I see that - but May might be too late if key developers/contributors have already jumped ship. There’s no need to keep up a pretence of grandeur anymore, there are much bigger companies around who tell you exactly who works for them and what they do.
I really don’t care for the people in the first group.
Even if they have millions what’s the point?
They are migrating to other platform.
Good for them, but why making negative posts and predictions?
Let’s be realistic.
There is a nice plan with Vlad as engineer and the support of the community.
Also there are simple goals like keeping Corona alive.
I read so many posts about lack of new users, big studios that will not choose corona, not enough employees for new features…
Who cares?
All this is happening from and for people who don’t want to leave the platform!
Let’s keep Corona running for a year and we will see.
I really don’t get the drama and the negativity.
Btw I’m not relying on Corona either.
I agree on 100% transparency too.
Well I obviously wasn’t talking about people who have already left, more those who have to decide in the coming months whether they will or not. The question is why did those people leave and how do you prevent it from happening more? There’s probably a balance to be had between ‘we’re all doomed’ and ‘la-la-la-la-la-la’.
All platforms, they’re leaving and coming.
You shouldn’t quote my post then :p.
They leave because they don’t feel safe with Corona.
There is a starting plan (Vlad bla bla bla) and we are here to talk about it more and make it better.
Just to be clear, I don’t judge people jumping the ship.
Anybody should do what is best for him / her / business.
I dislike their decision to make negative posts for no reason.
Again, I don’t have any special attachments with Corona.
It’s a lot easier to keep a developer that earns money that can be put back into the engine than attract a new one.
@Aarbron where you see negativity, I see cautious optimism and perhaps some pointers of how to move forward.
I think the reason people still post despite leaving the platform is they still want to see it succeed. I didn’t touch Corona for about two years before returning, but still helped newcomers on the forums when I could.
Isn’t a good idea to listen to customers that have left you in spite of universally liking the actual product to understand the reasons why?
I see some posts that besides negativity and unrealistic approach of the situation have nothing else to offer.
That’s what I’m talking about.
Why would I (or anyone else) reject any idea, good or bad one?
When did I write anything about that?
Hi Aarbron,
We do not try to be positive. We are completely positive.
Regards,
SolCa
Fair enough, I haven’t seen any posts like that, and even if I did, I don’t allow negativity to affect me.
We ( Glitch ) are sticking around, we haven’t been as active on the forums as we’d like but we don’t want to leave and hope to increase our forum time going forward.
Hey guys. Let’s try to take a step back and a deep breath. We are all here want Corona to succeed, as well as own and each other’s businesses. My plan is to keep Corona alive and kicking. I think I can do it. I hope for some help. There are a number of individuals and companies that made commitments to help me, so I can focus solely on Corona it seems, if trend won’t take a very sharp dive down. We have what we have. Let’s be nice to each other. Doom and gloom are not helpful, but if you feel like that, it is ok to share it. I am trying to point out that situation is not that bad and actually quite ok, but you feel what you feel, I respect that. Just don’t fight over it. I honestly don’t mean anyone/thing in particular. Peace.
@nick_sherman I appreciate that you continued to help out on the forums after you left for another platform and I’m happy you are still on our team!
It is great to see Glitch Games sticking around. It would be helpful to hear from other long-time users speaking up about staying. I think Corona will survive and will do well. I really believe that.
I have ‘no’ negative comments - but some food for thought :
I like the original business model the two creators Walter Lua and Carlos Icaza had. Corona SDK was free to use, and if user wanted to post the app/game to the stores, then would have to pay a license for the year. With it being open source now might negate that as a possible business model… but I like the original business model the most.
“I think” the two issues that caused that eventually to fail was over time there were multiple license versions(ugh!)… and ever changing ownership - this is always bad. Just have free version and paid for producing apps.
Having an ownership now of a small group composed of dedicated and long time corona people like Rob and Vlad - with true passion for Corona is the way to go. I think it will be much better in the long run then having a business own it as a side-piece!
One could look at Vlad and Rob as kind-of the new Walter and Carlos.
They have a quality product, they have the knowledge and skill and passion for the product. They should (maybe with a business manager added with them) run it as a business, dedicated to one thing, a top level super-simple-but powerful- 2D sdk. I think users will feel more secure on the future of the product. In other words - the sponsor route may work - but I think a business and charge under the business model I mentioned (I think) will work better.
One advantage is they now have a (I assume- because know one seems to know) a very large ‘potential’ customer base already in front of them. Of course there is always the fact that now-days we all want everything for free - so maybe there is not enough willing to pay for it. I just don’t know. I know I am willing to pay a fair-market price and I have yet to make any money from my games.
The real question to be answered is how many Corona users are there in these following 4 categories:
‘hobbyist-part-time’
‘serious users’ - 4 or 5 apps/games - making no money (that is me -so far anyway)
‘profitiable-users’ - 2 or more apps making decent profit, but likely not enough to quit a day-job
‘profitable users’ - making serious money as a bsuiness
I would think Rob and Vlad may know, and if not Appodeal the owners may know. It would be good for the whole community to know. It would clear up a lot of this discussion. Can someone post this information?
If you have 500 or more that are not in the hobbyist category, then these users will more then likely pay a competitive license fee. If you can lock in those fees before May1, you will have your projected revenue (minimum) for the year. You will know if you are sustainable for at least a year, and as a user, I would feel comfortable, knowing that the business has the revenue to handle the upkeep for at least a year. There will be more users I am sure joining during the year.
Keep the forum going with updates and discussions and I think Corona will survive and thrive. It just needs to focus on what it does best 2D (maybe 2.5D) games and apps.
Just my opinion, instead of counting on sponsors via GitHub etc… (no open source), sell the product - it is a great product for 2D.
@cyberpark - perhaps you would make good business manager? 
wish I could - just don’t think I have the skill set
Couldn’t you already create a repository on github with an awesome Corona? to put libs and plugins for the community, to start supplying the resources and improving them from an early age to use when everything is up to us.
@cyberparkstudios - you don’t know, how Corona Intellectual Property rights change for these years, how they will change from 1 May and what will be with IP after it will go full open source.
I suppose Vlad and Rob couldn’t sell anything, even after 1 May, only get donations. So if they want to proceed at this level, this is awesome news for everybody.
If the engine could be profitable as a business, more reasonable for current owners to just sell it, at least as IP. Another great news is that current owners don’t want to put up Corona for sale in whole or in parts.
PS. If Vlad and Rob could start a Corona Labs 2.0 - this maybe even worse, because will request much more responsibility and business promises. Right now ‘as is’ is better for everybody.
How about users that are somewhere between ‘profitiable-users’ and ‘profitable users’ in that they have a bunch of apps that are technically profitable, and act as a day-job, but aren’t “serious” money, and in reality if you already had a day-job it’d probably be foolish to quit for it with all the added stress and instability? As we’re that kind of user 