paid featurescript functions

fastwayjim

The token idea is a very interesting proposal by @owen_sparks... why not add a little "gamification" to it? It reminds me of RR3 (Real Racing 3) and many other "free" games with "in app purchases" that use their own currency to advance through the game. OS could give users tokens as they spend more time using Onshape (a time-based incentive).

OS could raise the initial cost (say, the month 1 cost is $200 instead of $100) and justify it by giving users "100 tokens" to spend on FS and Apps. A token could be roughly equal to 1$, but of course dynamic pricing can be utilized in the future.

For companies with complicated purchasing process (like large companies), it allows users to "pay on the fly" for FS features, or even Apps, without having to go through that process, since it's already been paid for!

dave_cowden

+1 i think that's a really great system @joe_dunne  how about running this approach up the flagpole?

I agree completely with @fastwayjim and @3dcad @owen_sparks on this. Most all paying Onshape users would buy more features if they can avoid the overhead of an additional payment 'process'.

Another recommendation: make sure users get some small number of tokens for free with the base pro account, and an even smaller number with a free account. That will encourage people to try _something_ and learn how to use FeatureScript.  If you have to pay to use _any_ FS, a lot of people will never try it. 

I'm still a firm believer that FS is a competitive advantage for Onshape. It is worlds better than in other CAD systems. A token system would go a long way to help the ecosystem. 

3dcad

Instead of tokens I would prefer $ kept in Onshape account. So that if I wan't to prepare for some paid FS (or other) I would simply go into my account and add some money in (charged from my credit card). So it would be like a buffer which is used for any Onshape purchases. Similar to paypal in early days.

But the best system would be if Onshape would just add the cost to next scheduled payment, I know this makes them sort of bank but they could involve some financial company between who would claim the payment if not payed within next license renewal.

dave_cowden

@3dcad, yeah i agree, i think its mostly about avoiding the work required to make a payment for a tiny thing than anything else.  $ or tokens-- either one works as long as its easy to just sort of 'use'  FS items without a lot of work, as long as they are cheap. ( < $20 )

I'd support tokens, $, or anything as long using an FS is just click-and-use.

claudio_2

Hello everyone, my name is Claudio Ventura, I design furniture.
I think that FS items may cause a big increment in OS subscriptions.
I use OS free plan and I have no competence/time to write the FS items I need, but if I could use a really time saving feature for my works, for example the features that @3dcad writed for cams and dowels, I will subscribe the plan.
The way to pay the FS designer could be this:
- OS invest a part to his incoming from subscriptions to pay the FS designers
- Every month OS control which feature a customer have used and  pay the designers of the features.

For example;
- OS decide to invest the 10% of the subscription plan to pay the FS designers
- a customer use a habitually three features 
- OS pay to the three authors a part of the 10%

Naturally the idea and the percentage have to be well defined, a lot of considerations have to be done of this point, but I'm sure that OS will grow if  people will write FS items because this will open the way to  thousands of new customers.

The concept is similar to the app business for smartphones, the ability to make profit from the apps has increased the market  

This system is also auto implemented, in fact if after a time a feature is less used, the designer is stimulated to  increase it with new functions.

The most OS will pay, the more people will write FS and more customers pay for a SP, and the business will grow quickly.

dave_cowden

Hi @claudio_2,

Sadly, I don't think we're going to see OS participate in this conversation in the near future.  Since we do not have any system to monetize features, I have been writing features that could be monetized in the future for free and releasing them to the community.

If there is something you need, maybe I can help.  Do you have any features in mind that you need/would like to see?

lni64

@dave_cowden You could at least put a "buy me a beer" button on your homepage. I (and probably a lot more users) would press this a couple of times I think :-)

dave_cowden

@lutz_niggl hah! ok, well where's your beer button, i'll click it for getting a laugh today!

Seriously, though-- the best thing users can do for me is to 'like' and link my features. OS does have a way to see how many times a feature is used and upvoted.  I use the numbers to see which features are most popular, and to figure out at what point it would be possible to get more than beer.

claudio_2

@dave_cowden  Hi Dave, 
As I 've write, I design forniture.
I think that this is a good thing to develop in this sector.
This is a link of an article posted by Neil Cooke

                   

Jun142016

Speed Up Your Furniture Design With Onshape

By Neil Cooke

https://www.onshape.com/cad-blog/speed-up-your-furniture-design-with-onshape?utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=30583923&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8fbBxd6KtHuPg4o7C8i6w8ioG0XRqWVdmpVr5n5I7mNlHzXkAcYJtiM4FIrth81XijjEKXCe8Iwz0QUllHt-dxfoYYAg&_hsmi=30583923

There are a lot of things to do for the furniture design, the first is create the holes where to place connectors (male and female) and dowels.

Now I try to describe my ideal workflow:

- after having create my box (2 vertical + 2 horizontal panel) I want to connect these part
 
- my ideal feature can add, starting from a face of these parallelepipeds, HOLES for connector and dowels (it isn't necessary for the moment to see/have the hardware), and after having add it I want to be able to change the parameters.

- When I add to a body The holes to allocate the connectors I need they have to propagate to the adjacent body to create the holes for dowels, some time I need that the hole on the adjacent part have a different diameter.

I understand that is a complicate topic and perhaps there are not the functions that allow you to have a sort of negative extrusion, able to intersect the adjacent bodies, but perhaps it is an idea for OS...

If you need, I can create a document to better explain what I mean.

dave_cowden

hi @claudio_2
I could work on this project for you after I finish my current one, which is a thread creator ( already published but working with a couple of folks to improve it ).

I can work with you to build the requirements, and then we can see how much work it looks like. if you can send me a personal message lets see what we can get done! Share with me what your dream input FS box looks like if you can. Also, i need to know what other kinds of features ( at a high level ) do you need? Dowel joints is clearly one.  Are there others?  All of the usual suspects I can think of (box joint, half-lap, flatten, and i _think_ dogbones ) are already done.

I cannot make any promises on timeline, but I would love to at least work out the requirements. I can quickly tell you what's possible/not possible easy/hard, and we can go from there.

3dcad

@claudio_2
Yep, it's not that easy to define a feature that works in every case. That dowel&minifix feature in Neil's post was made according to my needs. It is pretty awesome. In one single dialog I can add dowels and cam connectors to both end of panel and it creates holes to connecting parts too. Then I use replicate to populate hardware into each.

What sort of furniture do you design?

claudio_2

@3dcad
I design and produce cabinet based furniture on demand. I'm looking for a simply workflow to design with/for my customers and the ability to automatize the production process.  I don't like the existing sw, and I would like to partecipate with a group to develop a better production sw for furniture.