Market: How will situations of product failure be handled after a build update ? - page 7
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
No, it's not a warranty period, like with household appliances.
And the idea is probably the best one of all time.
Why on earth would I interrupt, say, a skiing job because of a developer screw-up?
Subscription is essentially wrong, because it is the wrong class of product. In short, don't go where you don't understand anything.
1. If you don't want to interrupt your holiday, don't create socially important products.
2. Subscription should be, at least as an option.
And stop ranting about "the wrong class of product". If you like creating "that class" of products - create them in Jobs for food, and if you want to make something really worthwhile and profitable - create an idea and develop it to the extra class, there are no other ways in business.
You are blathering on as usual without even bothering to get to the bottom of it.
Why should I as a customer have to pay a subscription fee for a product that has been written and forgotten about?
1. You don't want to interrupt your holiday - don't create socially significant products.
- It can. In this case, all the problems of incompatibility of the product with the new version of MT5 fall entirely on the developer. If the developer is in the taiga and hundreds of people around the world use his product, but it does not work on the new build, then the developer is likely to strive hard to fix this bug, forgetting about the taiga and hunting, because for the amount of money that brings him users, some would be willing to stay outside the Garden Ring for life. (Note that all this will be completely voluntary, on a voluntary basis, so to speak, the truth abundantly smeared with a thick layer of black caviar:).
Now the concept of "subscription" is completely clear. Such thoughts have already been voiced before. I reduced their essence to a short slogan: "The author is a scapegoat". Or, to put it mildly: MQ's screw-ups should be cleaned up by the author. The phrase "authors have nothing better to do than..." You must have read it. Why do I think this approach is one-sided, I explained here:"One must solve the problem and propose variants on the basis of the reason for the topic, and not from the consequences of this reason for the author and the buyer.
Well, at least some poles of attraction of thoughts are formed. Also not bad.
You are blathering on as usual without even bothering to get to the bottom of it.
Why should I as a customer have to pay a subscription fee for a product that has been written and forgotten about?
No, with a subscription fee, everything gets transferred to the programmer. A monthly subscription is like a monthly re-sale.
You have to redesign the entire market from scratch ))) . This is one
And again.
Why should I as a customer have to pay a fee for a product that was written and forgotten about?
You have to redesign the entire market from scratch ))) . This is one
And again.
A monthly fee is charged for services that require online support. They are a priori impossible in the Market, at least for now.Well firstly it is not from scratch. Secondly, you can do a subscription fee and as now. In third, if something new, better comes knocking at the window, (not necessarily what we are talking about now), then we must take it and redo.
Well, the online is not written in the constitution, it is possible to write their compromise rules.
-------------------------------
There has been much discussion and disagreement over this issue, but no solution has been found since the launch of the market, and there is no precedent, as I understand it)).
The conclusion is Sergeev is a provocateur (just kidding).
1) The whole market must be redesigned from scratch ))) . This is one
2. and again.
Why as a customer would I have to pay a subscription fee for a product that was written and forgotten about?
1. maybe not, I strongly suspect (based on circumstantial evidence) that this was built in during development.
2. But it's very convenient. Example: I get an indicator with a choice of either buying it for 100 for free, or 20 a month, with the first month at 10 (like "trial period 2 weeks included"). I take a month and (a) I find that the thing is cool, and buy the next month for good, or (b) I find that it sucks and just do not renew the subscription.
Everything seems to make sense and is very market-oriented and conducive to all kinds of progress. :)
3. solvable. laptop + G3.... :)