good tip...thanks!

mike

AHhh, hahaha.

So, usually you write a post and somebody quotes you and makes some statements in reference to what you said and you think to yourself, "Hey, I'm part of the conversation, I am contributing to the discussion at hand."

Well after 'posting' a comment early on in this thread and STILL having nobody quote or comment on what I said, it starts to feel like, "we'll damnit, I guess I WASN'T Contributing."

Then I go back and look and, well, I most of hit the wrong button when I meant to post, b/c the post is there. LMAO!

I had taken a day or two to think about the topic when it first came up, read the posts by others here that I respect and developed an opinion, that I thought, was worth posting. Sat down, typed it out, and must have gotten side tracked, cuz its not here!!

Sigh, anyway, I'll just cut to the chase. I think that if you do provide your programming you should be charging for ALL time spent on R&D of that template, graphics, layout, macros etc. and it should be Illegal for anyone to use or copy any part of that program. How do you enforce that, you probably can't, at least not very well, look at music file sharing.

I will say this if you are one of the people fighting strong against releasing the programming code, than you BETTER NOT be someone burning copies of your friends CD's or downloading music, software from file sharing sites, you damn hypocrites, you know who you are.


While, I don't have a clear cut opinion on this, I don't feel that the standard is to charge clients for every hour spent for the programming and graphics that they receive, and b/c of that I don't think that they are purchasing your programming, they are purchasing the complete system, delivered, installed and operating as is.

When you purchase a car, they don't offer you the programming and software development that they use to control the systems of the car, tune the engine, ABS, climate control etc. Nope, you just get the entire car as is.

I want a PDF like copy to give, like a loadable only copy, however this doesn't address the issue of making changes. Perhaps a copy that can be added to, deleted but not altered? Hell, I don't know.

I would hate to be the client that spent $50k on programming 5 years ago and now wants to add an AppleTV, Bluray and new 1080p Display, but instead of being able to just pay $2k in programming costs, I have to pay to have the ENTIRE system re-programmed, that's not cool. I'd be F$

Last edited by CoryBurgess on February 3, 2009 20:26.

it's there cory...post 133. nice touch with the pointing finger! LOL

mike

HAHAHA! That's even funnier. I swear I looked through it at least 3 times and missed it every time. So I guess I was right when I figured nobody cared about what I had to say, lol. Oh $H!T that is funny.

For what it's worth, that's disgusting.

Adele, IMO this suggestion is not a viable solution and might be almost as bad as the integrator having sole control of the code. You can't have the escrow holder be a party that has immense self-interest in the outcome of a transaction! What if the dispute takes place between a Client who only spent 20K and AMX or Crestron's largest dealer who buys 10 million in equipment each year? Or visa versa?

The goal should be to *remove* "case by case" determinations as much as possible by creating a very clear agreement between the integrator and client. The problem right now is that there is too often no agreement of any type.

I hear what you are saying and do agree with you. I can only post my own experience and tell you that AMX absolutely got involved and came to my assistance.
They have me as a customer for life.
My programmer is also completeley married to AMX. I guess I was just one of the lucky ones.
Having said that Im a firm believer in paying my vendors timeously and they in turn deliver.
What I dont understand is the programmers insecurity to have this out there. If they are good they are good and everyone's systems are so unique that (in my non expert opinion) that its hard to duplicate.

As far as posting private messages.. maybe we can get AMX and Crestron to decide on a case by case basis to see which private messages should be made public.....

I think that you are correct with regard to 90% plus of the cases out there but there are exceptions. To clarify, the fact that systems are unique does not mean that a particular part of that system might not have great value and be able to be reused again and again.

Here's an example. Suppose I develop a module that allows a customer to surf the DirecTV guide right on my touchscreen. Move it with my finger, press a show to select it and so forth. That's a pretty cool feature and a quite distinguishing one. I spend hundreds of hours developing it and it allows me to offer a feature that no one else (to my knowledge) offers. Perhaps it even helps me to win projects. Now I provide that code to a Client who I part ways with and they give it to a competitor who they are now working with and now he starts using my module. Now that competitor who could never have dreamed of writing such a module because they don't have the skill starts using it.

This is why I say there is a middle ground and in such an instance it is legitimate to want to protect that module. I think there are ways to address these issues however and protect both parties.

But in time..someone will develop that and it will become common place. To me it just sounds not right..but then again Im the end user.
My programmer does whatever I need him to do. I scour home automation books and magazines and get a zillion different ideas. I have been told by many installers that they have never seen such an automated house. (Not the best) But very complicated. Ive been doing this for many many years.
Case in point I have an automated bath feature that was orginally made by Kohler. The actual unit made by Kohler died and was not replaceable. He drew up a schematic for my wiring guy how to get it up and running with relays and stuff. I have no idea how he got it working but he did. We also tied in all the AMX stuff into the Lutron phone system so by the press of a button from out the house I can activate certain macros. ALL FUN STUFF..oooh Im completely off topic. I get carried away.

Yes, and at that point in time it will cease to have value. Until that time it does have value and the person or company who developed it has a right to want to protect that value.


*What* does not sound right? I simply gave an example of how code could indeed be reused and said "I think there are ways to address these issues however and protect both parties". Now IF your position is that no matter how much time an integrator spends developing something and no matter how much value it might have they are obligated to give it all to the end user with 0 protections, then frankly I think your position is identical to those integrators who think customers deserve 0 protections and you're just presenting an equally extreme view that's the opposite side of the coin.


It sounds like you have a wonderful relationship with your programmer and are a great Client to work with. If only all relationships were so good and all parties as happy with each other this entire subject would probably be far less of an issue.

I know that my programmer HATES modules..ive never understood why. He just tells me he doeS.
So when I ask him to incorporate them he does..very begrudgingly. So in actual fact I dont understand much about them. He also hates duet and will not use it.
So maybe he has nothing to hide. All I know is I ask him to change/upgrade. He gives me a quote. I agree or disagree and then the work gets done (or on rare occasions when its just not worth it i.e putting an alarm clock on the system when I can just use my iphone). He downloads the program. We test and then I pay him via paypal.
Clean and simple. As mentioned before he then uploads all code and source. I dont know how I would do it any other way.
When I said it didnt sound right. Try to help me understand. Youve developed a module and over a period of time have sold it time and time again. Surely at some time you recoup your costs. And even if you dont, recoup EVERY LAST PENNY isnt it better just to have a good working relationship. No one does the work for free and you should get compensated. And then its back to the same old story if the plane goes down the client is up the creek.

Adele,

I think you are jumping to a number of incorrect conclusions. Again, it does not have to be "either/or", or "all or nothing". It does not have to be "give the client all code without restrictions" or "client is up the creek". Using the example I provided above, the Client might be provided with all code minus the code for the unique module. The code for the module might be held in a software escrow account so that in the event that the integrator went under that code would also be provided to the Client. And if the client decided they wanted to work with another integrator they would lose that feature only. Or perhaps the contract specfies that in that event the Client can have all the code but there will be an extra charge for that module.

All of this should be clearly spelled out in writing. Now if you say "I would never agree to that", that's fine, because at least it's been put in writing and you have been able to make an informed decision. But to argue the flip side IF that code is truly unique, then you really aren't losing anything by going with that integrator, are you? In other words, you are still getting ALL the code EXCEPT for the one thing that is totally unique that you can't get from anyone else anyhow.

To look at it another way, that integrator is probably going to have a hard time negotiating that agreement unless his code truly has special value to the client, no?!


This is an irrelevant an argument whether Alan makes it from the programmer side for why the customer does not deserve the code or you make it from the customer side for why you deserve it. It doesn't matter if it cost me $10 to develop it or $100,000, nor whether I have made $1 in profit on it or $1,000,000. All that matters is whether I have developed something of value, and if I have, I can decide what (if ANY) limitations I want to put on it and you can decide if you believe it also has value and if so what (if ANY) limitations you are willing to have put on it and still purchase it. No different than when I purchase a movie on iTunes knowing I will not be able to watch it on any portable player but an iPod.

If a business has developed something of true value, it does not just start giving it away just because it has made a profit on it! I don't see Apple making the iphone OS open source just because they have made billions on it. Now that IS a good analogy, because I am simply pointing out that business are not obligated to give away their intellectual property simply because they have recouped their costs on something.


I believe that is a bit naive and oversimplified. It's extremely important to have good relationships but IF they have developed something of value that does not mean a business is obligated to just give everything away to make the client happy. I keep emphasizing the word "IF" because in most instances I don't think most of the code under discussion has any real value other than in the mind of the developer. But the market can decide that. In other words, customer can tell the programmer to fly a kite if they don't see anything unique enough about what the programmer is providing, to make them want to agree to any code limitations. On the other hand, if they can't get the same thing anywhere else, then they may agree to some limitation, no?

I believe that 90%, maybe 99% of this issue would be entirely solved simply by having clear cut agreements and informed consent. Once consumers understand they have interests to protect, most of this nonsense of the code being held hostage will stop because most programmers are not going to lose projects by refusing to provide it. And I believe this is why so many programmers feel so threatened by the issue being discussed. Because they know the truth of the matter is they have not developed anything unique enough to be able to get a client to agree to limitations when there will be 10 other programmers willing to do the work and provide all code.

I'm curious as to how you can qualify that statement unless you have direct access to system code that they have provided to all their clients....

I agree that there are many factors that can be amalgamated to give your competitive edge. These should contain service and performance.

However custom modules can be one way to "providing the customer with more than they expect" . I know that by spending time writing, developing and bug fixing custom modules I can provide the client with feature rich, reliable, and easy to use solutions in a fraction of the time that it would take me to code from scratch. This allows me to provide cost effective programming for systems that is both profitable and easy to maintain, and yet provides a rich feature set for the client. When I am quoting for work this gives me one more advantage to add to the list of items that make up our 'competitive edge'.

In this industry there will always be companies that can realise quality product in terms of installation, programming, maintenance, etc. There will also always be firms that can't and will try to obtain work by any means possible. This is often by cutting corners to lower price. Effectively 'giving' away modules that I have written so that we can provide better quality and value for money simply does not constitute good business sense!

The way that I see this is:

1) If the customer is worried that I may go out of business and he will be left stranded, then the Escrow model works fine. If I have gone out of business then I don't need to protect my custom modules anyway.

2) If the customer has decided to go elsewhere because we have failed to meet his expectations then the new company would probably want to re-write the program anyway, I know we would! (incidentally we do provide a full system documentation package upon receipt of final payment).

3) If the customer is going elsewhere because he has found a cheaper solution then he is on his own....

With regards to system programming, from the outset we discuss quoting as follows:

Mr customer, when we provide our proposal, with regards to programming, we can quote to,
1) provide a licensed operating program with our custom modules, and a backup copy of the compiled code at a cost of £x, with an option for uncompiled code in escrow at additional cost of £y.

2) provide a full uncompiled copy of the program written in standard format (i.e.none of our proprietary modules) at a cost of £x+n (where n is the additional time taken to write code instead of dropping in a module)

We also sell our systems based on feature sets. This makes it apparent to the customer what the savings are in programming with or without our modules.

Generally, having explained to the client why we want to protect our programming investment, and by them seeing the positive benefits in terms of cost and features, I have yet to have a customer ask for uncompiled code.

If the customer needs to change some hardware at a later date then in either case he has a cost effective route to acheive this: he simply employs us to change the programming!

It should be noted that I am not talking about simple (Simpl!!) modules that take a couple of hours to write, or that just control a dvd or some other piece of standard hardware, I am referring to large custom modules that provide the client with a high level of interaction (which incidentally allows the client to modify a lot of the parameters that he would normally need to call the integrator out to site to change - thus again saving them money) and provides one of the reasons that we obtain the referrals that we do.

I realise that I may be being cynical here, but this is possibly due to:

1) It takes longer to write code from scratch than to drop in a module, i.e. less billable hours!

but this is probably a minor consideration in comparison to:

2) If he turns his code into a module and supplies it to you, if you go somewhere else they will have access to this module to drop into other programs.

I do not know anything about the AMX programming world, but in CrestronLand modules are chunks of programming neatly packaged into a logic block designed to perform a specific task. You then only need to deal with what you send to, and receive back from the module without having to necessarily understand the processing logic that the original programmer built the module with.

Providing another programmer with large amounts of code to perform a task can make reverse engineering it for their own gain more difficult than if it as been 'modularised' (is this even a word!?).