pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Is this project dead?  (Read 37383 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: August 18, 2014, 07:44 »
-1
Cathy, maybe it's time to realize that you were a big part of the problem. End of story.

That's very unfair. The arguments which resulted were an inevitable outcome of the project and its goals being poorly specified and planned. If it had not been one person, it would have been another.

The problems with Symbiostock were many. One of the main issues was that economically it was not viable. Therefore it was always going to fail. Viable open source projects need a sustainable (typically much larger) user base in order, amongst other things, to attract enough developers. Free generally only works if there is money to be made.

Also - it was wrongheaded of people to believe that the solution they were looking for was software. Good well designed software would have been one of the outcomes of a project which had been well specified and project planned. And properly funded. Software is not an end in itself.

The end result, unfortunately, has been some not very good software and a bunch of poor looking sites mostly offering content which is never going to sell because it needs editing. The few sites which are doing okay would have likely done as well or better on another platform. Even any possible SEO advantage seems likely to diminish quickly now that Google is moving towards promoting only fully https websites.


Photominer

« Reply #51 on: August 18, 2014, 10:00 »
+4
The end result, unfortunately, has been some not very good software and a bunch of poor looking sites mostly offering content which is never going to sell because it needs editing. The few sites which are doing okay would have likely done as well or better on another platform. Even any possible SEO advantage seems likely to diminish quickly now that Google is moving towards promoting only fully https websites.
I think that's unfair. The software works exactly as specified with only a few exceptions. It's self-hosting. I think the bigger issue (and where all the contention started) was the networking side of things. The actual platform is incredible compared to others I've tried (and I have tried quite a few). As far as poor content, etc, well that would be up to the site owners wouldn't it? Trying to control what people choose to sell would entirely defeat the point of self hosting. 

« Reply #52 on: August 18, 2014, 10:39 »
+2
I think that's unfair. The software works exactly as specified with only a few exceptions. It's self-hosting. I think the bigger issue (and where all the contention started) was the networking side of things. The actual platform is incredible compared to others I've tried (and I have tried quite a few).

I don't think it should be about whether it is incredible compared with other software. It should be about whether it is the right solution for photographers. It isn't.

Firstly - it doesn't look good. That's one of the reason why none of the sites look good. Which means that people are never going to be able to use it to build the great looking sites which potential customers expect. For that you need sites which are built using the latest technologies. Look at how good other websites look today. Customers expect great looking sites.

And then there is the question of whether photographers being their own systems administrators is the right solution for photographers. In most cases no it isn't. So it's the wrong solution - it does not offer a good alternative to agencies.

As far as poor content, etc, well that would be up to the site owners wouldn't it? Trying to control what people choose to sell would entirely defeat the point of self hosting.

^ This goes to the question of whether there is even any point in running single photographer sites. I do not believe that there is - for most people. Customers typically want the variety and quality that only a library can offer. In which case what is the point of building a site which is rarely if ever going to get a sale. It would be much better to get a hosted portfolio on a better platform if it is simply about building a vanity site. Or use flickr. If you are building a network then there needs to be quality control.

You start with an idea. You put a team together to sketch out what the thing might look like. You argue out the detail and think about the possible legal and conceptual aspects. You make sketches of how you want it to look and begin to talk about what might be the best technologies and platforms. You put together a business plan including projections of how much it is going to cost. You get people with experience to advise you about the business plan - whether it is viable etc. Then if you decide to go ahead you raise some money to take the project forward and employ people to build the software, design the site and draw up the legal contracts etc.

^ if not something like this then it is not serious.


Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #53 on: August 18, 2014, 10:57 »
+1

Firstly - it doesn't look good. That's one of the reason why none of the sites look good.

Gee, thanks.

« Reply #54 on: August 18, 2014, 11:02 »
+1

Firstly - it doesn't look good. That's one of the reason why none of the sites look good.

Gee, thanks.

Yes, thanks, too  ;)

« Reply #55 on: August 18, 2014, 11:03 »
+4
I think that's unfair. The software works exactly as specified with only a few exceptions. It's self-hosting. I think the bigger issue (and where all the contention started) was the networking side of things. The actual platform is incredible compared to others I've tried (and I have tried quite a few).

I don't think it should be about whether it is incredible compared with other software. It should be about whether it is the right solution for photographers. It isn't.

Firstly - it doesn't look good. That's one of the reason why none of the sites look good. Which means that people are never going to be able to use it to build the great looking sites which potential customers expect. For that you need sites which are built using the latest technologies. Look at how good other websites look today. Customers expect great looking sites.

And then there is the question of whether photographers being their own systems administrators is the right solution for photographers. In most cases no it isn't. So it's the wrong solution - it does not offer a good alternative to agencies.

As far as poor content, etc, well that would be up to the site owners wouldn't it? Trying to control what people choose to sell would entirely defeat the point of self hosting.

^ This goes to the question of whether there is even any point in running single photographer sites. I do not believe that there is - for most people. Customers typically want the variety and quality that only a library can offer. In which case what is the point of building a site which is rarely if ever going to get a sale. It would be much better to get a hosted portfolio on a better platform if it is simply about building a vanity site. Or use flickr. If you are building a network then there needs to be quality control.

You start with an idea. You put a team together to sketch out what the thing might look like. You argue out the detail and think about the possible legal and conceptual aspects. You make sketches of how you want it to look and begin to talk about what might be the best technologies and platforms. You put together a business plan including projections of how much it is going to cost. You get people with experience to advise you about the business plan - whether it is viable etc. Then if you decide to go ahead you raise some money to take the project forward and employ people to build the software, design the site and draw up the legal contracts etc.

^ if not something like this then it is not serious.

you are delusional..

I don't even understand why you have written such a long and far from useful post in the first place..

if you have got something better to offer, please come back again.. if not, what is all that fuss about?

You hate it?

COOL.. DO NOT USE IT

« Reply #56 on: August 18, 2014, 11:06 »
+4

Firstly - it doesn't look good. That's one of the reason why none of the sites look good.

Gee, thanks.

The easy way of getting lots of hearts is to say things which people want to hear. But what would be the point of that ?

This project did not fail because Cathy upset some people. That's where I came into this particular conversation. If it was viable then it would have taken more than an argument to kill it. It failed because it was not built around solid planning and a clear specification. And the business planning was not good.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2014, 12:41 by bunhill »

Photominer

« Reply #57 on: August 18, 2014, 11:18 »
+3
Well, you don't seem interested in self-hosting, so there's not much further point in debate about it. You seem to be describing an agency-type site. So you're kinda in the wrong thread in my opinion. I have many reasons for self hosting besides sales.

« Reply #58 on: August 18, 2014, 11:26 »
+4
So you're kinda in the wrong thread in my opinion.

Since this thread is about Symbiostock being dead  it seems perfectly reasonable IMO to discuss what went wrong. People not wanting to talk about what was going wrong with Symbiostock was part of what went wrong with Symbiostock.

« Reply #59 on: August 18, 2014, 11:33 »
+8
Well technically, the concept was built around the idea of a collaboration of artists and developers all working together to create something. The idea was that hundreds or even thousands of people would participate and eventually something great would come from it. The momentum for this project needed to come from the community and MSG was supposed to be a great source for this community to be built. Ultimately things went south with this plan (which was probably doomed to fail) because there are a lot more talkers than do'ers. Leo is a do'er and assumed (incorrectly) that there were many, many, more like him. There aren't. Once this became a one man show it was easy for negativity to dramatically affect the outcome. There were actually a number of coders at the beginning but they lost interest due to these same reasons long before Leo did.

If the people who didn't like the project had just gone about their way and quietly done something else this might have had a very different outcome. Instead there was a very vocal and loud outcry against the project. This is the part I don't understand. I'm not a big fan of McDonalds hamburgers but instead of screaming at the top of my lungs in front of the restaurant, I just don't eat there. Why all the outrage? What was the point?Why not just not participate and do something else?

Lots of people are saying the project is so bad, but why do they care at all?
« Last Edit: August 18, 2014, 11:43 by chromaco »

« Reply #60 on: August 18, 2014, 11:44 »
+5
I waited 14 months to finally make a sale through Symbiostock, and when I finally did get one, the image didn't download properly for the buyer. He spent 24 hours going nuts trying to figure out how to download the image, and the Symbiostock system kept asking him to change his password.

In the meantime, something failed between Bluehost and my mobile phone service provider, so I never received email notification that a purchase had been made. Yet another issue that never seems to work reliably.  So I did not receive any of the angry buyer's rants over the next day. Long story short, I ended up refunding all of the buyer's money since a day later he had already flagged the purchase through Paypal and made it seem as though I was unscrupulous.

You can find posts from photographers who were disillusioned by the buggy payment process, if you search for them. For most photographers, it worked like a charm.

I supported the project for a long time, but I really don't have the patience to keep up with the issues. The reward-to-effort has never been there for me, in my own personal experience. So while the project isn't dead as far as I can ascertain, I wouldn't buy into the typical "it's so easy to set up" advice, because you don't know how many problems are under the hood until you really press the accelerator. And once a problem arises, do you have the programming ability to fix it? This is not a plug-and-play device. You might have the chops to set it up, but it takes real skill to fix inevitable issues.

You might not like the other options out there like Photoshelter, but those options seem to be fairly stable and you don't have to worry about troubleshooting shopping carts.

« Reply #61 on: August 18, 2014, 12:15 »
-3
Lots of people are saying the project is so bad, but why do they care at all?

they are afraid we will be successful and they will be doomed forever..  :D
« Last Edit: August 18, 2014, 12:17 by cidepix »

« Reply #62 on: August 18, 2014, 12:39 »
+4
If the people who didn't like the project had just gone about their way and quietly done something else this might have had a very different outcome.

This seems unlikely.

Instead there was a very vocal and loud outcry against the project.

I never witnessed that either here or on the Symbiostock forum. But I did read posts from people defending Symbiostock aggressively - as if raising issues was somehow against the project. There seemed to be a head-in-the-sand approach to many of the issues which should have been obvious. That persists apparently.

Lots of people are saying the project is so bad, but why do they care at all?

By talking about why projects fail people are able to work how not to repeat those mistakes ?

Waka Waka

« Reply #63 on: August 18, 2014, 12:40 »
+7
The fact that all the posts with criticism are voted down is very much what is wrong and exactly what Bunhill touched on as well.

My comment with facts, my own feelings, and some positive notes gets voted down
Cathy's comment with some good points, voted down
Bunhill's comment with constructive comments and arguments voted down

No one accepts any criticism. I wasnt the first to join the project, but I joined around version 1.4 I believe, and I have been a MAJOR supporter of Symbiostock, and I put money, time and support into the project. But when I started to criticise things, FOR THE BETTER, people started to work against me.


... I am done trying to convert nonbelievers..
What is to believe when the developer himself says, without running around the bush, the project is done and he is pulling out?

It is on the developer website for everyone to read. But then someone else comes out, speaking for the developer, saying it is not true.

Why are the two people running this project contradicting each other.

Which one is it, is it dead or is it not dead? If it is not dead, why are the two blog posts up saying it is?

Why is the forum being closed, reinstated, being closed, reinstated, and now read only? At least on three occasions I was told that the project had to come to an end.

The project had a following, and that following got 'punished' because they didnt want to pay a subscription. 177 people and growing, 13 people voted, 9 said they didnt want a subscription, and the project got cancelled. Simple as. 

I paid for plugins that later were given away for free, thats not the way forward to make money, if that is your plan.

I think the people who are desperately defending symbiostock are the ones that need to get their head out of the sand.

If I had paid nothing for this software you wouldnt have heard one word of criticism from me, but I paid 155 dollar. That entitles me to have criticism. Period.



« Reply #64 on: August 18, 2014, 13:24 »
+4
Just to be clear... and if I am inferring something that wasn't intended forgive me. I am not and never have been a part of the Symbiostock development team. I have never received a dime from the development of this software (other than selling my own images). In fact I am certain that I have paid more for my sites than any other single person involved in Symbiostock. My interest in the well being of the project is purely selfish in the fact that my sites make sales... lots of them, and it was in my own best interest for the project to continue. I did not know Leo until he sent me a PM around last November. Since then we have shared many conversations and we have become friends. Leo tends to be impulsive and doesn't handle this forum environment very well. Very often I have come to MSG as his spokesperson and even more often I have come here for my own interests. FWIW I know exactly what went wrong with this project and so does Leo. The issue here is that very little of what is said here is accurate. Most of it is taken out of context or distorted with important items being omitted. Everything is probably true from a particular perspective but not exactly true when taken in the larger context.

Leo spent 2 years basically working for free. From which many of us have profited at his expense and when he decided he could no longer do it he is criticized for stopping. When he decided to close shop he didn't wipe out all of our sites. They still run. He doesn't owe me or anyone else anything. If you think you didn't get your money's worth then I am happy to have that discussion because I think this software in its current form is worth more than $150. But if you think that continued development for an unsustainable business model is mandated then I have to disagree with you.

My stance has never changed. Subs are bad, self hosting is good! I jumped on board and defended Symbiostock because it was the best idea to come along in years. If anyone else would like to step up and create something out of the box that I think will work I will actively support your project as well.

Symbiostock IS dead!!!!
Symbio sites are far from it.

« Reply #65 on: August 18, 2014, 13:31 »
0
I continue to be vocal about the issues with the software because i believe people have the right to know all sides of a story. And i am even more vocal when bullies show up and start blaming me and telling me i dont have any right to my opinion and adding minuses to my posts just because they "don't like me." You better believe I am NOT going to let it drop and go on my merry way.


Both Ron and bunhill have made excellent points. And look at the mentality that puts bunhill down just because he doesnt have an SY site. This blind, worshipping following of Leo just baffles me. As a person, I am sure he is a good guy. Did he do a good thing writing this software? Yeah. But it's like that saying "The operation was a success but the patient died." Can you build a site with it? Yeah. Is it successful? Not so much.


It was LEOs choice to not charge, so don't be putting that blame on anybody, including me. From the start, for the life of me, I couldn't figure out why he didn't put it up on Themeforest or something.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2014, 13:39 by cathyslife »

« Reply #66 on: August 18, 2014, 13:37 »
+1
And just to clarify for anyone, I DID pay Leo for the software, I DID pay for plugins. So don't be telling ME that I got something for nothing. I know the value of developer's time and I didn't mind paying. And I don't believe I have EVER said anything different.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2014, 18:32 by cathyslife »

« Reply #67 on: August 18, 2014, 13:38 »
+1
And look at the mentality that puts bunhill down just because he doesnt have an SY site.

I built a dummy site using Symbiostock on a LAMP server at home to look at the software.

« Reply #68 on: August 18, 2014, 13:44 »
-3
And look at the mentality that puts bunhill down just because he doesnt have an SY site.

I built a dummy site using Symbiostock on a LAMP server at home to look at the software.


Which points directly back to the statement I made about how people aren't sheep. Maybe people aren't jumping on the SY wagon because ITS NOT THE RIGHT CHOICE.


OK, I got work to do. Enough of this madness.

Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #69 on: August 18, 2014, 14:01 »
+1
I continue to be vocal about the issues with the software because i believe people have the right to know all sides of a story. And i am even more vocal when bullies show up and start blaming me and telling me i dont have any right to my opinion and adding minuses to my posts just because they "don't like me." You better believe I am NOT going to let it drop and go on my merry way.


Both Ron and bunhill have made excellent points. And look at the mentality that puts bunhill down just because he doesnt have an SY site. This blind, worshipping following of Leo just baffles me. As a person, I am sure he is a good guy. Did he do a good thing writing this software? Yeah. But it's like that saying "The operation was a success but the patient died." Can you build a site with it? Yeah. Is it successful? Not so much.


It was LEOs choice to not charge, so don't be putting that blame on anybody, including me. From the start, for the life of me, I couldn't figure out why he didn't put it up on Themeforest or something.

There is no blind worshipping of Leo except in your own mind.

« Reply #70 on: August 18, 2014, 14:35 »
-2
never been with leo, or symbio; so not a "worshipper nor an anti-cult"
 but allow me 2 add my tuppence worth ... without pointing at anyone here.

 i like the idea of hosting ur own site , from the start i read of leo,
but now even more, given the current situation with is and ss. only i don't have time for now 2 immerse myself globally, as i have more or less turn back 2 local work.

i realise some did not find it worth it, due 2 no sales . but the no sales has nothing 2 do with leo's making. it is ur own portfolio, if some others r selling in the same "connection" (4 lack of a better word, as i m told not 2 use "co-op" when describing symbio.)

anyway, like the co-op stocksy, it rises n falls with the network. symbio is only as strong as its weakest link. i like the idea, as it is one step in the current sorry state of ms to find a viable alternative.

as 2 whether it be fair 2 pay leo or not, why not then give him a percentage?
since we give ss , is, etc a large %age n we have absolutely no control of where we r in the search placement, or when they decide 2 switch-off our portfolio when we reach a certain pay-out point.
(not my idea of conspiracy, but just quoting some long-timers from the forum itself ie"port falls off a cliff").

« Last Edit: August 18, 2014, 14:38 by etudiante_rapide »

« Reply #71 on: August 18, 2014, 15:02 »
+4
Maybe this would be a good time to redirect the conversation to "What's Next?" Who has an idea like Symbiostock and would like to take a jump and get it going? I would love to see another venue for myself to try that doesn't involve selling my images for pennies. I don't need another subs agency and I am not hearing a lot of great new options out there. In particular any illustrators (because I am an illustrator) out there who are interesting in doing something new? I'm happy to also "worship" someone new as well.

Seriously... I'm hearing a lot of criticism but not very many ideas. Someone share some ideas with your thoughts, I'll help.

Not real interested in comments about how it won't work. I've already read endless posts about all of those arguments. I've got them memorized. If I have respect for Leo it was because he said "It's possible" and then tried to do it. Who's next?

« Reply #72 on: August 18, 2014, 15:08 »
+1
Seriously... I'm hearing a lot of criticism but not very many ideas. Someone share some ideas with your thoughts, I'll help.

Start with a vision of what it is that you want to achieve. Are you looking for a better self hosted site for your own content in isolation or are are you looking to build a marketplace ?

« Reply #73 on: August 18, 2014, 15:11 »
+1

i realise some did not find it worth it, due 2 no sales . but the no sales has nothing 2 do with leo's making. it is ur own portfolio, if some others r selling in the same "connection" (4 lack of a better word, as i m told not 2 use "co-op" when describing symbio.)



I dont think it's the the main problem, not for me anyways. The main problem is it does not work properly, for me and some others as i can see here. The issues with Paypal was on and off for me and i dont have an idea what caused it and can never be sure if it would work the next time. It apparently works well for many people, so it should be due to the fact that i dont have enough technical knowledge to solve the problems.
But i liked the network idea, and so thought i could use it to drive traffic to my main Photodeck site. Well, after almost a year i must say the network feature does not work for me either. I had 4 websites at that time and my Symbio site had the best Alexa ranking, largest number of linking, and the only one that had 100% indexed, and yet, it has the lowest number of visits, even until now. It did not bring any traffic to me, the only thing i got from my Symbio site is spam registration, lots of it. So as much as it saddens me, i will have to take it down soon.

« Reply #74 on: August 18, 2014, 15:25 »
+2
Seriously... I'm hearing a lot of criticism but not very many ideas. Someone share some ideas with your thoughts, I'll help.

Start with a vision of what it is that you want to achieve. Are you looking for a better self hosted site for your own content in isolation or are are you looking to build a marketplace ?

Thanks but I'm not looking for advice. I'm looking for people who are interested in doing something. I know what I want and how to get there. Just wondering if anyone else out there was actually interested in the same thing. Is that you or are you just intent on consulting?


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
Face2Face project

Started by Istock News Microstock News

0 Replies
2452 Views
Last post March 21, 2007, 17:11
by Istock News
0 Replies
3350 Views
Last post September 27, 2007, 08:44
by ste7e
30 Replies
12029 Views
Last post February 19, 2013, 17:32
by alberto
1 Replies
5395 Views
Last post April 14, 2013, 23:12
by click_click
0 Replies
3740 Views
Last post June 24, 2014, 14:40
by cascoly

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors