Personal Environments

  
Just got an email about the replacement of Community Edition: Personal Environments

Although the price of the enterprise version is still a no-go for little players, I think OutSystems went the right way, ending with the low SU limit, and not restraining anything else.
For what I saw we have to use a subdomain (easy to workaround) and there is a limit on the number of users (didn't saw if it was a limiting number or a performance issue), but it covers most of our fears.

Thumbs up!
Nuno,

Do not agree at all.

I like to maintain my own DB, OS & hardwware... so under the new model there is no way to do that. Can only back-up our data using queries/webservices? - is this April the 1st??? A joke?
So this is stupid in my view being there is no SLA. How is the hardware maintained by OS? What if they have a signifigant event and there is data loss? What will be the gaps in their "regular" backups? This also extends to the code base being stored on their servers....

Seems we are being effectivly having our data locked in by OS now too....

OS Team you have, in my view seriously missed the boat on this. Reread what "your" users wrote in the licencing message please. 

Some people will love these personal environments and some love the existing arrangement (like me) even though the licencing is a little on the low side when it comes to the SU's.

Please let us continue  to have both - leave the binaries available & community licence!!!


I don't intent on giving up of my personal server. But this will be very useful complement.

I know the main problem of OS is the absense of a small license. But with this freelancers can have their entire portfolio online at any given moment. No need to select a few tiny apps because of SU limits. Wasn't that the second issue?
Well Nuno you will have to give up your personal server if you want to move on version 8, as  they will be removing the binaries.

And I agree it is a nice addition but OS do not remove the ability for to use our own servers. Please!
The following is my personal opinion.  I have no connection to Outsystems and do not represent them.

This change is intended for developers.  If you have live data on a development system and you aren't doing what you need to protect it, there is no way you should be expecting OS to backup or protect anything you put on a development site.  I'll bet that the terms of service don't allow for production use either, though I haven't read that yet.

As a developer, I kept running into the 30,000 SU limitation.  Specifically, I have a very large database schema for what I'm trying to do.  I hit the 30,000 almost before I created any screens.  I was able do things in pieces to make some progress but it was challenging at times.  This will allow for complete development of my application without the significant investment needed previously.  The benefit to Outsystems is that, if I'm right about my application, they will get several very large clients that will buy the largest enterprise version.

Catering to the developer community is nothing new.  Microsoft has been doing it forever.  If Outsystems creates a group of enthusiastic developers that will recommend the Outsystems platform and can show them the huge advantages by creating working examples, then this change in policy will pay off greatly.  I cannot wait to get started!!!
Mark Bayles wrote:
Well Nuno you will have to give up your personal server if you want to move on version 8, as  they will be removing the binaries.
I wonder if even with the binary we will be able to install them into new servers. My personal version is in 7 and I won't change that. But I'll upgrade the server configuration soon just in case.
Good morning everybody!

At first, I would like to congratulate OutSystems on the release of this new, exciting, product: "the personal environment" !
Considering they where warning us it could take more time up to even later then the first trimester, it must be said they have done a great job in releasing this new version halfway January! Great work guys!

So, gotten over the first excitement I studied the FAQ on the Personal Environment, which is stated here.

Here is my analysis, looked at from my own point of view, being working for small company customers:

From the FAQ:
 
[Point 1.4.] The issue is: you must actually USE the environment. If you stop using it, they will archive the apps and recycle the environment. They state this will happen if you do not use it "for an extended period of time". We don't know how long that exactly is. As developers, we are not even likely to actually use the apps. We develop. We do not use. The "personal environment" clearly is not targetted after production. That's important to notice.
Remaining question: does "developing" equals: "using" in OutSystems book? 
 
[Point 1.5.] OutSystems warns that:"the personal environment is suited for small deployments - personal apps with dozens of users - not for mission-critical or heavy usage apps.".
It also states in [point 2.1.] "as a free offering there are no SLAs for availability, performance, etc.". 
Altogether this makes sense of course (since it is free) but it is something to carefully consider. You can't guarantee anything to anybody, since OutSystems does not guarantee anything to you. Also, OutSystems states in [Point 3.3.]: Personal environments are configured for you to learn, experiment, or prototype apps at your own pace.
 
[Point 2.3.]  "On-demand individual backup or recovery capability is not available for personal environment users." So what happens if someone messes up the environment? More important: what happens if OutSystems goes broke (nobody hopes) or a disaster brings down the company. What happens to your app? How can you restore anything if there is no option for backup? Would you just have lost years of development? That would be unacceptable? Can we make backups ourselves? If not, why not? Who would EVER want to put many hours of work into developing an app that is not secured in terms of continuity? Certified corporations are not even ALLOWED to do that. I personally would never do so since my hours put in have VALUE. I want that value to be PROTECTED. Not being able to backup or restore is a gamestopper for any serious developer no matter for which market segment he or she is working.
 
[Point 3.2.] Ahh! There ARE limits! Here is an important one: Limit of 1GB of database storage for application data. Wow. That's a major disappointment.... what if the limit is reached? The app stops? Can you extend this limit? How? At which cost?
 
[Point 3.10.] Very important restriction: While the enterprise subscription has an “exit option” that allows you to detach your applications from the Platform, this capability is not available in your personal environment. So..... if your app is ready, you can not "get your app" from the cloud and store it on a DVD, or copy it to another personal environment (from a customer f.e.) Your application that is hosted on the personal environment is there to stay.... UNLESS you upgrade to the enterprise subscription. What if your customer can't afford that? 
 
[Point 5.2.] Conveniently forgotten? The limitation of 1 GB of data storage, that was not there in the Community Edition.... 
It seems point 5.2. only mentions those issues in favor of the Personal Environment, not those that work against it. I would say that is not very elegant. The data storage limit was introduced with the new personal environment. It should have been mentioned in this section of comparison between the Community Edition and the Personal Environment.
 
 
So, the "Personal Environment" is not intended (or even suitable) for production purposes. It is intended to learn, experiment or prototype. What if you are ready doing so? The app is ready, and you need to distribute to your customer(s). What happens, how do you do that? It seems the only way to do that, is upgrade.
 
It seems that the point of all of this is, that if you want to actually USE your app in production (or your customer) that you need to upgrade it to an "enterprise subscription" (expensive...): Applications and data can be transferred from your personal environment to an enterprise subscription as part of the upgrade process. Is the new "Personal Environment" nothing more than a "customer trap" ?
 
CONCLUSION
 
This new "Personal Environment" does not offer anything "new" for the independent developer in terms of realizing his production and delivery process. It is still targeted towards learning, and in the long haul getting customers into the "enterprise subscription". Your "small customers" (the mom and pop company on the corner) will not be able to afford this "enterprise subscription". So you may develop for, but you can not deploy in this market section, which happens to be where I operate nowadays.
 
Example: you could FOR FREE develop a nice app for "Company X" on the new personal environment. But then what once it is ready? "Company X" could either use it as is on the personal environment with NO SLA, NO GUARANTEES, NO BACKUP/RESTORE, NO STORAGE OVER 1GB, NO WAY TO TRANSFER THE APP or "Company X" can UPGRADE TO THE ENTERPRISE SUBSCRIPTION. That's it. There seem to be no more flavors available.
 
The first option is no real choice, who would EVER want that in production???
And the second option is no real choice either, since "Company X" could not, or would not want to, afford that being a small company on seriously restricted budgets.
 
So... developing for small businesses, we are left with.... what exactly ??
 
The "Personal Environment" is nothing short but a "missed opportunity". I can not afford to use it. My customers are not "enterprise class" companies.

So, the whole discussion seems to be about the question whether OutSystems really wants to create new opportunities for small independent developers building for small companies, or not. In the latter case, this all really has been a real waste of my time and I should be moving on to alternatives. There is no use in walking with your head in the cloud if you can't put it into practice....

Let's get this discussion going!

Hi Marcel.
I can help with your questions.

1.4
My assumption is that they will simply monitor database usage. If you're editing data, entities or publishing changes it will be registered and the environment considered as in use.
That puts all apps of one developer in the same bag so if I'm focusing in one for a couple of months, I won't lose previous work.

1.5 I'd say this is not like community edition, it's more like that 15-day trial version with 600k SU, but to infinity.

2.3 and 5.2 You can save the .oml locally (3.5), the code is never lost. The matter here is data. That part is never guaranteed. Using in production I would create a Timer to extract data and send it to me in a regular basis.

3.2 Installing CE in an express edition of database would have the same limit. What we are losing here is disk. When I made this component, I wanted to free space in DB by using disk. Here I would say you can't use the disk at all (at least I'm expecting that, because 3.6 says you can't configure anything).

3.10 You can extract your oml (3.5) and your data (bootstrap). What you can't, like before, is use the free version to generate .net/java code for you.


What we all want is a cheap magical tool. Agile Platform is magical, serves coffes, makes sandwiches and everything, but it is not cheap. If it can't be cheap, at least make the license scalable. Would 1000€ for 10k SU be fair?
Hi Nuno.

Extracting your application itself and separately, its data, should be something offered with a standard available feature, not something you have to "invent" and code yourself and then see if it works. These features should be transparant, and supported. You can't have that you are finished after 2 years of development and by then the feature you THOUGHT to be able to develop in order to extract application and data does not work anymore because of "x". That is an amateuristic approach in which personally I would not like to work and I'm sure my customers wouldn't like that "risk". The should be no guesswork or home-D.I.Y.-work needed in order to extract app and data. That's my opinion. If they'll allow it, then why not provide the ready-to-go function?

You ask me if 1000€ for 10k SU would be fair. I don't want a limit on SU. That in itself won't work at either price. I don't want my creativity to be limited by the tools I use. Furthermore, I may be able to offer criticism here (and I often gladly do so) but I hold OutSystems in too high an esteem to mention competing products here. Trying to behave myself as a welcome guest, I won't make any comparison. That said, you yourself will easily be able to put a list together of competing products and their costs. The result will quickly provide an answer to your question with regards to the 1000€ example. 

We are talking different worlds here. That's obvious. And there is no shame in that. Coming from a corporate banking world where our OutSystems licenses would exceed 100.000€ (as once quoted by OutSystems) there is a whole other approach there to software development platform costs as in the small business world where I am trying to work right now. Where the corporate world may look at 1.000€ as small change, for the small business owner these amounts are Serious Business! 

It IS actually possible to bridge that gap, I am sure of it. What's obviously hindering OutSystems here, is THE WILL to do so. And that's no shame either: they are very much allowed to make their own marketing and business plans and strategy. What I personally say does not play a role whatsoever. If OutSystems is not interested in the world of independent developers working for small businesses, that is perfectly their decision. 
There is nothing that I can (or want to for that matter) do about that. But personally I think that is a pitty. There might have been much more money for them to get out of their products. But, as said, that's not my call.
I can only say, that as it is now, I simply can not use this "personal environment" due to the many reasons I stated above.

I understand your point of view. Fitting into SUs is a huge slow down. This isn't limiting criativity like you say, it's killling it.

But I would let the product in this upper class level until around IPO time. Because opening the doors to the entire world will really increase visibility as well as market value and that is the purpose of any business.
I just hope they don't take too long, or most of the developers will jump out and a new batch will have to start from ground. Making senior developers like us more valuable... In that case, please slow it for a few more years :)
I think you have a sound vision on this market. I can only agree with most you say.

OutSystems may very well be leaning on past market positions way too much. Competition is changing with the speed of light in this market. There is really no time to rest and enjoy achievements from the past. You need to adapt, invent, go forward with a dynamic drive! In both your product technology as in your license policies and market approaches. It really is one package. If you don't your market will quickly dry up underneath you.

I have been following this market closely during the last year, since I decided to leave the previous tool/platform I used and was looking for a follow-up. Outsystem was (given my past experience with it) my first thought and the new license that was announced seemed worth while waiting for.

However, during this time of market research, I have also found that technology has not stood still. Not by a long shot. Some spectacular improvements in technology have been made and several completely new competitors have arisen from that with astonishing new products originating from new high performance software technology countries like Israel for instance.

So I waited to see what OutSystems would come up with. Unfortunately, as it turns out, OutSystems has not yet "seen the light" and restricts to the corporate environment. I wish them well. I do not fit in that model. As such, I have no other option now then to move forward myself, and look for alternatives. Time to go.

Marcel -

All of the objections you've raised are the kind of objections that a big company with a big server room, system administrators on hand, etc. would raise. Stuff like "why can't I manage my backups myself?" and "how do I access that data?" All excellent concerns! But the amount of money it costs to properly address these issues while self-hosting is VERY high, and the kinds of companies that seriously need to address these issues have no problem paying for EE.

If your customers are not "enterprise class companies", why are they worried about "enterprise class problems"? Are these non-enterprise class customers equipped to self-manage backups (including offsite)? Are they equipped to have a 24/7 on call staff to respond to every little alert in 15 minutes? Are THEY going to provide "5 9's of uptime" or come close to any SLA that you'd insist from a vendor?

You've raised some good objections here... but I really do not think that your customers are going to do any better self-hosting, and will likely do FAR WORSE.

J.Ja
I don't think 'Hosting' is the issue. Rather, PE cannot be used for production and to do so is cost prohibitive for small companies. That is the crux of it. It all comes down to dollars. It's simply, unaffordable. As Marcel said, that's OS call and there is nothing wrong with that since that is the way they want to do business. The small developer for small business must find another venue. There's nothing wrong with that either. 
Ken -

Nowhere in Marcel's objections does he actually show that PE isn't suitable for Production. That's my point.

How exactly is PE "not suitable" or "cannot be used" for Production in a manner that CE would not suffer from the same issues, given Marcel's statements about his customer base? He's describe them as lacking both technical skills and financial resources. Let's pretend that EE only cost $2,000/year. Would someone who is like Marcel's customers going to

* Buy a $5,000 SQL Server Standard license
* Buy a $1,000 Windows Server license
* Install them on a $3,000 rack server
* Connected to $2,000 worth of switches
* With $1,500 worth of UPS for battery backup
* Attached to $2,000 (per month) worth of redundant T3 lines
* With a $2,000 backup system
* And a $70,000/year system administrator

?

Doesn't sound like it to me.

So even if EE were free... the PE edition would STILL be better for them, because they don't have the money or the technical skills to maintain an EE environment at a level even close to what PE is offering.

J.Ja
He alludes to it in these references:

So..... if your app is ready, you can not "get your app" from the cloud and store it on a DVD, or copy it to another personal environment (from a customer f.e.) Your application that is hosted on the personal environment is there to stay.... UNLESS you upgrade to the enterprise subscription. What if your customer can't afford that? 


So, the "Personal Environment" is not intended (or even suitable) for production purposes. It is intended to learn, experiment or prototype. What if you are ready doing so? The app is ready, and you need to distribute to your customer(s). What happens, how do you do that? It seems the only way to do that, is upgrade.
 
It seems that the point of all of this is, that if you want to actually USE your app in production (or your customer) that you need to upgrade it to an "enterprise subscription"(expensive...): Applications and data can be transferred from your personal environment to an enterprise subscription as part of the upgrade process. Is the new "Personal Environment" nothing more than a "customer trap" ?
 
Justin James wrote:
Ken -

Nowhere in Marcel's objections does he actually show that PE isn't suitable for Production. That's my point.

How exactly is PE "not suitable" or "cannot be used" for Production in a manner that CE would not suffer from the same issues, given Marcel's statements about his customer base? He's describe them as lacking both technical skills and financial resources. Let's pretend that EE only cost $2,000/year. Would someone who is like Marcel's customers going to

* Buy a $5,000 SQL Server Standard license
* Buy a $1,000 Windows Server license
* Install them on a $3,000 rack server
* Connected to $2,000 worth of switches
* With $1,500 worth of UPS for battery backup
* Attached to $2,000 (per month) worth of redundant T3 lines
* With a $2,000 backup system
* And a $70,000/year system administrator

?

Doesn't sound like it to me.

So even if EE were free... the PE edition would STILL be better for them, because they don't have the money or the technical skills to maintain an EE environment at a level even close to what PE is offering.

J.Ja
 
Hi Justin.

Sorry for replying so late, that will probably be the time difference.

You are a very passionate man when it comes to OutSystems. That's good. I like people who are passionate about their stuff!
Although such passion is known to sometimes cloud judgement, help lose objectivity if you will, if allowed to express itself just a tad too much.
It seems, that you have created your comment on my 'analysis' of the personal environment before thouroughly reading it.
Otherwise, others would not have to point out to you that I actually DID support my arguments and that I DID state why in my humble opinion the personal environment as it is now, can not be used for production purposes.

But to now just take one argument out of my complete list of issues does not seem to do the analysis justice as there are many issues which I all mentioned. However, since you as a valued and respected contributor to this forum make a point out of it, I am willing to say a bit more about that particular argument, not withstanding all other arguments mentioned.

First off, I find it strange that you would argue here (as you seem to do) that the "personal environment" actually IS suited for production. That is strange. It makes no sense. Why? Well Justin, OutSystems itself clearly does NOT mention "production" as a primary goal for the personal environment. It clearly states (as I have mentioned in my analysis) that as far as OutSystems is concerned, the "personal environment" is intended for (and I quote): "Personal environments are configured for you to learn, experiment, or prototype apps at your own pace". "Production" is NOT mentioned!

On top of that, OutSystems clearly states (in their FAQ page), that if your usage is mission-critical (and which production environment is NOT ???) you should not use the personal environment, but the enterprise subscription instead. I quote: "......for mission-critical or heavy usage apps. You should consider an enterprise subscription...". Now Justin, that really says it all, doesn't it? OutSystems itself advises against it. I am not sure why you would bother to advocate in favor of it where the software manufacturer itself clearly puts the restriction down to do not. That fact in itself (use not supported by manufacturer) would be a sound argument not to use it as such for many IT professionals.

Furthermore, you do not even mention this type of usage yourself, in your answer in the thread "License and Pricing" where you describe the "needs" OutSystems is covering with their "personal environments" as you perceive them. And I quote yourself: "....
the need for a simple, free way for 1) people to trial/demo/experiment with the system and 2) independent developers to write software before their clients buy a license/sign up for PaaS (saving them a LOT of money which they can use to pay you with!) and 3) startups to do a "proof of concept" before deciding to put additional resources into a full product, or something to show to investors."
No "production" in there as well..... so, somewhere else even YOU don't think this "personal environment" is suited for production. Yet, you debate my saying it isn't? Seems you got a bit taken away there?

You also make statements that really are not applicable AT ALL in this situation, where you state a list of requirements and the thousands of dollars those would cost, telling that you would need that and that no customer in the small business section would be able to afford those either. The truth is, that the list is futile. That is a "sought argument". If you would just subscribe to any hosted virtual server for $25 a month, you would be able to have unrestricted access to data and applications and run your own backups. Without investing thousands of dollars.

Quote from Outsystems FAQ: "...On-demand individual backup or recovery capability is not available for personal environment users...."

The bottom line is, that a platform that does NOT offer full backup and recovery features easily available on demand by the user, is NOT suitable for live production, be it mission-critical or not. 

And again, just by stressing this point of view out especially, I do not dismiss ANY of the other arguments I mentioned in my analysis. 

OutSystems "Personal Environment" may very well fit the intended usage as stated above. It was NEVER my goal to state that it doesn't. But it doesn't fit MY personal needs as a small, independent developer producing for small businesses. For many reasons. But, as said, I don't think this solution was meant to resolve those needs. It clearly is meant to create a path that ultimately leads to the "enterprise subscription", which NONE of my customers will be able to afford. As such, the "personal environment" doesn't work for me at all. Unfortunately. But that is the way it is. Like others already said in this thread and/or the "Pricing and Licensing"-thread: time to go.
Marcel -

I think you mis-read my post in the other thread. I certainly said that the PE edition is adequate for Production use for some cases. If I were a small company on a budget, PE's limitations would not bother me, because they are the exact same limitations I would have unless I spent a LOT more money.

And that is the point I am making here. You've pointed out some big limitations of PE, and I am certainly not disagreeing with that (though as Nuno mentioned, you've mis-understood the "no detach" limitation; you can indeed download your OMLs, XIFs, OSPs, etc. and deploy them to a client via IPP if needed). But for the customers that you have described, nothing in their budget or technical abilities will be free from those limitations either.

As an example, your points on backup are excellent. But if I am that small business, and I'm using Gmail and WordPress.com and Google Apps or Office 365 or whatever... I already have that same set of limitations. Small businesses without an IT budget and without an IT staff live with these limitations on their entire IT infrastructure.

The same for the DB size limitation. Unless your application is doing a ton of binary data storage, that 1 GB DB limit is really not an issue... and if it WAS an issue, even with SE or EE, you'd need an expensive SQL Server Standard license to not have the limitation anyways.

And this is why I am very confused by your objections. You raise the exact objections that an enterprise class customer would raise, but your customers are not enterprise class customers, they do not get enterprise class treatment from any of their other IT services... in short, the things that you consider "not acceptable for Production" are actually perfectly acceptable for Production for your customers as you have described them.

Again: I understand your objections, and I see them as valid concerns, but I simply do not think that the kinds of customers you have described will be able to do any better even if they were given a free EE license, within the limits of their budgets and technical abilities, and I believe that they accept these exact same kinds of limitations from a variety of other services that they use daily in exchange for those services being free or very inexpensive.

J.Ja
The PE is a sandbox environment intended for learning, demoing, and prototyping.  And that's all good.  Running production appications in a sandbox environment ... not so good.  And it may be in conflict with the PE terms and conditions.

Ultimately the issue is that the Enterprise Edition is that ONLY edition that is intended for production.  It seems reasonable based on 99% of the software and/or Saas products in the marketplace today .. that there be a Small Business and/or Standard Edition that doesn't have all of the Enterprise features.  How about limiting it's usage to max of 5 developers? Or limiting the number of application servers that can be in production?

Overall, I'm surprised that OS is not at all interested in the small business market space.  Small business is a huge part of the economy.  Every big player that I can't think of ... MIcrosoft, Oracle, SAP, SalesForce, etc have offerings for the small business to get a piece of the action.  I wonder why OS doesn't want their money too?

Regards,
JT

P.S. Does anyone know how OS segments/defines Small, Medium, and Enterprise customers?
Hi John.
The most reasonable theory is that there were too many little clients bothering the support and OS needed to grow before they could handle that many requests.
It was around the time that they made that deal with Uncle Sam two years ago and had to focus in a huge new client (and market).

John Talbott wrote:
P.S. Does anyone know how OS segments/defines Small, Medium, and Enterprise customers?
You have to get in touch with Sales to know the options available, but besides community (30k SU, unlimited users) it used to be 60k, 150k, 300k, tailored SUs, with 25, 100, 500, 2000, 10000 or unlimited concurrent users.
The main change was a cut in lower values.
Thanks for the info Nuno
I don't think any company can ever get ahead of the requests for help by haring more staff. I hope they would isolate the issues and develop the product or the documentation to solve those issues. No doubt they've thought of that but it seems once one issue is solved, another comes along.

Ken
@ Justin :

I can understand that you are resisting reality here, especially if it has such a nasty face. However, sticking your head into the sand does only seem to help ostriches, not so much professional software developers lol.

Really Justin, OutSystems themselves are specifically warning to use the "personal environment" for mission-critical situations. I wonder why anyone would try to do it anyway? As an independent software developer I consider all of my development work "mission critical" to my business. I will not be doing myself nor my customers a favor by going against strict warnings on the usage of a development platform that were specifically stated by the manufacturer. When something goes amiss, the first word that my insurance company will use will probably be something like "negligence". That is not the way to go.

As others have already pointed out, the BIG question is, why OutSystems refuses the money of small businesses. They clearly do not seem to want them as a customer. John Talbott and Ken Nordin both made valid points about that. I agree.

You really should not drag every possible argument to your defense. Using Google as an example again is rather an example of the point that I am trying to make, then that it helps your argumentation.
Google has specific products in place for use by professionals and businesses. Those products DO HAVE an S.L.A. in place!!! Look here for example: http://www.google.com/apps/intl/en/terms/sla.html
If you are using products from the Google consumer line to use in your corporate business, then you should be asking yourself some serious questions about that as well.

There is a reason why OutSystems does not recommend the "personal environment" for mission-critical use.
Think about it......
 


Hi All,

Really like the option of the PE. Indeed there are some limitations, but there are also a lot of improvements regarding the community edition.

It still remains a developer licence, personal use, not production.

Kind regards,
Evert
Tip: When accessing your PE, login with mail/password from OutSystems site. It is not admin/admin like before ;)
Got all set up this morning - only took a few minutes. 
I think if we acknowledge the benefits of this offering, without wishing it to be the new "Standard" license, we will see that OutSystems is taking another step in addressing the wishes of the developer community.

Is there any question that PE is better than CE ?  Was it really important to host CE locally ?

OutSystems has now provided developers with an unlimited SU tool for developing applications either for customers or inhouse needs (timesheets anyone ?).  That is fantastic IMO.

Does it cover the hole left by the removal of the Standard license ? No
Does a mission critical runtime environment still require EE ?  Yes

We all understand that this offering does not allow for independent software developers to target small customers, but it does allow you to build a product to sell to large customers, or to develop for large customers without having to have fulltime access to their EE environment.

Baby steps
We all understand that this offering does not allow for independent software developers to target small customers, but it does allow you to build a product to sell to large customers

Indeed, Adam, I concur with your statement as quoted above.

But, since this (small customers) is exactly MY market, and developing for large customers is NOT, I see no other option then to put my time to good use finding a better fitting alternative.
I had my hopes that this new product would fit my needs not up too high to begin with (based on available information) but nevertheless the time invested in the last 6 months In OutSystems unfortunately was in vain. 

Hence, this will be my last post on this forum, and I will have to abandon OutSystems.
I wish everyone on this forum much success in the future, and I sincerely hope that the new product and otherwise available "old" products from OutSystems may suit your all needs.
I wish you all well.

Goodbye.

Adam Shapiro wrote:
We all understand that this offering does not allow for independent software developers to target small customers, but it does allow you to build a product to sell to large customers, or to develop for large customers without having to have fulltime access to their EE environment.
 
That's exactly the point..
First they dropped the "paying as they grow."
And now they dropped the community license, the last solution to "independent software developers to target small customers".
OS started a process of closing the platform to small customers a couple of years ago, and now the process is closed. 

Antonio Xeira wrote:
Adam Shapiro wrote:
We all understand that this offering does not allow for independent software developers to target small customers, but it does allow you to build a product to sell to large customers, or to develop for large customers without having to have fulltime access to their EE environment.
 
That's exactly the point..
First they dropped the "paying as they grow."
And now they dropped the community license, the last solution to "independent software developers to target small customers".
OS started a process of closing the platform to small customers a couple of years ago, and now the process is closed. 
 
IMO the community license did not have enough SUs to build any software of value.  PE does.  While PE does not help toward the goal of some, which is to targert smaller customers, I don't believe CE did either.  
 
One can squeeze a lot inside a CE. But this is not the solution, of course.
The solution is a "paying as you grow" just like it was promised a couple of years ago.
Hello!  My name is Sean Allen and I work for OutSystems.  I am quite close to the launch of the personal environment and the decisions made surrounding it.  I wanted to take a moment to comment and let you know that we are indeed listening.  We are thrilled by the amount of positive feedback and encouragement that we have received in forums, conversations, emails, etc.  We also realize that there is some confusion.
 
Change, even positive change, can certainly be hard.  It is great to see all of the passion in these discussions.  It implies that people rely on OutSystems in a positive way and are concerned about the changes that we are presenting.  We want to address each and every point of confusion, objection, misconception, and miscommunication.  We want to dig into each and every reason why someone believes that this change is a negative for them, as we have worked tirelessly to create an option that we fundamentally believe is solid, positive, and generous.  We invite each of you that have concern about the direction we are headed (a completely free cloud-based option that is intended to remove all points of friction on your path to becoming (or continuing to be!) wildly successful on the Platform) to get in touch directly.  Please send any and all concerns to us at success@outsystems.com and we will happily engage at whatever level is needed to provide the clarity and path to success for each and every individual developer in our amazing community.
 
It is easy to read unintended meaning in any communication.  We are happy to have these conversations for the sake of clarity.  If we chose to include a word, or not include a word, community members would be best served to ask the direct question instead of assuming a negative implication.  It may simply have been an error of omission.  We want to work together with you to manage this very positive change.
 
By way of example, I want to let everyone know that we have changed our initial position on the availability of Community Edition.  We will be continuing to host the binaries and existing licensing mechanism until we hit end-of-life of OutSystems Platform v8 (FAQ).  We hope this change will underscore that we are listening and want to make it fundamentally easy to engage with OutSystems and use our product to be amazingly successful.
 
We appreciate the passion that is being shown, we want to clarify any miscommunication and remove any roadblock - please get in touch at success@outsystems.com.  There are certainly business plans and financial constraints that we have to be conscious of as we continue to build our business.  We will happily explain our path and take any and all input as valuable feedback from all of you.

Best regards-
Sean
Hi Sean,

Thanks for the note. I think if you have not already read this thread then may I suggest you do as this contains some of the community thinking & mood; (you'll need a large cup of coffee)

http://www.outsystems.com/forums/discussion/9115/license-and-pricing/

Regards, Mark




Hi Sean,

I was hoping to read about the misconceptions and issues that needed clarity. Obviously, there is more than one issue involved which are a concern for many folks, whether or not they expressed their thoughts or opinions on this forum. Explanations are in order as you've stated. Any reason why you cannot share with us? 

Regards, Ken
Hi Sean,

I would say that we need to measure up the companies policies based upon actions.
And the actions tell me, that there is no interest to invest in the small independent developer.
I have been giving my opinions about what I think matters to Outsystems on many different occasions as you might probably know. I can't see anything back in the final results that would ensure me that my interests are protected as a small player in the market using OutSystems. 
Quite on the contrary: after waiting half a year on OutSystems to make favorable changes to my cause, I don't seem to have a perspective at all within the current policies.
Which has sadly caused me to "move on". As they say: plenty of fish in the ocean...
Hello Sean,

In my opinion the move to the cloud is good. What isn't good is that this means a move from small independent developers towards big enterprises. Personally a couple of years ago I invested in training and time, and started some projects with Outsystems platform, just to learn afterwards that all licensing economic solutions have been removed.
I’ve been using the Community Edition for some small projects. Someone from Outsystems published in another forum that “On the  Editions page you can check the limitations of the Community Edition. There are no restrictions for commercial use other than the limitations of the Community edition itself”. So, I’ve been using it. Now that will end also.
If there is an “error of omission” and if you want to clarify with us, maybe it’s time to do it in this forum, to the community, what are the real future plans considering licensing. That would be a good comment we would welcome.