Rοb

Sat0ri, on 08 March 2011 - 07:06 AM, said:

I have all the same issues and have brought it up quite a few times.  For the record Mark has said this may be fixed in the future but as yet there is no timeline and I am unsure if there is any urgency towards fixing this issue for those of us that upgraded from IP subscriptions.  Maybe if enough people bring it up there will be an eventual solution.  And yes it's a crazy expensive problem.  I had to raise prices to make up for the lost revenue and the site is still sinking financially but it's too late to switch to another system since there is no downgrade path back to IP. subscriptions.

+1 on the SUBSCRIPTION ONLY option...

We didn't realize about the "two choices" function in IP.Nexus until too late (since it's not documented anywhere), and upgraded from IP.Subscriptions thinking that Nexus would provide everything we had before (this is how it was advertised).

To date, just in the past month, we're already looking at a significant loss in recurring revenue thanks to this oversight.

ASAP, please, we need the option to specify "subscription only" for products.

I'm a little miffed, as this is frankly a no-brainer and should be have been considered with the first release, or at least in the first update.

Don't wait too long, this is a biggie... IPB RULES, don't fail us now.

Hi Guys,
I am currently using nexus as a replacement for subscriptions and therefore would like people to only be able to subscribe to payments on particular items and not just make one of payments. Is it possible for me to just have the subscription link on a particular item? If not could this feature be implemented?

Mark, on 28 January 2011 - 03:32 AM, said:

Yes, this is true for many subscriptions. Yet it doesn't mean the feature is dumb. I requested this sort of feature when Nexus was first released. Some people don't like to provide the 2 payment options of one time or recurring. This interferes with the owner's business model

Welcome to IP.Board 3.1.0 Beta 1!
Welcome to the latest development version of IP.Board 3.1.0. We're excited to reveal the product we've been working on for the past few months. This build contains all the features we've blogged about recently including the search improvements, Twitter integration, Profile Customization and more.

As always, this is a very early beta build so please expect to find the odd bug here and there. Please report any bugs found into the tracker as usual.

As always, we'd love to hear your feedback. Happy clicking!

Note: Please perform a hard refresh / delete temporary items in your browser to ensure you get the correct CSS and JS

Preview Only: IP.Board 3.1 is in preview only. It is not yet available for download. Keep an eye out for a future announcement.

What's New
Link Sharing
Easily share links from your community to Facebook, Twitter, and more. Great way to drive traffic to your community!

Status Updates
Enhancements to the existing member status system in IP.Board to include the ability to reply and more.

Topic Preview
Preview the first few lines of a topic without loading the entire topic.

View Reputation
Optionally allow your members to see who gave reputation points on their posts.

Twitter Integration
Your members can now link their account with their Twitter account!

Improved Facebook Integration
Further enhance the link between your community and Facebook to drive traffic.

Advertising Code Integration: Part 1 and Part 2
Easily place advertising code throughout your community with simple settings in the admin area.

Profile Customizations: Part 1 and Part 2
Allow your members to customize the look and feel of their profile page.

Skin Upgrader
Upgrading your skin between versions of IP.Board just became a lot easier.

Soft Delete Posts and Topics
Rather than actually deleting a post or topic you can now hide it from view to easily restore it later.

Notification System
An easier way to be notified of all the various events that happen in your community.

Modification Development Enhancements
Great tools for those that create modifications for IP.Board

Hook System Improvements
Improvements to the IP.Board hook system to make it easier for modification developers to expand the functions in the software.

Search Engine Optimization: Part 1 and Part 2
Allow search engines to better index and rank your community in results.

Search Engine Overhaul
Search engine rebuilt from the ground up introducing more flexibility and power.

lol @ -rep for posting honest feedback, nothing new there I guess.
The point of this thread is to provide feedback. Just because someone doesn't agree with it doesn't mean it's not appropriate, or deserves -rep.

Is the software decent? I can't say, its only been a few hours , but it does look decent.

Is the support acceptable? From what I've experienced (so far), not in the slightest. If putting something in the 'wrong department' (which it wasn't) means it's going to get delayed 12+ hours, then perhaps those understaffed departments need more staff, or people need to think outside of the box, and stop listening to ticket systems as to when to help someone.

Anyways, the feedback's been left. No, it's not an unreasonable expectation to want tickets answered same business day at all, especially when one is a new customer.

One feature of Vbulletin that I miss are links to moved threads that expire automatically after x days. Would be nice to see that as part of IPB

Richard, on 23 July 2009 - 01:48 PM, said:

The $25 ever 6 months for standard, $30 per year for perpetual, and nothing for lifetime isn't just support. It includes access to the resource site which is considered a service. I never said that I wouldn't be willing to pay something as a lifetime license holder. But their current reasoning is not justified. Either give it to all license holders, or don't. It's is simple as that. I hope you can understand now.

Matt, on 23 July 2009 - 01:56 PM, said:

Thanks Matt. I await your answer .

AtariAge, on 23 July 2009 - 01:12 PM, said:

I think it was around $150 when yearly licenses were about $60. I know I paid $200 or more for my lifetime license when it was available. I don't recall the exact amount.

But as I said before, it's not about what you paid for the license, or how much you pay to renew it. A license is a license, and should be considered equal. They should be giving it to all license holders, or make it separate service. I'm not against paying something to help with the costs of running this service (as it seems to be their concern), I just don't appreciate their initial tactic.

They're talking about it, so we'll wait. But I expect nothing less than equal treatment for every license holder. What ever is/was paid for a license should not be put into the equation.

bfarber: The way I see it is the standard license $25 fee is for support and upgrades, nothing else. If you bend it to "future services" then by that token you should do it to the perpetual license since they pay $30 per year for support. And if you give it to them, lifetime license holders should get it free. The closest thing I have to compare to this service is the resource site: Without an active support contract, you cannot access it. Standard license holders pay $25 every six months, perpetual license holders pay $30 per year, and lifetime license holders pay nothing. But they get access to the same "service". And technically I would consider the resource site a "service" the same as the spam monitor.

I ask for every license holder to get it, or for none of them to get it and have a yearly fee. That would be fair to everyone. And it's much simpler to charge no one, or charge everyone. And as far as who is paying what for their license, in order to be fair you can't look at that. Regardless of what the initial agreement was, a license is a license. I have an active support contract, I get access to the resource site "service". The spam monitor should be treated the same for all, or different for all. It's as simple as that.

Charles, on 22 July 2009 - 07:38 PM, said:

Well then couldn't a new type of license be made, available only to Lifetime/Perp holders, where they pay $10/year (renewable at anytime, just like the standard IP.Board license)?  That way IPS is making money (as I mentioned in my previous post) but not forcing the customer to change their license type?

I felt like smacking someone when I saw this thread's title.