What, Precisely, Is A 'build Server' Used For? Why Can't That Work Be Done On My Machine?

Getting Started Newbie Questions
#1

Hey All,

Absolute Corona newbie here.

I’ve got the free version, and am impressed, for the most part, with its speed, and ability.

However, I’m not thrilled with the comments I see in the forums about broken past promises, about compatibility issues between the widgets 1 and widgets 2 API.

Combine that with the raising in price from $395 to $599 for a YEARLY SUBSCRIPTION (Who could possibly have thought /that/ was a good idea? For that kind of money, I want my development environment to be good forever.  You want more money from me, bring out a version that’s even better that I cannot live without.)

Finally, when I went to build for devices today, I saw that the app goes out to a build server to do the build.    It’s a deal breaker.

Can someone explain the sense in this?  Why is it necessary?  How do I turn that off?  I’ve got XCode on my machine, along with my Apple provisioning profiles, etc.  Why do I need to go to an external site to build?

It’s not so much the “security”, though I’m not keen on that aspect either, but rather what if my network goes down?  What if theirs does?  

So if something (anything) goes wrong with the networks, I can no longer build?

For a tool that costs this much, that’s frankly not acceptable. Is there an alternative?

-Ken 

#2

You can get offline builds with the Enterprise edition ($999-$2499 per year). I don’t believe CL will ever NOT require online builds for the Starter and Pro editions – I’m pretty sure they use it as a way to combat piracy 9and there may be tech reasons, too).

If it’s a deal breaker, you’ll have to find another framework – or upgrade to Enterprise.

However, after your copy of Corona SDK is registered you don’t need to be online for development – the build servers only come into play when you’re doing a build for device. But “normal” dev work with the simulator? Being online isn’t required for that.

 Jay

#3

That the build server is required is fact. That Moai and Gideros give you a lot more is opinion. That Corona is now seen largely as a low-end product like GameSalad is just inane. 

If I still lived on the road I *might* switch to something else because of the build servers, but since that’s only required when doing a device build - and since every coffee shop in the free world (and most of the unfree world) has wifi – I’ll bet I could get by just fine.

People throw out “Moai” as something to compare to Corona and it’s not even in the same ballpark. I *love* Moai and expect to use it for a project at some point, but you can not compare the two – unless you’re willing to compare everything, and not just that one is open source and one isn’t. Everybody says, “Moai is free!” but you never hear them say, “The learning curve is a freakin’ cliff!”

Before “Daniel” comes in and accuses me again of being a Corona lapdog and a paid shill, the reason I defend Corona SDK so readily is because as a long-time developer who looks at almost everything that comes down the pike, I think it does a disservice to new people to feed them a load of crap about how bad this or that thing is.

Nothing is perfect, but in general for 2D game development you’ll be productive - FASTER - with Corona SDK than with just about anything.

And for people to miss out on that because some people think the price is too high, or because device builds require an online connection, etc., is just wrong.

 Jay

#4

I appreciate your position Jay, even if I don’t appreciate Corona’s.  My position is fairly clearly stated too:

I’m not a cash machine for Corona to harvest at will. $600 is a big boy price.  Time to grow up and not require users to pay year in, and year out.  Develop a decent product, support the hell out of it, and improve it year on year.  Give me a real reason to give another $600 next year.

Native code should be a part of the $600 price.  There’s no justification for the $999 price.

And don’t be just ridiculous…$2500 for 1 year of license?  For that I want dancing girls and…oh nevermind.

Finally, I will not pirate their SDK, so I don’t want to be treated as if I will.  Don’t force me to connect to a build server (and build in a waiting time if I haven’t paid stupid money) simply to enforce this.  That’s simply pathetic.  Even Microsoft only charges $130 when trying to harvest my money.

I was interested and considering purchasing at $345, assuming that I’d be able to build indefinitely with my current environment.  I’d have paid $600, if I could supplement Corona with my own, native, code, also indefinitely.

I can’t picture a way for Corona to justify to me charging $999.  

Their reality distortion field is obviously not quite as strong as they thought.

-Ken

#5

Not sure if you saw the post to which I was replying – my second message, which is admittedly a bit “aggressive”, was aimed at a post that’s no longer there. My initial reply to you was much more calm. :wink:

Yesterday I ran across something interesting…

A year ago (April, 2012) there was a thread in the forums where a bunch of people all agreed that for Corona Labs to have any kind of future they’d have to move away from the build server part of things.

Here we are, a year later. The build server is still there and Corona SDK is being used by more developers than ever.

Let’s say $600 is a big boy price – but the framework is a big boy tool. And the proof is not whether I or anybody else says it is. The proof is in the apps that are being made by professional indies and studios.

Buying tools is a part of any business, and $600 a year is not steep, no matter what kind of business you’re in. Especially for a cross-platform development tool that will save you HOURS of time every project you do.

I’ll admit I’ve (often!) not had $600 laying around that wasn’t earmarked for something else, but if that were the case now, I’d be all over the free version of Corona SDK. Someone may think the $600 edition isn’t worth the money, but I’m not sure how you could say that about the free version. :slight_smile:

 Jay

#6

I did sound aggressive in my email. Sorry about that. It certainly wasn’t targeted towards you. I guess I’m just tired of people (organisations, etc) reaching into my pocket before I’m ready, or giving me less than their best to justify pricing tiers.

For me their pricing tiers are wrong.  That’s not to say they don’t have a tool people can use and that some people will choose to use…just that their pricing structure and insistence upon me using a build server for no discernible reason isn’t compelling.

FWIW, their API seems more approachable than some of the competitors I’ve seen, but that’s not the main feature I’m in the market for…and I’m *definitely* not willing to give up local building and no expiration date on my compiler just to gain a little simplicity.

I can see that with your business being based on selling a tutorial for Corona, it’s in your interest to promote that simplicity…but equally, I guess I’m not your target demographic either.

I’m looking for a way to build things that work fast, that gives me a development speed improvement over coding in ObjectiveC/Java, yet still allows access to the native environment, and will not expire.

Since I’m willing to invest that time to gain flexibility and control, I might as well save the money I would have spent with Corona for the pro version.  

No thanks.  Their value proposition doesn’t make sense to me when there are other alternatives that offer the things I want, for the same low price of free.

-Ken

#7

“I can see that with your business being based on selling a tutorial for Corona, it’s in your interest to promote that simplicity…but equally, I guess I’m not your target demographic either.”

I don’t usually swear, but I’m yelling FUCK right now because my opinion only means something if I don’t have a stake? I’m not biased because I make tutorials – I make tutorials for Corona SDK because it’s the best option available. 

So here…

I’m telling everyone right now – do NOT buy my tutorials. Get your information free from YouTube, or StackOverflow, or here in the forums – don’t buy my tutorials.

Now that that’s out of the way, I’m *still* saying Corona SDK is the best way to get a 2D mobile game up and running. Fastest code? No. Most features? Probably not. Can do everything? No. Overall fastest time to market with a *good* amount of computing power? Absolutely the best, hands down.

Jay

#8

Hi Jay, Ken,

Just to clarify, I want to make it clear that the removed post (in which you responded to, Jay) was not removed because it was “anti-Corona”… that is not our policy in any way whatsoever. If there’s any confusion about our policy on that, please read last week’s blog post about the updated forum rules and guidelines.

http://www.coronalabs.com/blog/2013/04/02/corona-forum-rules-and-guidelines/

The reason it was removed is because there is clear evidence that a single person (or perhaps two) were using 7 or more aliases/accounts to post comments that were disruptive and added nothing to the discussions or the community. The individual(s) in question have been doing this for months now, and it was tolerated. Recently, it devolved into personal attacks, among other things; he/she/they were fairly warned, cautioned, and yet still persisted, so all accounts were banned and any new accounts by the same individual(s) will be as well.

Anyway, that aside… Ken, of course you are free to use whatever platform suits your needs. I am just a little confused why a “build server” is a potential deal breaker for you. This has always been the method behind Corona. The process takes (usually) between 20-60 seconds, and it’s not a process that you will perform repeatedly every time you make a change to your code. Many developers code and test in the Corona Simulator and actually build a project a few times per day. Now, I won’t claim that’s the case for all developers, but in general, building is not required every few minutes just to test minor changes in your project.

As for “easing” you into the SDK, this is why Corona Starter was opened up as totally free to everybody, with a solid foundation and a solid feature set. We’re not trying to “reach into your pocket before you’re ready”… in fact, we would welcome you to try out the SDK before you pay. Put an app into market. See how you like the SDK. Determine if it meets your needs. If it does, then continue using it, and at some point if you wish to upgrade to Pro and have the need to, then I would say “you’re ready”. :slight_smile:

Again, it’s up to you. If native coding is your desire/need, so be it. If you wish to tackle the steep learning curve of Moai or Unity, then that is your prerogative. I just wanted to clarify the stance of Corona and the pricing changes.

Take care,

Brent Sorrentino

#9

Hi Jay, 

I must have touched a nerve.  No offence intended. Best of luck with things.

Brent, thanks for chiming in.

As I said, I won’t have my development process dictated by a dodgy internet connection/needing to be connected to the internet, unless there’s a clear reason that benefits me. It’s simply not stable enough, no matter whether I want to compile once a week or every 5 minutes. Since there’s no /real/ reason its necessary it’s simply a sales requirement, and that clearly rubs me the wrong way.  

Adding the ‘upgrade to not have to wait x seconds’ is just an insult.

If it’s really for piracy, use the ‘activate once before use’ model. Don’t put the sting in the end of the tail and get me every time I want to compile for the device (where I have to wait x seconds). 

I appreciate the free version of the SDK.  It’s what has allowed me to try Corona in the first place.

Unfortunately for me, the way your organisation has structured things that’s simply hooking me into an SDK before demanding money from me.  

The way apps are built these days, you do need to have In App Purchase, and I’ve already explained my resistance to the build-server concept and my desire to have the ability for native code.

That means that when I would need to make the inevitable switch, I’d be at the $999 version (and I’m not clear that that removes the build server requirement).  As that simply doesn’t make any sense, all I can do is wish you guys the best of luck.

If you get rid of the build server requirement, and drop your prices a tier, then please do give me a call.

-Ken

#10

@Ken: I believe that if you are interested in Enterprise you can test it for a month or so. Furthermore my internet connection is very bad and sometimes unstable too. But I still manage to get some daily builds up and running in time.

Even though my upload speed is 40kb/s at max - and this in enough to finish my builds in less than a minute(!).

I would suggest you to wait until Corona has finished and released project Gluon and Graphics 2.0 (Pro/Enterprise exclusive!). Gluon might give you what you are missing right now :wink:

Just my 89 (euro-) cents :slight_smile:

  • Max
#11

Hi Max,

It’s not a question of speed.  I’ve got an acceptable 8MB internet line, when it’s working. Once the mandatory wait of 18-19 seconds of up-sell passed, then the build happened quite quickly for both Android and iOS. I didn’t time it but certainly less than 15-20 seconds.

It’s not even clear what’s being done when the “Build server” is invoked.  I suspect that there’s no a lot of  “build” in that “server”.  There’s presumably a lot of us (and a lot of computing power on our end) compared with a limited amount of Corona Labs (and limited computer power comparatively speaking on their end).  From a technical standpoint, it would make sense to do all the heavy lifting on the customer’s computer, and only give final blessing on the server side.

Of course, since it’s not clear what happens during that time…(I’m sure it’s not any of these things, but just as an example of what I could imagine) the source code could be posted on a web server, saved as proof of what you’re up to for later law enforcement scrutiny, the source could be shown to the design department and examined for good ideas that could be lifted and put into their own games, etc.  Who knows?

Again, I’m sure NONE of these are the case!  A company would have to be mad to try any of those…this is me truly stretching possibility into farce to make a point: we simply don’t know what’s going on there.

In fact, if I am correct (by no means a guarantee) that nothing happens from a “build server” except a sales effort and a piracy defence mechanism, then Corona would never want to admit in public.  Because then they’d have to admit they are actually wasting the developer’s time each and every time the developer compiles for no other reason than to try to up-sell them.

So, when working in this way, I’ve constantly got the sales team from Corona jumping in front of me every few seconds saying “UPSELL!”  Every time I start the simulator in the free version, I get the “upgrade now” message.  Easy enough to dismiss, but when I’m dreaming of the architecture of my app, and trying to learn the SDK, it’s jarring.  The “build server” message simply gives them another chance to get in my way to up-sell me again.

I find that irritating, frustrating and insulting, and the fact that they will soon want $600 per year for the privilege, in an environment that doesn’t allow native code, unacceptable.

Even if they were the only game in town, I’d be unhappy with it, but might still go along.  

The fact that there are other games in town for rapid cross platform mobile development (moai, appcelerator, LiveCode, MoSync, PhoneGap, Monkey) make it ridiculous.  Considering almost all of these can target more than just iOS and Android, I wonder if they’ve really thought about their value proposition?

-Ken

#12

Hey Ken,

I do unterstand your points. As far as I know the build servers are required in order to “convert” the lua code into objective-c. This might be done on our machines as well but as you already said it could be just an anti-piracy thing.

A few weeks earlier my “Indie” subscription was about to expire and I got an “Renew your license now” (or something like that) alert everytime I started the simulator even though I had upgraded to “Pro” already.

Things like this are really annoying but not deal-breaking (for me). I would like to see an official statement about the build-servers even though I remember having read such a (blog-) post in early 2011…

At this moment the only difference between “Starter” and “Pro” are IAP and the little advertising when you try to build for a device. I do not need IAP right now and I just make a few builds per day so this would not disturb me.

There are a few features missing in comparison to other engines and I hope to see more information about graphics 2.0 in the very near future.

But what I can say from my experience is that Corona´s real strength is the community. There are other 2D frameworks, but even also LUA-based ones are not as easy and beginner-friendly as Corona.

There are many features that has been announced a long time ago but are still missing or not prioritized right now, you are right. But I hope that this time is over :wink:

  • Max
#13

Hey Ken - thanks for all the comments. Here are some responses/comments:

  1. Server builds - let me be clear, this is not a “sales tactic” or a “piracy prevention scheme”. There is real work happening on our servers. This architecture actually has let us be more nimble over the years as we don’t always have to make client changes when something changes in the target build platforms. So there are real reasons behind why it was built this way.

Furthermore, we have always been very clear about what gets sent to our servers. We convert your code into bytecode and send that up. We do not send up any assets (e.g., images) or raw code. Once the building takes place on the server, everything is deleted and we do not keep anything up there. We never look at your raw code. Period. No need to make up scenarios here :slight_smile:

You’ve made it clear you find this part of Corona annoying and not to your liking. That is fine. We hear this from time to time, probably about 1 person per month roughly. We think it gives us a number of advantages, so the benefits vastly outweigh the negatives. Now, there are companies that have compliance requirements that require offline builds and for them we have Corona Enterprise.

  1. Price and value proposition - The value proposition of Corona is clear: you will build great apps quickly and efficiently, especially if you need to go cross-platform (on the platforms that count today). If you value your time highly, each hour counts. And the hours you will save with Corona make it worth it. If you value other things very highly (e.g., a full open source solution) then your priorities may be different, and that’s fine. Or you may enjoy the challenge of other platforms and not mind the extra time. That is fine too. But lots of developers use Corona and have no problem paying for it.

David

#14

Hi David,

Thanks for writing back.  

If it happens once a month, you’re probably tired of answering the same questions.

I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree here.  

Corona sees value in using a build server, where I do not.

Corona feels that the value proposition, even at $600/$999, is competitive because “it’s possible to build solutions so much faster than the competition”. Perhaps it’s time to review the competition.

After reviewing several other packages, it looks like I’m going to be using Monkey.

Using an object-oriented BASIC language, it gets points for simplicity/speed of development.

It translates BASIC into various languages (std-c++(desktops), Html 5, Flash, Objective-c, java (android), c# (XNA (xbox)).

Since it’s native, the speed can be pretty phenomenal, and can be tweaked to take advantage of the development tools offered on the various platforms.

The bulk of it is open source, so if there’s a problem that they aren’t fixing fast enough, I can have a go and tell the world about it.

I still get the source code to the part that is proprietary, I just can’t disseminate it myself.

Building happens on my local machine, so no network hassles.

I costs £85, including VAT here in the UK, for lifetime access to updates.

-Ken

#15

You can get offline builds with the Enterprise edition ($999-$2499 per year). I don’t believe CL will ever NOT require online builds for the Starter and Pro editions – I’m pretty sure they use it as a way to combat piracy 9and there may be tech reasons, too).

If it’s a deal breaker, you’ll have to find another framework – or upgrade to Enterprise.

However, after your copy of Corona SDK is registered you don’t need to be online for development – the build servers only come into play when you’re doing a build for device. But “normal” dev work with the simulator? Being online isn’t required for that.

 Jay

#16

That the build server is required is fact. That Moai and Gideros give you a lot more is opinion. That Corona is now seen largely as a low-end product like GameSalad is just inane. 

If I still lived on the road I *might* switch to something else because of the build servers, but since that’s only required when doing a device build - and since every coffee shop in the free world (and most of the unfree world) has wifi – I’ll bet I could get by just fine.

People throw out “Moai” as something to compare to Corona and it’s not even in the same ballpark. I *love* Moai and expect to use it for a project at some point, but you can not compare the two – unless you’re willing to compare everything, and not just that one is open source and one isn’t. Everybody says, “Moai is free!” but you never hear them say, “The learning curve is a freakin’ cliff!”

Before “Daniel” comes in and accuses me again of being a Corona lapdog and a paid shill, the reason I defend Corona SDK so readily is because as a long-time developer who looks at almost everything that comes down the pike, I think it does a disservice to new people to feed them a load of crap about how bad this or that thing is.

Nothing is perfect, but in general for 2D game development you’ll be productive - FASTER - with Corona SDK than with just about anything.

And for people to miss out on that because some people think the price is too high, or because device builds require an online connection, etc., is just wrong.

 Jay

#17

I appreciate your position Jay, even if I don’t appreciate Corona’s.  My position is fairly clearly stated too:

I’m not a cash machine for Corona to harvest at will. $600 is a big boy price.  Time to grow up and not require users to pay year in, and year out.  Develop a decent product, support the hell out of it, and improve it year on year.  Give me a real reason to give another $600 next year.

Native code should be a part of the $600 price.  There’s no justification for the $999 price.

And don’t be just ridiculous…$2500 for 1 year of license?  For that I want dancing girls and…oh nevermind.

Finally, I will not pirate their SDK, so I don’t want to be treated as if I will.  Don’t force me to connect to a build server (and build in a waiting time if I haven’t paid stupid money) simply to enforce this.  That’s simply pathetic.  Even Microsoft only charges $130 when trying to harvest my money.

I was interested and considering purchasing at $345, assuming that I’d be able to build indefinitely with my current environment.  I’d have paid $600, if I could supplement Corona with my own, native, code, also indefinitely.

I can’t picture a way for Corona to justify to me charging $999.  

Their reality distortion field is obviously not quite as strong as they thought.

-Ken

#18

Not sure if you saw the post to which I was replying – my second message, which is admittedly a bit “aggressive”, was aimed at a post that’s no longer there. My initial reply to you was much more calm. :wink:

Yesterday I ran across something interesting…

A year ago (April, 2012) there was a thread in the forums where a bunch of people all agreed that for Corona Labs to have any kind of future they’d have to move away from the build server part of things.

Here we are, a year later. The build server is still there and Corona SDK is being used by more developers than ever.

Let’s say $600 is a big boy price – but the framework is a big boy tool. And the proof is not whether I or anybody else says it is. The proof is in the apps that are being made by professional indies and studios.

Buying tools is a part of any business, and $600 a year is not steep, no matter what kind of business you’re in. Especially for a cross-platform development tool that will save you HOURS of time every project you do.

I’ll admit I’ve (often!) not had $600 laying around that wasn’t earmarked for something else, but if that were the case now, I’d be all over the free version of Corona SDK. Someone may think the $600 edition isn’t worth the money, but I’m not sure how you could say that about the free version. :slight_smile:

 Jay

#19

I did sound aggressive in my email. Sorry about that. It certainly wasn’t targeted towards you. I guess I’m just tired of people (organisations, etc) reaching into my pocket before I’m ready, or giving me less than their best to justify pricing tiers.

For me their pricing tiers are wrong.  That’s not to say they don’t have a tool people can use and that some people will choose to use…just that their pricing structure and insistence upon me using a build server for no discernible reason isn’t compelling.

FWIW, their API seems more approachable than some of the competitors I’ve seen, but that’s not the main feature I’m in the market for…and I’m *definitely* not willing to give up local building and no expiration date on my compiler just to gain a little simplicity.

I can see that with your business being based on selling a tutorial for Corona, it’s in your interest to promote that simplicity…but equally, I guess I’m not your target demographic either.

I’m looking for a way to build things that work fast, that gives me a development speed improvement over coding in ObjectiveC/Java, yet still allows access to the native environment, and will not expire.

Since I’m willing to invest that time to gain flexibility and control, I might as well save the money I would have spent with Corona for the pro version.  

No thanks.  Their value proposition doesn’t make sense to me when there are other alternatives that offer the things I want, for the same low price of free.

-Ken

#20

“I can see that with your business being based on selling a tutorial for Corona, it’s in your interest to promote that simplicity…but equally, I guess I’m not your target demographic either.”

I don’t usually swear, but I’m yelling FUCK right now because my opinion only means something if I don’t have a stake? I’m not biased because I make tutorials – I make tutorials for Corona SDK because it’s the best option available. 

So here…

I’m telling everyone right now – do NOT buy my tutorials. Get your information free from YouTube, or StackOverflow, or here in the forums – don’t buy my tutorials.

Now that that’s out of the way, I’m *still* saying Corona SDK is the best way to get a 2D mobile game up and running. Fastest code? No. Most features? Probably not. Can do everything? No. Overall fastest time to market with a *good* amount of computing power? Absolutely the best, hands down.

Jay