Developer Fund

[CronoTriggerfan]

That being said, don't you think it's a little screwy that we're talking about donating to a project that still doesn't have a release date or a GUI?
+1 !!! With no smiley attached.
Regardless of any kind of smiley, I was dead serious, Chad.

The more I think about this, though, the more I'd like to just donate to my dev of choice. Perhaps we could have a number of options and be able to allocate our money to the top few devs, and then put however much into the "Other" fund that can be distributed as-is? Just an idea, it's a bit rudimentary...

 

[fusion_power]

A poor quality hacked port of something would still get some money, but with the lure of a lot more if they polish things up.

If this means OPTIMIZED Software, I'm into it. Example: A Dev makes an Emulator for the Pandora, it runs good but needs the full MHz of the Device or even more. Another Dev makes a more optimized Emulator of the same System and now the Emulator runs full Speed AND underclocked because it was good optimized. THERE should the money flow because the huge Power of the Pandora easily leads to quick, dirty, unoptimized ports.
This should flow in the rules for the Fund: Optimized Software that makes good usage of the Pandora Hardware, no wasted ressources, no PONG Games that need 600MHz to run etc.

 

[Patrick R Ludvigsen]

Goddamn, I'm IN. Just twenty bucks! Thanks!

 

[Firefox]

I think bounties are the way ahead if there's going to be a centralised pot of reward money that people chip in to.

If you try to pay people after the fact it's going to cause loads of controversy and upset - somebody's always going to feel they've been treated unfairly. On the other hand, bounties could be a good way to encourage people to create software that would be useful to lots of people but isn't the sort of thing that devs would tackle just for the fun of it.

 

[gaterooze]

If you try to pay people after the fact it's going to cause loads of controversy and upset - somebody's always going to feel they've been treated unfairly. On the other hand, bounties could be a good way to encourage people to create software that would be useful to lots of people but isn't the sort of thing that devs would tackle just for the fun of it.

The problem then could be, what if 20 devs create the same program to claim a bounty -- you will be left with the same issue, 19 of those people will feel cheated if they don't get the prize. And what if, for example, there is someone who is working hard on an ultimate, super-polished version of that application but a quick port swoops in and wins the bounty before it is ready?

I like bounties too, but they are just as fraught with complications as any other system.

 

[davidgutierrez]

I like the idea. Funds should be based on users feedback (and maybe) the kind of software (original game, original app, ported game, emulator...).

 

[Orkie]

I don't see how you can quantify worth in terms of type of software. I for example would set emulators as a fairly low percentage because I never use them (other than for development) but how many people here would agree with that?

 

[Hitnrun]

Couldn't it cause a legal problem if the "official" hardware maker gives monetary incentive to "gray area" applications (emulators)?

 

[Suntan]

Personally, I think it is crap to "ask" for a "donation" then make it a requirement for access to beta software/patches, etc.

The reality is that a lot of opensource/homebrew stuff can stay in beta for years, even though it quickly becomes very usable and is only being held from 1.0 status because the dev is OCD and wants every last line of code to be completely perfect.

I'd rather have $40 added to the price of the unit than have to deal with a farce $20 "voluntary" donation that "allows" you access to beta versions.

-Suntan

 

[Adventus]

@Suntan
I suspect by beta Craig means pre-public releases. I agree, most opensource software does not exit "beta" status.... but thats just because devs rarely consider a project finished.

I think it's a good idea. It gives a chance to contribute to the community without having to find a specific dev with a paypal account you like. It could work well inconjuntion with those who wish to target particular dev/apps. Maybe we could integrate the system with the file archive to make it more transparent.

Personally, I think the board moderators should decide where the money goes.... But i wouldn't get all strung up about what specific decision process is taken.

Although, I suspect I would be one of those crappy port devs .

 

[ashadocat]

Although I think limiting access to what should be public space (ie beta or testing zone) is bad, the idea has merit. perhaps we should give the money to people who make fixes to core aspects of the pandora? things that are already on the todo list like patches and drivers and stuff?

instead of allowing access to the special zones maybe you should get a special forum picture? like the gp32 guru guys \/. that and maybe an autographed pandora and/or a special skin for whatever gui we get.

 

[Tobriand]

This is probably going to go down like a lead balloon, but I'll throw the idea out there anyway:

How feasible would it be to log usage time spent on apps (obviously on an opt-in user has to turn the option on in advanced settings on the unit), and then have a program/script/whatever that uploads said times (preferably anonymously) to the archive. Ideally, when downloading software directly on Pandora, the user would be prompted as to whether they wanted to send the info (if logging were turned on in the first place).

Average time spent per user using an app can then be used as a silent-ish witness for determining how popular it is, and consequently, how much the deve would get.

Advantages: addictive mini-puzzles don't miss out so much, and may indeed trump emulators. Similarly, frequently used office apps (pdf viewers, text editors, browsers, email clients, gaim, and the rest) which may not be commented on as being awesome as much should compete well with the vocally popular software.

Disadvantage: feels a bit like spyware, no matter how much you have to consciously opt in, regardless of the fact that information is never transmitted without your consent. New versions might also be problematic - if a dev is releasing a new version of something every couple of days, then it seems likely that no one version will ever accumulate enough time.

Personally, as long as it was said logging was turned on only when I pressed the button to do so, and I was always *asked* whether I wanted to submit play-times, I'd be happy to do this, but I don't know how many others would be...

 

[icurafu]

I've always donated money to the projects I like and will continue to do so. I would like the beta access, but I can sarcrifice that in order to spend my donations for myself.

I'd like to give a big fat thankyou to Craigix for the very generous donation. Is it from Craigix alone, or from the entire Pandora team?

If it's craigix alone, I'll buy my Pandora from gbax as long as paypal is supported.

 

[ashadocat]

I'd be happy to submit play times, however i'm not sure that thats completely secure. anybody could edit their playtimes or even just leave a pandora running their software on all the time. and what about programs that run in the backround? like wifi managers and parts of the gui? I suppose it could be cpu power used + time spent using it but then good optimized code would be avoided becouse it dosn't make as much money.

 

[Tobriand]

and what about programs that run in the backround? like wifi managers and parts of the gui?

Actually, they're part of what the system would aim to capture in particular. After all, just because a program is quiet and unobtrusive, if it's incredibly useful nonetheless, surely the person who made it deserves recognition? And of course, if we make an assumption that money received from the fund has a limit set on it to ensure fair distribution to all, then even if they do rack up a lot more playtime than other programs, it won't matter after a while.

Agreed about the nonsecurity, though. Maybe the times could be stored in a non-encrypted file, but a hash be made of the file (and encrypted) such that tampering would show up? When sent, only the text file goes out, but before it does so, it is checked against the hash to make sure it's the right file. Or something alon those lines anyway.

For the limit, I propose £220, which is to say, the price of a Pandora plus a bit of beer money. You make a good enough program, then you got the hardware for free, and a drink or few on the people who use it.

 

[Suntan]

@Suntan
I suspect by beta Craig means pre-public releases. I agree, most opensource software does not exit "beta" status.... but thats just because devs rarely consider a project finished.




Well, if it is truly for alpha builds, then I really don't care. If I have the time, I'll volunteer to troubleshoot alpha software if it is a program I'm interested in, but I don't see that as a "privilege".

As for the idea of a usage tracker, no thanks.

First, the amount of time I use a program is not always directly related to how valuable that program is to me. I'd pay top dollar for a mobile program like EES but I wouldn't use it very often.

Second, I don't want any programs running that I don't specifically have a use for.

If it has to be a group decision, I'd much rather everybody just get to rank their top 5 favs and tally the points that way. A tracking program just sounds like an overly complex and resource wasting solution to a problem that could be solved much easier.

-Suntan

 

[Chip]

Personally, I think it is crap to "ask" for a "donation" then make it a requirement for access to beta software/patches, etc.

That's how ZodTTD runs access to his software, and it works well enough for him. He's raised almost $6k in the last couple months. Granted, he has the much larger iPod audience to work with, but the idea obviously works. His "beta" editions only stay as betas for a few weeks to a couple months at most, then they're released to the general public. When it comes to porting software, the guy is a machine. He's pumping out something new every couple weeks - it only makes sense that he'd want to make something for his effort. Hell, I donated and I don't even own a device he's deving for yet.

I don't see anything wrong with that sort of system.

 

[gruso]

I agree with Chip, I like the way Zod's system works. And I'm in the same boat - I made a donation but I don't own an iAnything yet.

I'm not a dev, but I imagine that a "controlled" beta release allows for more focused, constructive feedback & bug reporting. In a perfect world anyway.

 

[Adventus]

QUOTE
That's how ZodTTD runs access to his software, and it works well enough for him.
A little bit too well if you ask me . Zodttd's probably made much more money from his ports than the sum total of the original developers....

 

[PSyMastR]

Personally, the only aspect that I can see of this developer fund is the bounties.
For example:
Firefox 3 - Fully working back end (gecko) and comparable front end with tabs: Bounty $500
Pidgin - Fully working aim/msn/jabber/gtalk/irc: Bounty $250
etc...