InfoQube IM - Community

Submitted by richlove on 2014/09/07 16:29

I registered for this website over 4 years ago, because I need an ECCO Pro replacement. That is the greatest value of this product, at least for me anyways. That's its prototype, and that's how it was advertised, and from my point of view that is still its greatest value and promise.

I am annoyed by the lack of a final v1.0 InfoQube product in more than 4 years. Everytime I go to use the beta to see if it is DONE, it says "expired...please download the most recent version". This is annoying. Then when I do that and I go to convert my Ecco Pro files to InfoQube, the converters don't work, or the converted files require so much work, that seems easier to start from scratch. However, starting over with InfoQube file formats requires too much work, because the Ecco Pro files are significant in size.

I hesitated to say anything in the past because I don't want to upset the nice gentlemen developing this product. The InfoQube project needs to be run as a product development activity, not someone's hobby project. Good Product Version Control is missing. Great products have great product management. Perfectionism is not part of good product management. Freeze the code, clean it up, call it V1.0 and start selling it with documentation. Get some money to pay for your efforts and get money to support future versions. Stop screwing around with 150 beta releases.

It is a great software tool, moving in an innovative direction to replace ECCO Pro. Ultimately it will be better than ECCO Pro. If you don't freeze it, finalize the product, and ship it with price tag, then , if it doesn't get eclipsed by something more innovative based on Python, Flex, or a newer paradigm. If you wait much longer, it will be eclipsed by something better (there are probably a few people in this forum who believe it already has been eclipsed.) Don't try to make it perfect; software is never "done", it is a work of art. Fix the critical bugs, finish the full compatibility with ECCO Pro, and get it out the door. PERIOD. NO MORE RELEASES FOR V1.0.

If you need help, then open source it, sell a supported version, get money for the next product version. Sell the product to Google, Microsoft, or some local company with the resources for managing the larger development process, but get it out the door. Or else "open source" the product and build a community of developers around it.

There are many business development models that will work.

I am weary waiting for InfoQube to release a fully ECCO Pro-compatible replacement product so that I can move away from ECCO Pro. If a fully-compatible ECCO Pro replacement with migration tools is not a primary goal, then let the community know so we can choose to wait or move on.

A clear policy statement and commitment about Ecco Pro compatibility from product management will be greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

Rich Lysakowski

Comments

I cant answer your main question (and would also very much like to see some sort of a transparent plan-of-action myself).

A couple of thoughts prompted by your post:

> I hesitated to say anything in the past

And you complain about Ecco import not being fixed - if you dont report bugs - well, let me turn that around: if you do report bugs, they will get fixed faster.

Re the betas running out, one possibility is the option to buy a basic license (50$ I think) and register the software - of course I can understand anyone not wanting to do that if they are unsure about the product.

Hi Rich,

I'm sorry to hear about your frustration in waiting for InfoQube v1.0. 4 years is a long time... imagine mine... I've been working on this for the last 11 years !!!

IQ is a big project for a one-man show and, apart from a 2 year period where I had to do some software consultation to finance this project (2010-2012), I've been working on it full-time (and more). Donations are rare and fixed costs are what they are...

InfoQube has been in public beta for 7 years now (originally under the SQLNotes name). This is a long time, I know, but how long was GMail in beta ? Nearly as long IIRC and we all know that Google has huge resources. Being in beta that long didn't stop millions of individuals using it and trusting it.

The same is true for InfoQube (well, there aren't millions of users, just 100-200 downloads per month lol). Meaning, it is very stable and users trust it.

Regarding the Ecco import issue, please report it as I'll fix it ASAP. AFAIK, it was working. If you can describe the issue, that would help me a lot.

The version expiration was the mean I chose to ensure that users would upgrade to the latest version, as supporting older version increases my already high workload (website maintenance, answering on this forum, some documentation, bug fixes, improve / complete implemented features, adding new features, ...). As Tom mentioned, a $50 donation gives you a life-time license and removes this expiration.

Has InfoQube been eclipsed by some other program ? You tell me, because I see no other current effort to reproduce / improve the original Ecco. It's sad, but that's the state of the software industry these days... Expanding the user base at the cost of reducing the feature set. Make it so simple so more an more users will use it...

Last point I'd like to make, is that InfoQube's goal is not to reproduce Ecco and I don't believe that the little marketing that I do goes in that direction (see the main page at http://www.infoqube.biz where there is just one reference to Ecco in the whole page).

InfoQube's goal is to provide a modern tool for information management. Hopefully, the best tool, at least for a significantly large group of users to make it viable.

Pierre Paul Landry

IQ designer

I think this is a good answer.

We all know that there are still things to be ironed out and some to be implemented (calendar + sync), but it's getting there.

Development plan (as Tom suggested) & bug fixing priorities could be clearer; at the same time developing a piece of software in a world of constantly moving technology isn't like building a table. It's much more complex and always changing.

More developers working on the project ? Maybe... I also know a few stories about many developers developing disasters. "Many" or "more" isn't always better. Plus, there's the financial aspect... Open sourcing ? don't think so... Selling it ? that would probably be the end of it. Anyway...

Apart from that, the biggest challenge is to find ways to make IQ easier to use for new users.

I'm sure that that awaited V1 is not too far away.

-------------------------------------------------------

Windows 8.1

Sony Vaio S Series 13 (SVS131E21L)

Ram:8gb, CPU: Intel i5-3230M, 2.6ghz

[quote=Armando]

[/quote]

Thanks Armando ! Chandler is an obvious example where a PIM with big budget and serious planning was not a success...

[quote=Armando]

Apart from that, the biggest challenge is to find ways to make IQ easier to use for new users.

[/quote]

I have my own little idea on this... expect a major announcement real soon !

Seven years in Beta stage of development ? Sounds like a life passion labor of love. I applaud you for your persistence, but it is past due time that you finished version 1.0 and get paid a lot more.

My $50 for a perpetual license will probably not make a difference in the grand scheme of things, but I am happy to provide that.

More important for me is knowing that my product development input will be heeded, so my investment of time in your company pays off in a stable company, a happy development team with funding to continue supporting and improving this product for another 10 years.

Try to take the lead from (and emulate) other successful product launches and upgrades in similar categories, namely office and personal productivity products (whether commercial or open source). If Microsoft waited 7 years to release the next version of Office, MS-Office might be dead in the water, or the poprular press and competitors would more likely shame them into action. If Inspiration (the drawing tool) waited that long, they too would be dead in the water.

A good project or product development strategy is to "time-box" your versions, for example, no later than 18 months between major releases. Each major product version releases is a separate project. Projects longer than 18 months are officially recommended to be "Programs" by the Project Management Institute, in this case it becomes a software development program. Product version releases every 18 months could mean 12 months of new features or significant bug fixes (ones that impact many existing functions), code freeze (NO NEW FUNCTIONALITY), and then 6 months on final software "packaging", QA (to stabilize the product), and user documentation and Help system updates . If your release cycles are 12 months, then 9 months of development / bug fixes, and 3 months of packaging, final QA, and documentation / Help system updates. These are examples.. you will figure out what makes the most sense. I have been associated with new product development and this is a schedule that is sustainable for small teams, but also help product marketing and sales plans and execution to keep up with changing markets.

Step back a bit too. Distance yourself from the details long enough to make some key product management decisions. Get feedback from totally naive and new users. InfoQube cannot be all things to all people, because then you will be going in 15 different directions. Right now the product appears complex out of the box, with only a few concrete examples. Perhaps more concrete examples from long term beta users would help. Calendaring is nice, but how is it designed to work with Google Calendar and Outlook; is it design to access and view, co-exist, synchronize, or compete ? Email is another major category of functionality that needs to access, synchronize, co-exist, but not compete with GMail, Outlook, Thunderbird, etc. You'll put too much effort into competing with huge development teams. Trying to compete or replace those products seems like a fatal mistake for resource reasons. And those products and all the dozens of add-ons basically stink for Task Management and Project Management. Focus where you can make a difference today.

Calendaring and email are categories that people want to move to tablets and cell phones. Project and task management for non-trivial real-world projects with dozens to hundreds of tasks are hard to move to tablets and cell phones because of lack of screen real estate. A webbrowser with HTML5 or desktop application are needed to get the fine resolution and functionality for handling complex graphics and functionality.

Ask the ECCO Pro developers why the product is so stable after 20+ years. What did they do right on the technology? They had only 4 major releases in all their years. Why? I may be wrong, but my understanding is that it was not for technology reasons that Ecco Pro did succeed in the long term, but rather executive management decisions to do something else with the product and the NetManage company. If you don't want to use ECCO Pro as a model of success because of such executive decisions, then ask other product development companies what they do now to be successful.

Ultimately the decisions are yours. I want you to be rewarded for your efforts, and me to be rewarded with a stable product for many years to come.

Best Regards,

Rich

Thanks Rich !

Wise words, some of which I've followed in the past, others which I'll do my best to keep in mind as small and large decisions are taken.

Pierre