Move tabs using tab list

[cpusrvc]

I keep a lot of tabs open, so there isn't much space on the tab to show the path, even with a narrow font. I also like to keep tabs for similar paths close together for speed and convenience. However, it is hard to determine where to move a tab when you can't see the path on the other tabs. It would be a lot easier if it were possible to use the tab list to change the order of the tabs.

[admin]

I see but this is not possible for technical reasons. The menus do not support drag'n'drop.

The tab's tooltips tell you more about a tab.

[cpusrvc]

Would it be possible to add a line to the tab list called "Sort Tabs"? That function could sort the tabs alphabetically and would essentially accomplish the same thing.

[admin]

Would it be possible to add a line to the tab list called "Sort Tabs"? That function could sort the tabs alphabetically and would essentially accomplish the same thing.

Possible yes, but I don't see this coming very soon.

[cpusrvc]

Possible yes, but I don't see this coming very soon.

Then it is a good thing I bought the lifetime license. I can wait.

[admin]

Possible yes, but I don't see this coming very soon.

Then it is a good thing I bought the lifetime license. I can wait.

The lifetime license is the best choice for sure! I'm having so much trouble with Standard and Home License users who are begging for upgrade discounts and/or don't understand the license agreement that I'm very tempted to just offer the lifetime license and period. It would give me so much more time to code...

[j_c_hallgren]

I'm having so much trouble with Standard and Home License users who are begging for upgrade discounts and/or don't understand the license agreement that I'm very tempted to just offer the lifetime license and period. It would give me so much more time to code...

From other posts, you know how I feel about this: That you should have some automated way to provide an upgrade path for a total price greater than if Pro was bought originally yet less than a Std + Pro or other combinations...because while your income would thus be a bit less than customer buying two licences, it would still be higher than one Pro...and you are doing this for income, right?

Having a way for those who don't have all the $$ to buy a Pro but still buy a version is smart marketing, but given the wide number of packages that allow some form of upgrading for proportional additional cost, I think spending some time to do that would pay off in the long run and make for more happy users.

I'm only speaking as a user who has seen hundreds of schemes for licenses from companies huge and small and what would (and does) entice me as potential buyer is a way to get a starter package and then add-on later when I find that I need those extra options/features...

[admin]

I'm having so much trouble with Standard and Home License users who are begging for upgrade discounts and/or don't understand the license agreement that I'm very tempted to just offer the lifetime license and period. It would give me so much more time to code...

From other posts, you know how I feel about this: That you should have some automated way to provide an upgrade path for a total price greater than if Pro was bought originally yet less than a Std + Pro or other combinations...because while your income would thus be a bit less than customer buying two licences, it would still be higher than one Pro...and you are doing this for income, right?

Having a way for those who don't have all the $$ to buy a Pro but still buy a version is smart marketing, but given the wide number of packages that allow some form of upgrading for proportional additional cost, I think spending some time to do that would pay off in the long run and make for more happy users.

I'm only speaking as a user who has seen hundreds of schemes for licenses from companies huge and small and what would (and does) entice me as potential buyer is a way to get a starter package and then add-on later when I find that I need those extra options/features...

No. I did not go for the no-upgrade policy to make more money by selling two licenses. I definitely want to sell only one license per user. If a user comes back for another license he made a mistake in the first place. I expect users to trial 30 days and then choose their optimal license. I'm not liable for a wrong purchase decision.

My daily experience with users for many years now tells me that an automated upgrade will not work as intended (namely automatic) but will even generate more emails from users who don't understand what to do. Additionally I will have new breed of users who upgrade from a cracked version to a legal version or vice versa. Not what I need.

I really tried my best to be as clear as hell on the website about the standard and the home license but nope. Everything that goes beyond a single simple button generates daily loads of emails that nobody needs. Answering ever repeating emails ("How to upgrade from the Home to the Professional edition?" ) is just not my passion.

Fortunately currently about 80% of all customers buy the lifetime license anyway so I won't lose that much if I drop the other licenses. I'm still not decided but close...

[cpusrvc]

Yes, they did make a mistake, obviously thinking they didn't need all the features or the future upgrades. But no one knows what their needs will be in the future, just as you have added new features that you never dreamed about when XY was first written.

FWIW, I think you should allow users to upgrade for the difference in license cost, plus maybe $20 processing fee. You get money and a happy customer, and they get an upgrade at a fair price so they don't feel they're being ripped off.

[Stefan]

People, i think it's not an matter of the income or the good will... it's just someone have to do the work.
At least someone has to compare the inbound from the bank account to the upgrade data base and enable the upgrade.
Not to think about all those non-standard requests.
So what will "you" as current user want Don to do: improve XY or do the administrative work half the day?

[j_c_hallgren]

No. I did not go for the no-upgrade policy to make more money by selling two licenses. I definitely want to sell only one license per user. If a user comes back for another license he made a mistake in the first place. I expect users to trial 30 days and then choose their optimal license. I'm not liable for a wrong purchase decision.

I may be totally wrong about this, but based on what I've read, it seems that people may either fully believe that a lesser vers is enough for their needs and then after gaining usage knowledge over a longer time period realize that it wasn't -and/or- as I wrote above, maybe they don't have the funds at that time to buy the more costly but later get the funds...remember that XY is a complex product and a potential user may not (even in a 30-day period) have the time to gain an understanding of what XY product differences really mean to pick the right product.

My daily experience with users for many years now tells me that an automated upgrade will not work as intended (namely automatic) but will even generate more emails from users who don't understand what to do. Additionally I will have new breed of users who upgrade from a cracked version to a legal version or vice versa. Not what I need.

Isn't there some sort of a auto-responder available for some of these emails that could help? Because there are other companies that seem to be able to handle upgrades with minimal human intervention...also, if someone has a cracked vers and wants to buy an ungrade, that would result in at least some icome vs none from the cracked, so while it may not be ideal, it's better than nothing.

I really tried my best to be as clear as hell on the website about the standard and the home license but nope. Everything that goes beyond a single simple button generates daily loads of emails that nobody needs. Answering ever repeating emails ("How to upgrade from the Home to the Professional edition?" ) is just not my passion.

I think you're very clear on site about it and as I wrote above, I suspect some sort of canned or auto-responder could help in this if you're not already using one.

Addendum: It's a $41 diff between Home and full Pro and if you charged $45 to upgrade and it took you even 4 minutes to process that, that would be a pay rate of about $675 per hour...now that pay rate doesn't seem to me to be anything to ignore!
Ok, so it's maybe boring but it would help pay the bills...and you could specify that upgrades may take 2-3 business days to process...I think a user would be willing to wait for that instead of having to buy a 2nd license or be stuck with a vers that doesn't serve their actual needs.

And...for that $45...heck, you could even hire someone else to do it for you! Pay them even $5 per trans and you'd still get $40 and avoid the distraction and give somebody else a few bucks for some easy work...you might even find a forum member or two who'd work on that part of the "job"...ideal for someone out of work!

Fortunately currently about 80% of all customers buy the lifetime license anyway so I won't lose that much if I drop the other licenses. I'm still not decided but close...

I hate to say it but I'd guess that if only the Pro vers is available, it might result in more usage of cracked vers as some users may be willing to pay a smaller fee but can't afford or justify the higher cost, and thus go that route instead.

[admin]

Actually the only reason I'm offering a standard license is once again that people do not read the website and simply fail to understand what a lifetime license means. They just see the number (the dollars) and compare it to the number of the competing product (which does not offer a lifetime license) and think "overpriced!".

As this point still stands (and as it would be a lot of work to change the website and everything back to lifetime-lic-only) I will leave things as they are. I got pretty routined in the meantime with copy+pasting standard replys to standard questions...

Auto-responders... naah, not my style. I answer every email manually within 24 hours, usually within 8 hours. But, yeah, its getting more and more... so the day of the auto-responder might come...

I get an daily average of about 2 users that lost their key and ask me to send it again. This takes about 3 minutes per key, not much but quite interrupting and stupid. Does anybody here know if I'm really liable to do this? Can't I expect that a user backs up a key that costs him 70 dollars?

[zer0]

Since this discussion was allowed to continue, I would like to chip in with a few words of my wisdom...for what they're worth

I'm not sure if lifetime-only license model is sustainable in the long term. I have witnessed a rather successful software company change its stance from lifetime and introduce a time-based subscription charge. They retained a lifetime license option, but at a substantial premium to the original price for their new customers. Existing users were able to retain the lifetime licenses.

I suppose it is good PR to tempt customers with a lifetime license. After all, it just sounds good to have something for a lifetime. But this income is non-renewable -- people pay once and get a continuous stream of goodies in return. Eventually, the cost of providing those goodies would no longer be met by lifetime subscribers. It's like an unintentional Ponzi scheme of sorts. Thus, a time- or point- limited edition is needed to ensure additional revenue coming in. I think there is little doubt that developing and maintenance costs will rise, so funds to cover those costs will have to come from somewhere.

Personally, I am sitting pretty with a lifetime pro license. Though I wonder if there was a rush of orders coming in at the turn of the year just before the prices went up?

I get an daily average of about 2 users that lost their key and ask me to send it again. This takes about 3 minutes per key, not much but quite interrupting and stupid. Does anybody here know if I'm really liable to do this? Can't I expect that a user backs up a key that costs him 70 dollars?

Is it possible for this process to be automated much like an updated license key can be retrieved here http://www.xyplorer.com/key.php ? If not and you make it clear on the site that retrieval of a key is a burden, then you should charge for it. Some people may think that it is a harsh measure, especially if loss of a key is not due to a user's fault. However, it is a user's responsibility to maintain a backup of important data, so a user can take measures to avoid such a situation.

P.S. Congrats to Germany on yesterday's result -- well deserved

[admin]

Since this discussion was allowed to continue, I would like to chip in with a few words of my wisdom...for what they're worth

I'm not sure if lifetime-only license model is sustainable in the long term. I have witnessed a rather successful software company change its stance from lifetime and introduce a time-based subscription charge. They retained a lifetime license option, but at a substantial premium to the original price for their new customers. Existing users were able to retain the lifetime licenses.

I suppose it is good PR to tempt customers with a lifetime license. After all, it just sounds good to have something for a lifetime. But this income is non-renewable -- people pay once and get a continuous stream of goodies in return. Eventually, the cost of providing those goodies would no longer be met by lifetime subscribers. It's like an unintentional Ponzi scheme of sorts. Thus, a time- or point- limited edition is needed to ensure additional revenue coming in. I think there is little doubt that developing and maintenance costs will rise, so funds to cover those costs will have to come from somewhere.

Personally, I am sitting pretty with a lifetime pro license. Though I wonder if there was a rush of orders coming in at the turn of the year just before the prices went up?

I get an daily average of about 2 users that lost their key and ask me to send it again. This takes about 3 minutes per key, not much but quite interrupting and stupid. Does anybody here know if I'm really liable to do this? Can't I expect that a user backs up a key that costs him 70 dollars?

Is it possible for this process to be automated much like an updated license key can be retrieved here http://www.xyplorer.com/key.php ? If not and you make it clear on the site that retrieval of a key is a burden, then you should charge for it. Some people may think that it is a harsh measure, especially if loss of a key is not due to a user's fault. However, it is a user's responsibility to maintain a backup of important data, so a user can take measures to avoid such a situation.

P.S. Congrats to Germany on yesterday's result -- well deserved

I'm not a software company. A "time-based subscription charge"... sounds nice but also like a lot of extra work. The problem is that people don't read and understand more than about 5 words on a website. If you need more words to explain a concept: forget it. Frankly, my ideal customer pays once and is never seen again. He's happy (and working), I'm happy (and coding).

Automated key retrieval. I had thought about that several times, but it's difficult. The most simple identification just by name (which is about the only thing that most people normally do not forget) is already a problem: Many users use a different user name from their real name, or they skip or shuffle their initials. And of course they forget their name of choice immediately. And a name-only identification would be an invitation to brute-force attacks by hackers. I'm almost sure I have a "John Smith" among my users...

[j_c_hallgren]

I get an daily average of about 2 users that lost their key and ask me to send it again. This takes about 3 minutes per key, not much but quite interrupting and stupid. Does anybody here know if I'm really liable to do this? Can't I expect that a user backs up a key that costs him 70 dollars?

Is it possible for this process to be automated much like an updated license key can be retrieved here http://www.xyplorer.com/key.php ? If not and you make it clear on the site that retrieval of a key is a burden, then you should charge for it. Some people may think that it is a harsh measure, especially if loss of a key is not due to a user's fault. However, it is a user's responsibility to maintain a backup of important data, so a user can take measures to avoid such a situation.

I would agree that some sort of a minimal charge (if that's easily done) might encourage users to keep better track of key...even $3-$5 would help offset time loss.