Hi Gang, We're preparing to release our super-duper-fantastical plugin creating / sharing tool. But, before we do, we're looking for some feedback, input, perspective. This lengthy post should help answer some questions you may have. It also asks a few questions of you. Your replies are much appreciated and all input will be taken into consideration..You don't need to answer all of the questions, just do your best to comment. When commenting, add the question number to the start of your comment so we know what you're referring to, like... "Question 3: I think that you should....." "Question 2: I think you should..." Plugins: The more plugins, the better. Everyone wins with a large library of plugins to choose from. The goal is to allow users to find, use, and create additional plugins with the least amount of headache. Finding and using plugins isn't the topic of this post (we have a good grip on that part), creating and sharing is. Two things to consider: 1) Creating plugins. 2) Sharing plugins. It's not easy to make a sophisticated plugin, we understand this. However, the soon to be released Plugin Creator tool should help a little. How it works... --User visits their Account > Plugins screen and chooses "Create new Plugin" --User enters a simple name and description for their idea. The user can also "base the new plugin on an existing plugin" to help speed up the creation process. Example: You want to start with the Quiz plugin but plan to extend, change, or improve it. Basing the new plugin on the existing Quiz should make this much easier. --The tool automatically creates a basic plugin package for the yet to be created idea. The package automatically creates the basic plugin structure, code, and resources needed to "make it work" in an iOS or Android App. --User adds this plugin to an app in their control panel. At this point, the plugin doesn't "do anything new" but is usable. --The creativity begins after downloading the source-code for the app that includes the new plugin. It's at this point that the app owner modifies the plugin files to achieve the goal. Modifications could be simple or sophisticated, it's up to the app owner. --After tinkering, testing, creating, and making something super-cool, it's up to the app owner to decide if they want to share, sell, or promote their new creation. --In either case (sharing, selling, promoting or not) the app owner needs to decide if the plugin should be re-uploaded to their control panel. Re-uploading it to their control panel will allow them to use it in future apps. This process asks them if they want to "share" or "sell" their creation. --Newly uploaded plugins will NOT BE AVAILABLE in online control panels until we get a chance to inspect their contents. We do not want to do this but need to. It's a matter of making sure the newly uploaded package doesn't contain any malicious code. We are not interested in becoming the plugin police and it's not a matter of "rejecting" someones idea or creation - we won't be deciding the usefulness of user created plugins. The need for the inspection process is to make sure the plugin package doesn't intentionally exploit our backend, self-hosting provider backends, corporate intranets, end user devices, etc. It should not take long to inspect these uploaded plugins. --After a plugin is inspected (by us) and given the thumbs up, the user can decide if they want to share it (for free), sell it (for a fee), or promote it (in the plugin gallery). --Sharing, selling: If the plugin developer decides to share the plugin they will need to include a PayPal "pay to" email address in their account profile page. This is necessary so we know where to send sales revenue from your plugin. You can't do this yet but will be able to when we release this. ######################## Question 1: What do you think the best approach is for helping users set a price for their new creation (we expect most folks to want to get paid for creating something). Ideas range from a set price for all the plugins (a price we decide on), allowing plugin creators to set the price, allowing users to "donate", etc. There are pro's and cons to each approach. Question 2: What do you think is a reasonable price to charge for a plugin? And, how do you think we at buzztouch.com should charge the developer for selling their plugin? A percentage? A flat fee? Lots of ideas here. Question 3: If we had a mechanism to allow folks unlimited access to the library of plugins, how would we compensate the plugin developers? In other words, if there are 100 plugins available and 25 developers, how would we pay the plugin developers if the end user isn't paying for each one? Tough question here. Question 4: Duplicate plugins. It's very very likely that the plugin library will have tons of very very similar plugins. Example: 25 quizzes, mostly the same but sort of different. This seems problematic but we don't want to get into a situation of having to tell people "no, your plugin isn't good enough to be included." Question 5: Plugin ratings. The new system allows end users to provide ratings and reviews. Do you think this system should allow anonymous reviews / ratings or not? We're excited to finally get this going (after a ridiculous amount of work) and look forward to your feedback. We'll take everyone's comments into consideration before releasing the tool. Happy app-ing...

Question 1. I reckon BT could set a price range for plugins and each plugin has it's price set on its usefulness and originality. An existing plugin that has been improved on or modified would have a lower price than a brand new shiny, all bells an whistles plugin, like Scringo or a Push Plugin. Question 2. You are the host / shop for the plugins so a 30% cut doesn't seem out of question. Without BT there would be no store front or potential customers. Question 3. Developers could be asked I they wanted to be part of the 'package deal'. This might put their plugin in front of many more folks but for a reduced fee. Question 4. We don't need tons of duplicates, correct. The approval process should check the plugin offers something new and can possibly supersede existing incarnation. Question 5. Never anonymous. Look at Rotten Tomatoes and other ratings sites, they are all moving away from anon posts. If you have a view on something an want that view published, stand by it. Ps This sounds super cool, epic even as my boy might say. Or even as the say in Boston, ' wicked awesome!'

1. I think that the developer of the plugin should be allowed to set if they want it for free, price based or donation option. Some plugins could be useless, and some really creative, so I'd leave up to the user. 2. Certainly BT should collect a fee. Is BT handling the payment processor? If its paypal based than I'm thinking 20% for BT, if BT is handling the processing, I'm thinking 50% 3. Hmm, thats a tough one. I'm unsure how to answer this one, maybe later I'll figure it out. 4. No duplicates, agreed. 5. Nope no anonymous, absolutely not. Sounds exciting, I'll edit my #3 response, it all depends I think what you decide on question #1.

Question 1: I think as far as pricing the plug-in, I think a tiered rate that the developer can pick from may be a good idea. I think BT should set 3-5 options on the scale. Question 2: I think most of us are familiar with the 30% fee, and are comfortable with that. Question 3: I think a fee per app to access to the plug-ins may work. I understand this wouldn't work with self hosted, but it would handle everything on BT's back end. Question 4: Duplicate plugins. I can see this happening very fast. what is a meaningful change can be different for many people. Does the rating system help take care of this? Question 5: Plugin ratings- I would vote for no anonymous ratings, and I do like the idea that in iTunes you do have to buy it to rate it. Really excited for this! I think a "app store" like environment will allow BT to grow into "The ultimate app building platform" without a doubt.

Question 3 - I could help you setting up a system similar to stocks (free-trading shares), where all developers would receive a pre-defined number of shares (Certificate of Subscription) for each plugin up-loaded into this library. The direct involved developer would be paid normally for plugins that he elected to sell it. However, all plugins in the library eventually would create a huge value, and bigger this library becomes larger the value of these shares. These shares could be set to be tradable among the community (for example), so people could cash-out when they need it, or for any other reason. We could have plugins then even to facilitate this mechanism among us, (like an electronic trade "bank")

Question 1: I would as well go for the tiered price range. Tiers would be set by BT admins and the user would chose between them Question 2: A 25-30% from the income generated by a plugin could be a correct amount Question 3: I would see this as a repository for old..ish plugins, the ones that already generated some serious income for both the developer and BT. By then if both parties agree, the plugin would be moved in this repo. Maybe a different rewarding system could be implemented. So if a user agrees to publish a plugin in the 100s list he could get let's say 5 plugins for free from the first tier. Yep, tough one :) Question 4: Indeed, nobody wants a store full of the same plugin with different names. But also I guess the plugs will only get better. Think AppStore. Even if there are hundreds of torch apps, only a few make the difference by design and UI/UX. It would be hard for BT admins to filter each plug Question 5: Not really against anonymous ratings, but for sure I would go for the try and rate logic. It is a matter of trust to know that only someone who purchased and tested a plug can rate it PS. Can't wait for this to come out, I can only imagine where would this take BT.

Question 1: I would suggest a recommend price list but allow developers to set the price. Some plugins will be of no value to some and extremely valuable to others. Question 2: 30% seems to be "the model" some sites are doing 20%, ultimately it's your call. Question 3: 1,000 downloads that pays $1 each is better than 5 downloads that pays $10 each. I would think that a weighted average model could be of some value. Yesterday read that one site (I believe it wasgitJar) pays certain developers to allow free downloads of their apps. This apparently gives the developer more downloads, more money?, but it also draws traffic to the site. I would expect basic plugins to be part of a basic package. Additional packages offering different sets of plugins would be an option which ultimately Buzztouch would have to exercise judgment on which plugins to include. For an all inclusive package you would still have to consider value of plugin vs. uniqueness. I can see it coming "Another flashlight plugin?" How many variations will the unlimited package allow. Question 4: Difficult question, since some improvements may not be apparent to many. Question 5: ratings, like buttons, editors picks, featured plugins, number of downloads all useful info.

1, Sins this sophisticated plugin come to live b/c of BT Plugin Creator tool in the process of inspection BT should give it Average rating and set the price. 2, if it is possible it should be optional percentage or a flat fee. 3, a flat fee is easy & onetime right approach for super busy BT. 4, Duplicate plugins should not get approval. 5, No. Fantastic !!!!!

Just a thought on question 2: If a plugin is not "free" then it creates accounting issues and additional documentation requirements. A minimum payout with perhaps a minimum fee might be appropriate.

Before getting into answering the questions, I want to say great job on the hard work you guys have been doing. It sounds like a great system. Question 1: Helping? or choosing? It was hard to understand what you meant with helping. I don't think it would be fair to estimate what plugins would and would not be worth. If I spend 4 weeks on a quiz plugin, have it submitted, but it doesn't bring too much "new" into the plugin field, it still might be worth $100 to me, even through to you, it's worth about $5. My time is worth money! I think developers should be free to choose the exact amount, but perhaps a minimum limit, of say $5, to pay for any processing fees buzztouch may run into (if buzztouch is doing any payment processing other then paypal?). Question 2: There's no reasonable price for a plugin (see question 1), that's all opinion based between developer and customer hehe. 20, 30%, sounds pretty good to me. Don't make it too high, people might want to sell it elsewhere then and get a full or bigger cut! ;) Question 3: Hard one, yep. I would take a look at how wordpress does that (if at all?) sorry, wish I could help more on this one! Question 4: Duplicate plugins are UNAVOIDABLE! (we all know this), but each one will have it's own little change. Let the user decide which ones are better, by rating these plugins. NEVER REJECT!, the person you might reject now might lose interest in submitting other, more powerful plugins - and we might have just lost a valued developer (who may have improved upon his first submission based on ratings/reviews). I would never turn down a working plugin, so long as it's not an exact replica (reasonably). Question 5: In the jailbroken community, anon reviews were HORRIBLE. Developers would spam other competition with horrible reviews. Make sure the reviewer has a certain amount of posts and a certain amount of registration time in order to rate/review (say, ten posts and at least a weeks worth of registration time). It's a *little* annoying, but it will go **FAR** from keeping the rating/review system from being abused. Awesome stuff - I'm so excited!!! Cheers! David buzztouchmods.com p.s. food for thought... what's stopping one user from distributing a purchased plugin to another user? Once you have the source code, your good to go to distribute! We don't want to see a buzztouchhacks.com. Is there anything buzztouch could do to help protect plugin developers?

Great comments, keep em' coming. Quick reply to @MrDavid's question: "what's stopping one user from distributing a purchased plugin to another user" There isn't much that we can do about this. However, we can help plugin authors understand different licensing models, defense protection mechanism's and other approaches to help them prevent unauthorized sharing of their source code (if this is something that is important to the plugin author). Giving somebody a USEFUL plugin package (sharing when they know they should not be) isn't as easy as it sounds. Sure, a few teaks could be done to any package to "make it work" in another app but ultimately it's a giant pain in the butt to "illegally share" a plugin, what's the incentive? Think of it this way, hacking around in a plugin, changing all sorts of values, and trying to get it to work in an app is entirely different than using the simple control panel. Hackers and Code Enthusiasts will do this, for sure, but probably not in any kind of volume? Bottom line, everyone that creates / shares / offers anything for sale online takes this risk and has to take responsibility for protecting their Intellectual Property ;-) Lastly: buzztouchhacks.com: See comments above. It's not a difficult matter to use the legal system to TRY to protect yourself / ourself from unauthorized content distribution. It doesn't always work but for sure it can be tried. It would also be relatively easy for us to loudly and publicly condem such a project. Our blessing isn't required to try such a thing but without our audiences participation, it would make it very difficult to make any progress with a bogus enterprise that's not acting within the spirit of what we and our community is trying to do.

@David Thanks for the response - appreciate it, totally get what you mean. It was a honest question. I'm really glad to know that BT will be there for plugin developers, as I'm sure the community will help out too. p.s. I like the licencing models idea! What a movement. Cheers, David. buzztouchmods.com

Sounds very cool!!! Question 1: developer should set the price. If he decides to sell at $100 it's his decision (but he may not sell any) Question 2: 20 to 30% should be good Question 3: struggeling with this one..... Question 4: Just let them in 'the store'. When adding a plugin to 'the store' there should be a list of fields that are mandatory to fill in. Example: This plugin is a reproduction of.....(list here of all available plugins) If existing plugin is choosen then next question will be: What does it do different etc etc with good detailed description. In the plugin (in the pluginlist) should be a button to contact the developer so users can ask questions before they buy/download. Ratings and reviews of plugins will determine if the plugin is usable or not. Question 5: Nope! Based on the list of fields to fill in (mentioned in question 4) some ideas on fields that have to be filled in: 1.plugin based on... 2. Differs from... 3. OS... (iOs or Android) 4. Device...(iphone, ipad in other words: big or small device) 5.rotation...(portrait or landscape) 6. is an external script necessary...(yes or no) 7. if 6 is yes, script included (yes or no) By developing my own plugins I experienced that field 4 and 5 are critical to me. I hope my input will contribute something. Best Regards, Danny

Question 1: Let the developer set the price. Question 2: A percentage sounds the most logical. But I could also argue the "e-junkie" model where you would charge a certain amount per month for a certain amount of "shelf space". For example: $5/month for a max of 10 plugins, unlimited sales. BT should see the value of having a recurring income. And it would challenge the developer to market their plugins better (and create better plugins) since the more they sell, the more profitable they are. Question 3: This is a complex one. If you wanted to go that route, I would suggest you make the whole market based on more of a iStockPhoto business model. Where the developers submit their goods, and they get a set amount for each download. The customer pays a set amount for unlimited access. I don't think BT is ready for this type model. So by the time we get hundreds of (valuable) plugins in the store, it would be easier to evaluate this model. Question 4 and 5: These merge together in my mind. I say let the plugins in. And leave the burden of marketing to the developer. If there are 30 quiz plugins, a few will rise to the top based on their features, reviews, marketing, etc. And reviews should not be anonymous. Looking forward to this new option. I have a ton of plugin ideas just waiting for this option!

Q1. I think all plugins should be chargable with no free plugins offered as it may encourage more downloads than paid plugins, a bit unfair I think. I think as part of an approval process BT should offer a recommended prices rage, for example $2-5 or $5-7 etc, plus a rating. The developer of the plugin then sets its price. Also please ensure there are screenshots. Q2. Developers of plugins should have the choice of selling at a flat fee, subscription fee or to share privately. Depending on what is selected will determine %, example flat fee 30%, subscription 5-10% and no tax on privately shared plugins. Q3. I would prefer no free plugins. And depending on your account could determine what type of plugins you get. Or BT can buy the best plugins outright or for license fee, then if you want to give it away free you can. Not sure how it would work for self hosting, may be the same as my example for BT. Q4. I have no issue with duplicate plugins as some will be better than others. I think like the apple app store all plugins should have screenshots and rating / review section. I think competition is healthy, but there does need to be quality control. Q5. I think plugins should only be rated after purchase and no one should be anonymous, just good honest feedback. All this sounds exciting, can't wait!

Reading some of the comments, Q2. Don't allow sharing, that way no abuse of the plugin and no law suits.

Question 1: Dev's set price. Question 2: Developers should be able to choose out of the options,flat rate fee around 25-30%. Question 3: Basic plugins could be given away for free, best and top notch plugins go for paid. Question 4: yes, as long as it is a little different then the main one, but users can decide based on the rating of the plugin. Question 5: Plugins should be allowed to be rated only after a user buys it, and it should never be anonymous.

Question 1 dev set the price for there hard work Question 2 A percentage 20% to 30% Question 3 membership sounds like a good idea Question 4 no Duplicate plugins have a approval process Question 5 Never anonymous

Question 1: I think I like the idea of the developer setting the price. Question 2: The popular 30% fee seems reasonable, and a model that fits in with the current app models. Question 3: No idea. Need to think about this one. Question 4: Dupes are OK because, as others have mentioned, some will be better/more feature rich than others. Both app stores are chock full of duplicate apps...users will separate the good from the bad. Question 5: No anonymous ratings, as I tend to think they end up being vile rants. Having to sign your name to it causes most people to stop and think about what they're going to say. Mark

Question 1: Dev should set the price Question 2: BT should get their 30% Question 3: No idea how that works Question 4: Plugins shouldn't be judged on usefulness or duplication - If it's rock solid code, should be approved Question 5: All ratings should be tied to a person/account This really seems like a CodeCanyon.net market would be best. Developers submit code (from Wordpress to Drupal to HTML), people buy, ask questions and rate their purchase, and the site takes a cut. I'd pay $$$ for the missing plugin that helps me close a deal, fix a problem, or otherwise make a client happy! Buzztouch helps me dream bigger. Thanks!

Well, I've got nothing to contribute that hasn't already been said, no big disagreements with any suggestions. I'm still struggling to appreciate the potential enormity of what @carlos33609 suggested. Surprised no-one else has commented on it.

Question 1: Pricing should be what the market will bear. The developer can set their price as they see fit. Question 2: I agree with others on here that 30% seems customary and reasonable based on the “Apple model”. Question 3: Personally, I’m much more likely to acquire plugins on a “pay-as-you-go” basis rather than a fee for access to all paid plugins. Question 4: As long as the plugins were categorized and clearly described what they do, then duplicates would be ok with me. I would presume that a developer would not create a plug-in if another identical one was already available. Question 5: The system should not allow anonymous reviews. I probably have more questions about the mechanics behind this than the actual delivery process. For example: Who supports the plugin after release? Will the plug-in development tool create plugins for both iOS and Android? Will there be some sort of Buzztouch “seal of approval” to provide some assurance that the plugin won’t blow up my project? Lots more questions beyond that. All in all, this is fantastic news. Thanks as always for the incredible effort!

Great Update: Question1: There can be a Minimum Price But over all should be on Developer. Question2: 30% ( Industry Standard in App Stores) Question3: Buy a Plugin and use it it any application. Question4: Plugin Review process should weed out duplicates. Question5: No Anonymous reviews. There will be always some fake reviews but in the long run it should even out. Also lot of people will want to put up free plugins and those can have a community support so it brings up an idea of plugin community / Developers.

Great news, this is going to be big. Question 1 : I think the developers should set their price, Question 2 : 30% seems good. BT should charge a one time fee to review the plugin and certify that it won't harm our self hosted installation. (Maybe optional for the developper, but I'd buy the one that is certified by BT). Question 3 : Yikes, that's like splitting the restaurant bill, who had dessert, who did'nt have any wine ? Hard one. Question 4 : Duplicates are ok, I'll guess there will be better duplicates than other's. Question 5 : Not any anonymous reviews. Better if only buyers could review. Review for support also. One extra real important thing is support for these plugins. Developer's like MrDavid, Danny, Stobe do great supporting their creations, but we are going to get a lot "hit and run" plugins. Example : iOS6 or 7 comes, Android 4.1 et hop, plugins don't work anymore. The developper has lost interest, has no time, or can't fixe it. Our published apps stop working and clients get angry. We are out of business. A premium support with monthly fee for the plugins that we know will be supported. I know BT can't do the support but how about a list of actively supported plugins. These go on a special list or a special monthly offer. This maybe partly an answer to question 3. Hopefully, the simple plugins won't need support, but more complicated ones will and the will need updates. Recent example : iOS with google maps, Android with notifications. Really looking forward to this,

Question 1 - Buzztouch forums show there is a helpful community out here, with active participants who like to help each other. I am sure some poeple will want to create free plugins without being tied to providing support. Others will like the opportunity of charging - the system has to cater for both. If I was a seller, I would want to find the balance between price and volume. You might want to have some preset price-points; ultimately I suggest it is probably better to let the seller decide and let 'market forces' decide if the price is right. As a buyer I do not like finding I have paid for something that doesn't work the way I expect, so a way of evaluating before parting with money is always good, even if that is down to the developer making 'lite' or time limited variants. Question 2 - If I was a seller, I would want a shared risk model, i.e. a percentage, not flat fees. I think this could work if Buzztouch takes a percentage for making a market and collecting payments in the way Apple do it. Something in the region of 30% would seem reasonable to me. If plugin authors relied on donations, it would suit buyers Income would be variable and some people wouldn't pay anything. However, it is a less commercial model and this is possibly more suited to a community like Buzztouch. Question 3 - A complicated solution that is not transparent usually does not go down too well. A simple option is to charge per plugin. Everyone would understand it. Question 4 - I think this is the tough one. What if somebody releases a plugin and then somebody else comes along with a better variant - in the interst of avoiding duplication, would you remove the old one? - I say you would not. What if some plugins are free and some are chargeable, or if someone releases a plugin similar to someone elses, but wants it to be cheaper or free ?. I think the best option is to allow any plugins to be published if they meet technical standards and if they provide an benefits and let the user base judge if they want them or not - Joomla does this and it works well. Question 5 - I wouldn't trust anonymous reviews. Reviews and ratings are good, but anyone who wants to comment should nt be afraid to put their name to their views - most of us already do this in the forum.

Cool to see most folks in agreement and on same page/similar ideas. Unique to most forums I've ever seen. //Q1 Developers def need to set the price. Only they know how long it took to develop. Having to abide by a set price might discurage sharing. Developers can factor support into their price. Lack of time to provide adequete support is what keeps me from doing a lot of stuff. Time is money. $15 for a plugin that you might spend 5 hrs trying to make work for one user.... //Q2 I'm reaching for 34% 30% for David/Stephen/Parker 3% to fund Webcasts/BuzzTour (so you can teach us to make theese things) 1% of all proceeds to fund BUZZCAST //Q3/Q4/Q5 Sharing/repository. Love and now use Envato/Code Canyon/Chupa ideas/model. Excellent controls there. I've picked up a few and tinkered with them. I'd grab more if the price is right. I shop by nevcessity here but love to gander. You never know, impulse buy can spur an app design. If they had a deal I would gouge heavily. Great point made about the fact that after you spend $25 on a plug in. Then someone re-resleases/mods that plug in and resells it for $40, what happens here. Does original author get royalties? I've modded the plug-ins from BTM for my own liking. I'll probably do this with any plugns that I buy. All about a BT Seal Of Approval/Review Process and stuff. Also want an "Apple has Approved apps built with this code" Seal too. That is all stuff that I hope doesn't keep David from improving BT. Rather have you coding than reviewing/testing/supporting. This is why I'd like to suggest incorporating BuzztouchMods into the process. Why re-invent the wheel. MrDavid does fantastic work and already has credibility in my book. Anyone can write a review but who reviews the reviewer. I know I'll read and judge reviews based ont he reviewers experience in the area. Also hope language barrier isn't a problem and users like broomla that want to speak code can get thru the process and weigh in and submit plug-ins and support isn't a factor there. //Additional input I'd love to possibly use the TweetSheet code I sent you to be a ginea pig to test this new API. I've got a new updated package that installs even easier now just waiting for the doors to BT Plug-in repository to open! Thanks again for making this. Glad you're not lost at sea. Don't make us nervous like that. Lets talk about a keyman policy here. I know a good insurance agent ;)

this is extremely tough to judge. I think plugins will prosper if allowed to grow organicly and more 'open source' rather than people trying to make a quick buck selling plugins. Like mentioned previously theres nothing stopping someone copying code, making some minor mods and re-packaging/selling. Unfortunately in emerging markets this is inevitable much like we see many copycat apps in the appstores. However long term the cream will always rise to the top in such cases the better plugins will prevail. Those with real world business solutions and that offer additional support/updates (key for paid plugins imo) will perhaps justify payment. If the majority create plugins for profit then imo the point has been missed. Open source is the future :)

I think the Wordpress plugin model could work really well for BT. Wordpress plugins are licensed under the GPL (meaning once you purchase the code you can do anything you'd like with it, even resell it). There aren't many problems with this (that I'm aware of) because of the forward momentum of the code. Updates come out all the time that break functionality, and plugins that don't have support for these updates are not valuable. Support is the key factor in purchasing a plugin. There are many parallels between BT and Wordpress, the main one being that they are both constantly evolving. As iOS and Android advance, updates are key to keep BT (and plugins) functioning correctly. Plugins are only valuable if they can be counted on to evolve with the OS. There are basically two camps for Wordpress plugin developers: Lifetime updates and Yearly updates. I think a similar system would be ideal for BT plugin devs.

@andydahl... agree 100%

To me, wordpress is inherently flawed. There should be NO WAY that core updates break existing functionality! It's just wrong. Depracate yes, but not break. It's not like it's in beta anymore!

Just to chime in, I guarantee you that there are developers on BT that have developed plugins for their own use. Reason they don't want to release it is because there is really no incentive for them to do so. Also, they probably dont want to list for sale because other members would think they are greedy, etc. Its a lose/lose scenario. Hence, why I dont see the "open source" in regards to plugins a valuable move. Those same developers will hold on to their plugins, and nothing will get accomplished unless theres some incentives. As for Wordpress model, I was never a fan personally. Why should another developer have the right to resell my plugin and make money of it? Doesn't make sense. Especially if it took a lot of time to create.

David's post here gets me thinking: Could the buzztouch U Plugins Learning Path be close to release?? What a great thing to have available with the launch of the sharing plugins tool!! Question 1: I think developers should be allowed to set their own price. Supply/demand will self-correct any misguided pricing. If a plugin is good enough, people will pay for it, I'm sure. If someone is charging for a poorly done plugin, a few reviews from our well-respected community should set them straight. Question 2: I defer to everyone else's thoughts here, I suppose. Sounds like 30% is the consensus number. Regardless, I do strongly believe that BT should charge something for helping developers sell their plugins. But like Q#1, you should set the price you feel is fair, not us. Developers will tell you if they are okay with it by how many plugins are made available through BT. The market will help you set your price in time. Question 3: Complicated. Still need to think about this one. Question 4: Tread lightly here. I wonder: is the intent to only share the code of the BT created plugins and not developer ones? Letting me take someone else's really great work and change it ever-so-slightly and call it my own and sell it as my own seems a bit unfair. But making everyone start from the same place (BT developed plugins) should help keep copies from showing up. Independently developed duplicates, while a pain, will help fuel the creative fires of developers, especially if they wish to make money. Make a unique product and do it better than others and you'll make more money. Question 5: 100% PLEASE do not allow anonymous reviews. Anonymous reviews beg for those with similar plugins to say negative things about others. I think that would greatly impact our wonderful community negatively. You want to review something, own your words. Put your name on your reviews. I do wonder about implementing a similar review system to the Apple App Store. That is, the ability to view reviews from a particular version. Old versions of a plugin with a bug that has been fixed deserve to be reviewed and scored overall upon its current version, in my opinion.

Hey all, Quick thing on the anonymous reviews.. I agree, anon reviews should not be allowed. However, many of us forget that this is the internet, and it's inherently built on anonymity. There's absolutely nothing stopping me from creating a new account and reviewing a plugin or WORSE, a competitors plugin with the name "Bugs Bunny". With that said, just wanted to throw in again that there should be review/rating limitations (in my opinion) and should be based on these 3 factors: 1. the user must have the plugin in question downloaded/installed. 2. the user must have been registered for at least 2-3 weeks. 3. the user must have at least 10-15 forum posts. Plugin developers that have plugins in the "bt store" should revoke their right to *publicly* review other plugins, for the best interest of bt. I know that last one might need more thought, but I truly believe these limitations will prevent 90% of any abuse the review/rating system will unintentionally host. What do you think? Cheers, David buzztouchmods.com

Very interesting. I've worked on some "compatibility plugins", meaning I haven't developed anything new but I've managed to get third-party solutions working on BT powered apps. I think this tool will make this even easier. Rock and Roll @David! 1. Dev set price based on a tier model (e.g. Apple App Store) 2. 30% sounds fair (e.g. Apple App Store) 3. Don't know. 4. Have a set of rules and guidelines to approve each plugin (e.g. Apple App Store) 5. No anonymous comment. 6. Can't wait to get my hands dirty on this tool!!!

Guys, I'm mega excited by this. 1. From what I've seen on most platforms, the donation-ware simply doesn't compensate the developers well enough (I'm happy to be proven wrong on this). As an Apple fan-boy, I think their pricing tiers are a good idea. 2. Depending on the application I'd go for as little as $5 to a 'sky is the limit'. The market will decide whether a high-priced plugin is worth it. I think it's really important that there's a refund option too; within 24 hours or something like that in case the plugin doesn't work as described. Fee-wise, a percentage seems the best option to me. 20-30% always seems reasonable. 3. A 'subscription' to all plugins should be an opt-in option for all all plugin developers. I'd like to think that a really, really good plugin could reward the developer handsomely. As such, a cap on their income from this could prevent continuous, strong innovation (and I say this as a user, I've nowhere near the skills to develop a plugin!). 4. Just because a plugin is similar to an existing one doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed for publication. Otherwise, you risk a gold rush to develop the first plugin in it's field, after which, no further development will be done. There could be allegations of plagiarism, but this is for the community / developers to police themselves. It's not really BT's job. 5. Anonymous would be fine if there's a security against manipulating the market. However, no one else has managed to do this, so maybe forbidding anonymous reviews is the way forward.

Having just struggled through building my first plugin package, I'm ultra-excited. The iOS code wasn't the hardest part...it was packaging everything up properly, so your tool will be awesome! 1. Developers should set prices. For "vertical market" plugins there may even be a revenue-share required, and the price could be in the thousands of dollars, without anybody blinking an eye. For mass-market functions the prices could be 10 bucks. Your platform is so darned flexible and so unique...don't limit it. 2. 30% 3. Not sure. I agree with the idea that all buzztouch users can pay a fee for "base" access to the BT core plugins plus perhaps some set of popular 3rd party plugins. The high-end and specialized plugins aren't going to submit anyway, will stay private. 4. Hard to police duplicates. This is one reason that it should not be "too" easy to build plugins. They should require at least a little real skill and some understanding of JSON and/or iOS/Java. One system you might use is simply analyze the iOS code to see if it's a flat-out duplicate of existing code. If it is, not acceptable. 5. No anonymous. Not needed in a community like this.

I don't really have time to go in depth with answering those questions but I think you guys should take a look at what Unity3d (game engine) has been doing with their asset store. You would probably want to do something similar to that.

@ThomasB #4: I believe this is apples thought with making apps, this is what I thought when I spent a MONTH trying to get provisioning profiles working correctly in xcode ;p Cheers, David buzztouchmods.com

Question 1 - Devs set price Question 2 - I think 30% is a fair cut Question 3 - I like the subscription idea a lot and I think it seems pretty fair Question 4 - Duplicates I think just don't need to go on the market. If for say they aren't at least 30% different from the original than it is a no go.. This would have to be deemed and trolled by Buzz of course. Question 5 - Reviews are a must and IMO essential before purchasing any software/app online.. I never buy an app without first reading some sort of comment from other buyers. Anonymous reviews should not happen as I like to know who has the Plugin and what they thought. Keep up the great work Buzz