
Hello.
I posted a question a while ago but haven’t had a specific answer yet so am posting again.
As an indie developer looking to release an inaugural product sometimes in the future, I will be releasing only to desktop and so will not be using any of the mobile code or features. Especially as the pro license allows splitting cost into the different platforms, a desktop only indie license would be very helpful to my startup, and seems fair as there are so many features that I won’t be using as part of the full license. Is there any scope (pun intended) for this?
Thank you.
Hi there,
Unfortunately we are not offering split Indie license for Desktop only.
Thank you jb, will plan around it.
HI I am a University student I just want to use Projucer for two months how can I purchase it?
The Projucer will be entirely free next week with JUCE 5, so I would recommend to wait until then.
So if a company (not maintaining the code internally) does not employ any coders, but outsources the development to indie developers (each one having its own one-man business), then the company does not need any license, and it’s to each single indie dev to buy a license. Is that correct?
That is correct. The developer is the only one working with the code, so that’s where the license fees are due.
My issue with the whole licensing and opensource is that there is no true technical support. For example, I pay $999 a year ($83.33/Month) for my shopping cart support, but I can ask questions to them privately and they fix bugs and offer suggestions and support.
With Juce, I pay into the system, but bug fixes can take a while and really relies on the community, rather than the Juce engineers. There is no DEDICATED support section, with tracking and follow-up for bugs that affect paying customer’s revenue.
I don’t mind the buy-in, but the technical support needs to be on par with a real dedicated support system with dedicated support engineers for the price and/or monthly fee to be justified. Allow non-paying customers to use the forum, but allow paying customers who pay every year like we do, a dedicated support area.
IMHO, it’s not a “real” product until there is a dedicated staff to cater to the fully-paid customers who rely on Juce for their livelihood. Right now it “feels” like we pay in, but then we are on our own. We post an issue on the forum, and maybe a Juce engineer sees it and responds and maybe they won’t.
When is the releasing time?
we launch on the 27th April
Just checking (haven’t read all the above) - responding to the mail table breakdown - Does the Splash screen have to appear every time the app is used or just following install - I’d lprefer to see that (first or every 10th) with a note in an about page/contact page (e.g. on Appstore/Play etc)… Having it pop up EVERY run would be prohibative for most, I feel.
I’m very interested in these two bullet points:
• Priority support on the forum
• Access to consultancy services
Thank you for the feedback.
Providing better support has been on our radar for a while, and we will aim to improve in that area. A dedicated forum for Pro users is definitely on the horizon.
It will pop up every time you start the app.
On the horizon? So the answer is, keep paying the premium, until it happens? Sorry, not trying to be difficult. We’ve built a few apps that we had to release buggy, because it took forever to release a new version that fixed the bugs. I’m not talking about new features…just bugs that inhibit a quality app. We are dealing with Juce rendering and repainting bugs right now and it has taken our engineers extra time to release it, because of the bugs.
Having pro level support would, at least, allow some direction or a temporary fix. People who buy in more should get more support.
For priority support on the forum, I can only apologise on behalf of the team if you feel that you haven’t been given priority despite being a paying customer. With the dedicated forum, we will be able to more effectively prioritise, so bear with us while we implement that.
With regards to consultancy services, you can contact us to discuss your needs. We do offer paid support.
