Public Forums 71,145 posts

[cgc0202 Friend cgc0202Join date: August 2007Posts: 2244Downloads:0Uploads:3 Thanks: 206 Thanked: 262 times in 1 posts]

#264915

<em>@cgc0202 72959 wrote:</em><blockquote>Unless Joomlart changes its very restrictive licensing provisions — 3 domains for 1-year membership or 10 domains for 5-year membership, I do not see how a regular Joomlart member could have multiple sites for themselves, or have clients — without violating the Joomlart licensing policy.

To my knowledge, RocketTheme has the similar licensing restriction. Gavick Pro does not. I do not know about other companies.

Cornelio</blockquote>

<em>@mj1256 72962 wrote:</em><blockquote>this certainly does not suit a web developer</blockquote>

mj,

The response to that is that Joomlart never claimed to be an “Open Source” template entity but a for profit company. Based on their business plan, it factored that it can get away with such licensing and still attract enough customers to make a profit.

Frankly, if I have a good product, I would not even consider the nebulous Developer unlimited licensing. Of course, as a user, I would have a different perspective.

Considering this, my own compromise would be individual template licensing per site, if I were to use a template if I have clients. After all, if you charge your clients, there is no reason why you cannot pass the cost for the cost of the license — $50 (for example based on single license from Joomlart). Now, if you are a regular member if you charge $50 for each client, you already have a $100 profit (3 templates) or $250 (5 year membership) — just by using your own quota and without doing any other work. I assume that on top of this you charge your client per hour or agreed upon price for each job.

And, if you are good and have so many clients, the Developer membership with “unlimited” licensing would be a bargain.

So, personally, I do not see the licensing as unreasonable, if I am a developer, charging my clients and passing the cost.

Having said this, if I have other similar choices then I would not use a more restrictive license. You will not encounter the same issue for example with Gavick Pro.

To cite a more concrete example, I was investigating various forum softwares. vBulletin, used by Joomlart and many commercial sites for their Forum is quite expensive. There is a comparable forum software, SMF, that is open source and has most features that vBulletin has. It is not perfect yet,, but I would rather support the further development of SMF than vBulletin, so that eventually the two will have comparable features.

Cornelio

[perdu Friend perduJoin date: June 2007Posts: 227Downloads:0Uploads:26 Thanks: 10 Thanked: 20 times in 1 posts]

#264916

<blockquote>Your assertion about “repackaging” is only as solid as it is accurate. </blockquote>

Sorry to interrupt 😉 but if you can’t see the similarities between most (not all) of the templates then you only have to study the template files to see that mostly it’s a cut and paste job. However this does have some advantages as you can easily customise them by creating a hybrid out of several templates in a few minutes :p

[markb1439 Friend markb1439Join date: August 2008Posts: 124Downloads:0Uploads:1 Thanks: 14 Thanked: 34 times in 11 posts]

#264920

<blockquote>If you really do not like Joomlart templates, why did you even join? Did you do your assignment looking at the template choices of the template companies before joining?</blockquote>

I like a lot of the JA templates, which is why I joined. Yes, the co-owner and I did our “assignment” very thoroughly. Why are you even asking me questions like this? I said that I joined because I liked some of what I saw.

<blockquote>Why waste money and spend so much time complaining if Joomlart is just your third choice?</blockquote>

My point was that I first subscribed to other template clubs with lower “quantity” than JA. I said that in response to someone saying that I obviously prefer quantity over quality.

I don’t think I’m really complaining. I like many JA templates. JA’s support, though it could be improved, seems on par with what I’ve seen elsewhere.

I was simply saying that if I owned a business like this and I had the choice between offering one high-quality template a month or doing whatever it took to offer two high-quality templates a month, I’d choose the latter to make sure I had the advantage over my competitors.

Since JA has been offering two templates, clients would be reasonable to assume that both templates should be high-quality. But JA has admittedly fallen short of that goal. So now they are saying that they will cut quantity in half. If I had fallen short of offering two good templates a month, I would do whatever it took to fix the situation and achieve that goal, instead of eliminating my main advantage over the competition. The cost of doing this could be less than the cost of losing business, because there are some people who will go elsewhere.

Adding a staff member or two shouldn’t be financially prohibitive. If JA has 5000 active members (judging from download statistics) paying an average of $15-$20 a month, their gross revenues should be $900,000 to $1.2 million per year with relatively few expenses (no raw materials, etc.). Adding the necessary staff to keep the quality up at two templates per month would only cost a small fraction of that. And it would keep their competitive advantage to the point that the additional staff could pay for itself in increased revenues.

That’s my opinion, and it would be a sound business decision. If the number of templates was not important, why is it shown first in JA’s feature list?

You can disagree with me all you want, but don’t bombard me with questions like asking me why I chose JA. I already explained that. I’m actually happy with my choice (except for the upcoming automated licensing). But I think they are making the wrong business decision by cutting quantity just to address the quality deficiency that shouldn’t have happened in the first place. If you go into business offering two templates a month, you staff yourself appropriately and do whatever else it takes to meet that goal. They failed, so now their answer is to eliminate a major key selling point.

Even if it’s the wrong decision, they did implement it superbly. Giving a one-year notice allows everyone the time to get ready for it and decide not to renew if they don’t like the change. But that’s my point: they will lose business over this. There will be people who don’t renew because of it, or who don’t choose them because the competitive advantage is gone. They will lose revenue, but they could keep that revenue by keeping alive their original business model of two (presumably) high-quality templates a month.

That’s my opinion. Feel free to argue, but don’t badger me and try to second-guess why I joined.

[TomC Moderator TomCJoin date: October 2014Posts: 14077Downloads:58Uploads:137 Thanks: 948 Thanked: 3155 times in 2495 posts]

#264925

<em>@perdu 72971 wrote:</em><blockquote>Sorry to interrupt 😉 but if you can’t see the similarities between most (not all) of the templates then you only have to study the template files to see that mostly it’s a cut and paste job. However this does have some advantages as you can easily customise them by creating a hybrid out of several templates in a few minutes :p</blockquote>
I can see similarities in EVERY Joomla tempalte out there.

[terp Friend terpJoin date: May 2008Posts: 40Downloads:161Uploads:0 Thanks: 2 Thanked: 1 times in 1 posts]

#264926

<em>@perdu 72971 wrote:</em><blockquote>Sorry to interrupt 😉 but if you can’t see the similarities between most (not all) of the templates then you only have to study the template files to see that mostly it’s a cut and paste job. However this does have some advantages as you can easily customise them by creating a hybrid out of several templates in a few minutes :p</blockquote>

I stand corrected; Craw is right. They did change the clock graphics in Ja Fargus before rereleasing it again this month. Zooom Zooom. Given the repackaging, one would fasley assume that it would free up more time to fix the problems with Ja Teline II (not that they repackage templates…name must be a misnomer).

Craw, you are correct, sir. These are all fresh ideas released each month and clearly in a class unto themselves….clearly.

[TomC Moderator TomCJoin date: October 2014Posts: 14077Downloads:58Uploads:137 Thanks: 948 Thanked: 3155 times in 2495 posts]

#264931

<em>@terp 72981 wrote:</em><blockquote>I stand corrected; Craw is right. They did change the clock graphics in Ja Fargus before rereleasing it again this month. Zooom Zooom.[/quote]
Whole lot more than that …. but hey, can’t please everyone. You obviously don’t like it – so be it.
A lot of ther people DO like it.

terp Given the repackaging, one would fasley assume that it would free up more time to fix the problems with Ja Teline II (not that they repackage templates…name must be a misnomer).

Proceeding under the false assertion of “repackaging” – perhaps.

TomC wrote:

Craw, you are correct, sir. These are all fresh ideas released each month and clearly in a class unto themselves….clearly.</blockquote>
Glad you agree.

[terp Friend terpJoin date: May 2008Posts: 40Downloads:161Uploads:0 Thanks: 2 Thanked: 1 times in 1 posts]

#264933

I didn’t say I didn’t like it; I thought Ja Fargus was easy on the eyes, so naturally I still like it this month. If it’s repackaged again next year, though I clearly won’t be here, I’ll still think it’s a nice template. You miss the point, I guess…but I wish to no longer argue with you. You clearly think every template is frewsh and original; lots of us disagree. We’ll have to agree to disagree and I’ll just write the whole Joomlart off as a lesson learned.

I joined simply for Ja Teline, as the rest all appear to be of ‘free template quality’ to me, though I understand given the demands to churn these out every other week. Once Ja teline released with bugs and never addressed, I just stop back from time to time to see if they were…all for naught, of course.

But, back on topic, I think this is a good policy and will serve the Joomlart community well if it leads to fresh(er), more original templates being released each month..not that there’s anything wrong with regifting.

[bossep Friend bossepJoin date: April 2008Posts: 262Downloads:0Uploads:3 Thanks: 50 Thanked: 15 times in 3 posts]

#264936

Perhaps I don’t understand JA licensing. So my question to you guys is this.
If I have the right to use the templates on one domain or 3 or 5. Why do I need some 80+ templates?

How do you use all of them on one domain or 5?
I bought a developers license because I develop websites for clients and I select or let them select witch one they like.
I might sometimes like to switch template but then I normally do a new one with some modifications but based on the same template.
It should newer occur to me to run, for instance Teline, one week and then switch to JA Galena the next on the same domain.

Am I missing something?

Bosse

[cgc0202 Friend cgc0202Join date: August 2007Posts: 2244Downloads:0Uploads:3 Thanks: 206 Thanked: 262 times in 1 posts]

#264945

Hi Bossep,

<em>@bossep 72998 wrote:</em><blockquote>Perhaps I don’t understand JA licensing. So my question to you guys is this.
If I have the right to use the templates on one domain or 3 or 5. Why do I need some 80+ templates?
</blockquote>

Like fashion show? 🙂 Wear the latest creation?

<em>@bossep 72998 wrote:</em><blockquote>
How do you use all of them on one domain or 5?
</blockquote>

Create two websites each month, in the same domain or distribute them in 5? 🙂

<em>@bossep 72998 wrote:</em><blockquote>
I bought a developers license because I develop websites for clients and I select or let them select witch one they like.
I might sometimes like to switch template but then I normally do a new one with some modifications but based on the same template.
It should newer occur to me to run, for instance Teline, one week and then switch to JA Galena the next on the same domain.

Am I missing something?

Bosse</blockquote>

Why be satisfied with one when you can have two a month? 🙂

I hope I satisfied your curiosity. Tongue-in-cheek.

But then again, there must be more compelling reasons why others with regular membership have a need for two new templates (or even one template) each month, and cram all those in one to ten domains or ad libitum subdomains.

I have a developer account, and since I do not create websites for others, so far I use only one template that I liked for all my sites — not counting the one I used before. I just keep on modifying the same temolate.

What I need now is a graphic artist to help improve the aesthetic appeal. 🙂

Frankly, I agree with the notion that as far as layouts are concerned, many of the templates are just like the same individuals wearing different clothes or sets of clothings and accessories. Sometimes the scarf is placed around the neck, sometimes it is used elswhere. The blue jeans is worn with a white shirt then next time an A&F or a J. Crew shirt, or go out at night with a signature shirt, etc., etc.

Some are better combinations than others — it is still the same person inside. And that person can transform as the bartender at night, a student during the day, and more. In other words, the same person can be whatever (s)he wants to be.

That is true also for templates. Unless you customize a template, aesthetically, it is like wearing a fake Asian copy of an original design by a known fashion designer. As much as I like the elegance of the Nagya for example — it would require me to make a radical transformation of all the artistic designs to make it my own. Otherwise, it has the same effect of wearing the same copy-cat attire. Looks good but not much personality.

The only radical transformation in structure that I saw was the transformation from the original Teline to Teline II. Of course, many people do not see the difference from the outside (Homepage) because it is mainly in the scripting, and when you go deeper.

In the right hands, Teline II does not have to be simply a magazine template — it can be transformed to become the template of an art site, a commerce site, a complex company site or whatever you want with the appropriate extensions.

Cornelio

1 user says Thank You to cgc0202 for this useful post

1. bossep

[finchwizard Friend finchwizardJoin date: February 2008Posts: 9Downloads:0Uploads:0 Thanked: 1 times in 1 posts]

#264951

Providing the quality go’s up, I’m happy.

I just hope we’re not waiting longer for the same quality.

[cgc0202 Friend cgc0202Join date: August 2007Posts: 2244Downloads:0Uploads:3 Thanks: 206 Thanked: 262 times in 1 posts]

#264953

<em>@Finchwizard 73018 wrote:</em><blockquote>Providing the quality go’s up, I’m happy.

I just hope we’re not waiting longer for the same quality.</blockquote>

If you are still many months after September 2009, we will know for sure. There are encouraging signs though, even if they do not always apply to my owned threads. More moderators are responding more quickly to posted threads. At least that is what I observe in the Teline II forum. Now, if they just respond to my own threads, I will be happy.

Cornelio

[bossep Friend bossepJoin date: April 2008Posts: 262Downloads:0Uploads:3 Thanks: 50 Thanked: 15 times in 3 posts]

#264955

Hello Cornelio,
Ahh!:cool: So I can do:
http://www.mydomain.com/template1/
http://www.mydomain.com/template2/
http://www.mydomain.com/template3/
and so on?
or perhaps even:
http://www.mydomain.com/
ww2.mydomain.com/
ww3.mydomain.com/

or perhaps a redirect
ware I have subdomains redirected?
Like this
Main domain = http://www.mydomain.com/1
then a redirect o http://www.mydomain1.com/ to http://www.mydomain.com/1/
so it appears like http://www.mydomain1.com/1/

The later could be understandable to do cheap use of manny templats!

Bosse

[cgc0202 Friend cgc0202Join date: August 2007Posts: 2244Downloads:0Uploads:3 Thanks: 206 Thanked: 262 times in 1 posts]

#264956

<em>@bossep 73023 wrote:</em><blockquote>Hello Cornelio,
Ahh!:cool: So I can do:
http://www.mydomain.com/template1/
http://www.mydomain.com/template2/
http://www.mydomain.com/template3/
and so on?
or perhaps even:
http://www.mydomain.com/
ww2.mydomain.com/
ww3.mydomain.com/

or perhaps a redirect
ware I have subdomains redirected?
Like this
Main domain = http://www.mydomain.com/1
then a redirect o http://www.mydomain1.com/ to http://www.mydomain.com/1/
so it appears like http://www.mydomain1.com/1/

The later could be understandable to do cheap use of manny templats!

Bosse</blockquote>

Indeed, Bossep!

I am not familiar with

ww2.mydomain.com/
ww3.mydomain.com/

but I am sure (as I do) can perform:

http://www.subdomain1.mydomain.com/
http://www.subdomain2.mydomain.com/
http://www.subdomain3.mydomain.com/

But more seriously, there is are applications called multisite that allows you to do a single master site installation, and slave sites creation using the same master installation but if you want different databases and different templates.

Furthermore, under proper settings, it is possible to have a master registration/login integrated with the multisite software.

I was reading about these features this weekend because there is a “less restrictive” multisite software in terms of licensing that is native to Joomla 1.5.3 — well documented.

I am familiar with this feature in TikiWiki but I was never able to implement it because the instructions is Greek to me. Thus, I was not able to evaluate how a single master script would affect the robustness of the presentation of the individual sites. If not much effect, then this will save a lot of diskspace usage from not having to install one on one for each site.

Cornelio

[tanisha Friend tanishaJoin date: July 2007Posts: 30Downloads:0Uploads:0 Thanks: 32 Thanked: 4 times in 1 posts]

#264957

If you are going to change the templates from 2 to 1 template/s a month then how will each member that has paid for 2 templates a month membership (which will last past August 2009) be compensated?

[cgc0202 Friend cgc0202Join date: August 2007Posts: 2244Downloads:0Uploads:3 Thanks: 206 Thanked: 262 times in 1 posts]

#264958

<em>@tanisha 73025 wrote:</em><blockquote>If you are going to change the templates from 2 to 1 template/s a month then how will each member that has paid for 2 templates a month membership (which will last past August 2009) be compensated?</blockquote>

Hi tanisha,

I am not connected with Joomlart, but that is the whole point of the Announcement well in advance. Anyone who joins even on midnight 31 August 2009 that the following month, (s)he must expect to get just one template per month, thereafter. Before 1 September 2009, there will be 2 templates per month. So, no need to compensate anyone — unless you are one of the rare few who has 5 year membership that goes beyond the 1 September 2009.

For those who do not do their assignment, I and a number of posters here suggested that Joomlart must include a qualifier (or a footnote) that effective 1 September 2009, the new policy will take effect.

I am very disappointed that Joomlart has not done this yet. — announce it in the

Main site
http://www.joomlart.com/

where the current 2 tempates per month is advertised. And, if they want to be more clear, include it also in Forum sites where unregistered visitors may be able to view them publicly (no registration). This must include, at the very least, the

Pre-Sales Questions Forum
http://www.joomlart.com/forums/forum/pre-sales-questions/

and other Forum sites that are open to unregistered visitors.

They can be as honest as credit card and insurance companies, but making this a fine print — even in gray #99999 color if they want — but Joomlart must do this.

Joomlart cannot claim, hey we announced it in the

News and Announcements

that may be legally valid, if the latter is public; but it is ethically deceptive still, as far as I am concerned.

Cornelio

[Author]

Posts