How NOT to monetise your software: Constructive criticism inside.

[slikvik 2]

So that this criticism isn't instantly dismissed, I'm a 42 year old commercial software development manager of 18 years. Frankly, I can't believe the mess you've made of the commercial aspects of Emby, which is a shame as the actual software is fantastic! - slick, robust and well designed.

 

I've always used Kodi to access my media libraries and have PC's, Android phones, 2 Fire TVs and a Roku. I recently purchased an LG TV and given that Emby (and Plex) are available on this and all my family's devices I decided to move over to a proper client server application. I looked at the site and was happy that I don't need the premiere features yet (yes I saw the "Free Apps" - more on that later). So I spent three evenings installing the server, getting it configured just right and installing the app on my LG, Fire TVs and Roku. The whole experience (commercially) has just sprung disappointment after disappointment at me and I've now pretty much decided to just bin the whole thing.

 

First thing I noticed after running the Fire TV versions was that it was locked after 15 days even for the basic function of playing may own media unless I unlocked it or subscribed. I could not find the "Unlock" so off I wonder to Google where I then find that my Android versions are also on a trial (despite the Android app not warning me like Fire TV app does.) I finally find the unlock on the Fire TV and say to myself, "OK that's not too expensive, I'll pay for that on my Fire TV devices when everything is setup". Unfortunately I am completely unable to find the Unlock on the Android version!

 

Meanwhile the Roku version seems fine and completely free. So after deciding to give you guys four paid App unlocks for the Fire TVs and Androids, I trot off downstairs to actually use the App on my LG. First video I click on pops-up with a nag screen for 15 seconds before I can play my video! Even worse, the LG App doesn't offer a one off unlock, so the only thing it offers me is to subscribe to Premiere! How lucky I hadn't just gone and paid to unlock the other four devices.

 

You guys really need to A) get your business model straight and B ) make it AS CLEAR AS POSSIBLE, what that business model is.

 

To summarise:

 

The details of Premiere show "Free Apps" when the rest of the website, and the App stores on LG, Roku, Fire TV etc all show them as Free. This is easily passed by as "well of course I get the free apps".

(I appreciate the Apps have to be Free on the stores for subscribers and I'll get to that later. That isn't the complaint).

 

The website doesn't state anywhere what is and isn't available on the Apps, what needs unlocking and how much it is.

 

The Fire TV App has an Unlock (which is also hard to find).

 

The Android App supposedly has an Unlock but I can't find it, nor is it warning me.

 

The Roku doesn't need an Unlock.

 

The LG nags me but doesn't provide an unlock, only a subscription, thus rendering the other unlocks pointless!

 

Can you not see what an absolutely mess of (what I believe are purposeful) obfuscation, conflicting pricing models and bad in-App implementations???

 

To add to this, the subscription model is a bad idea. It works for companies like Netflix who provide content monthly and it works for SAAS where the infrastructure is weighed heavily towards the supplier. You're neither of these! We provide our own servers for god sake. I know Plex do it (and it's just as bad) but you do not overtake the market leader by copying what they're doing price wise - even more so when it's a bad idea to start with. Not to mention that it's way too expensive even if you do stick with it.

 

Looking through all the complaints on here I'm clearly not alone and I would listen to them regardless of the people that come to defend your position (some people just like to argue for the sake of it - we all know people like that!). You are losing money with this business model, I can almost guarantee it. I know you've now probably got "money men" involved at this point, but you need to have a word with them in the strongest possible terms. In it's current form you have definitely lost money from me. How many more wouldn't even bother to spend an hour writing to tell you!?

 

Here's what I strongly recommend you do:

 

First off, get rid of those ^$"&!(@ nag screens! That was the final straw for me. They almost never work. You sell to customers by offering to improve their life, not by purposely ruining their life and offering to stop! Research shows this.

 

On the downloads page, show clearly what is and isn't available in each app for free, what is unlocked and how much the unlock costs.

 

On the Premiere page, reword "Free Apps" to "Access to all Apps, fully unlocked" or something along those lines. You get my drift.

 

Make the unlock feature in the Fire TV more obvious in the App and make the wording on the App store itself much clearer. THIS APP IS ESSENTIALLY USELESS IN ITS FREE FORM. 

 

Does the Android App even HAVE an Unlock??? If so, apply the same recommendations as per the Fire TV app above. (If it doesn't require an unlock, GREAT. Don't add one if it's already free!)

 

Create some consistency in your Apps. I get that you're charging for the ones you CAN charge for because their App store services allow you to do in app purchases e.g. Amazon and Google, but the ones that don't, need to be free, full stop. Why is the LG nagging but the Roku not? Make the free apps actually free and just swallow it.

 

Lastly, bin this subscription model. It doesn't fit and is too expensive for what you provide. Anything over two years starts to look awful for the customer. Offer a free version and a paid for version, no more than $50. State clearly what you get for each one in a table. It's not like 1000s upon 1000s of other companies don't work with this model with few complaints! Something like this: https://www.launchbox-app.com/premium

 

So...

 

Two types of server - Free and $50

Two types of App - Free full versions - NOT GIMPED (LG, Roku etc) OR Ones that you only get free with the paid server or can unlock for the free server (Amazon TV)

 

I welcome your feedback but I can't say how strongly I feel that this would make you more money AND help you gain ground on Plex. PM if you prefer.

 

Regards

Edited December 3, 2017 by slikvik

[dee1 3]

Interesting post, I have a question: if I buy the app for Emby that will work on all my FireTV players?  I reached out and asked for a trial to simply configure the software.  I write software and have done so for a long time.  I could have branched and gone it alone but wanted something stable and wanted to enjoy entertainment instead of constantly tweaking it.  I wish that the app was more focused on a player or another, doing one thing very well is probably better than trying to do many things and not doing any of them excellent.  I felt that it was worth looking into as silicon dust though not ridiculous in their DVR costs was still asking me to pay for info that is free.. However their software is idiot proof and runs without errors.  There is allot of rough edges here.   Then there is Plex which has to do a proprietary format of libraries which I'm not impressed with, additionally with adequate players it is cheaper in my opinion to spend the money on buying a capable player than trying to trans code everything, I don't want to trans-code and really avoid that. If I want to burn cpu's I'd bitcoin, I'm watching tv.. 

 

If I had any reasonable and constructive criticism it would be the walk-through of the security setup and the implications of the setup. 

 

I got an agreement to have the $ refunded after signup with Paypal, I'm not asking for the money back as I feel that software met allot of my feature list in respect to users and access.   The granularity of allowing the right account and access was there.  But the licensing should be by feature as you point out, I'm interested in FireTV only.   

 

I have turned off automatic updates, do not use the silicon dust tuners with the product and just recently received the "beggar screens" which are a term from shareware, but the in-app advertising isn't what anybody wants and why so many are cutting the cord and stripping commercials.   

My suggestion would be:

 

x amount for firetv license

x amount for 3 license

x amount for 5 license

 

It is as if the security of the product and the manner in which that conjuncture occurs is where that paying for it becomes an issue and for the $100 I could just go get a player that doesn't require trans-coding or damn near buy a tuner that does it!

 

Maybe the price of the software competes too closely with hardware that makes it unnecessary?

 

Then finally the searching of media libraries that is where the product really falls down, the limit on search.. is where the true product limit is.

 

I didn't find the ops and people here unreasonable, thought the offer was fair, not requesting a refund, see some good and some bad..  but in respect to a solution I'm going to be spending the $ for more DVR support from Silicon Dust.

 

If you check my posts you will see I clearly documented how to do the XML tv here, and the security concerns as well, also my observations that the format was consistent with Kodi

 

I'll probably keep the software and use it for NFO generation which is god awful slow and see how the product evolves.. 

 

But I'm not ready to toss lifetime license with no road-map of feature.  I cut the cord to get out of recurring charges, not replace them.

 

One to ten i'd say a 7, mixed.. with rough edges 

The Halloween thing until I turned it off.. not a fan..

I like linux and stability, dancing icons and in-app stuff.. not so much

 

In closing I demand to be paid for my work, I do not work for free, I'm not asking for the trial $ back.

Carefully test and configure and don't be a buttwhole.. nobody is twisting anyone's arm to use or buy anything

 

But to dust's credit.. they have a roadmap 

 

1 concurrent license = 5 bucks

3 concurrent = 10

5 concurrent = 15 bucks

per app.. I'd pop for that

 

But I have no idea where this product is heading and I want a flat cost structure.

ServerWMC, XMLTV, and Kodi is looking more stable

Edited December 2, 2017 by dee1

[Bert 49]

I am not a developer just a long time user. I am not here to argue with you either. Just wanted to make a few points. Subscriptions are basically now the norm and while as an end user I don't like it, I see why companies choose to do this. The product is never finished and so developers continue to cost money. Almost every software has gone this route from MS to Adobe to Quickbooks. Could you not just pay $4.99 for a month and see if you like it? As far as I can tell, this would unlock everything and seems pretty paltry. Then you'd have the option to purchase a lifetime license as I have. Personally I think the lifetime license is a good deal relative to the cost of other software in general.

 

You using your own media and own server is irrelevant. This software is continuously developing and as previously stated that costs money. None of the other mentioned companies provide content nor servers and nobody expects them to.

 

Personally if it were my decision I'd offer a 30 day free ride so people can make up there mind but that's irrelevant because it's not my software. Some of the fragmentation you are seeing is due to the software starting out as a community project. Currently there are still apps developed by users and how to compensate them while this is also someone's full time job is difficult to balance I'm sure. While I understand your frustration, it seems 5 bucks would basically end it so I have a hard time empathising.

[slikvik 2]

Some points...

 

No, "Almost every software" has not gone to subscription. Not even close. They tend to do subscription when they move to a SAAS model, which Emby is not. Even your example of Quickbooks isn't accurate. You can still buy a Windows Desktop version or Quickbooks for £118. The monthly version is for Quickbooks Online. I fully expect a monthly charge for the latter, not for the former. Emby is like the former. Adobe is actually the exception and was duly noted in the industry. Take these two examples that I actively use: https://www.jriver.com and https://www.launchbox-app.com. Both are similar products, from similar sized companies with active communities which the the developers are part of (unlike the big corporations you mentioned). Neither of these do a monthly fee. By all means charge a larger fee for a lifetime license (like LaunchBox) or just do traditional versions & upgrades (like JRiver.) 

 

This is not like paying £9 a month for WoW because of all the servers they're running or Netflix distributing movies or a cloud based app. This is like Kodi or Media Portal or Media Monkey or JRiver or LaunchBox or any other "desktop" based products.

 

5 bucks may not be a lot of money in and itself but it's all relative. It's 5 bucks recurring, every month, for software that you host yourself using your media. Even if you are paying for (hopefully) active updates, you have no choice of freezing at a feature set and deciding that you no longer need to upgrade. This should be a possibility with software sitting on your devices, when the company isn't having to pay infrastructure to host the software.

 

$119 for the lifetime license is too much in my opinion - and it is just my opinion so I'm not willing to pay it and I'm guessing a lot of other people wont either. Like I said, I have no problem paying for the apps with a one-off fee. It also is a small point and doesn't address the other 90% of my post....

 

...Which was that none of it is documented well (the price of the apps etc), some of it is contradictory (I could have unlocked an app and then STILL needed the sub because of the LG app) and some of it is just plan annoying (the nag screens).

 

EDIT: Look, in addition to my other complaints in bold, I'm not saying that people WONT see the value preposition, I'm saying - in my experience - that more people will see the value proposition if done differently, actually make more profit and create a larger user base (which is just as important)!

 

More importantly, in my searching the forums to find out how the hell the pricing all works (something which you shouldn't have to do with software like this), I came across page after page of complaints about the business model and the app pricing design. I've frequented the forums on JRiver and LaunchBox for years and have never seen anything of the sort. That should set alarm bells ringing that their MAY be a case against the current system.

Edited December 2, 2017 by slikvik

[dee1 3]

I am not a developer just a long time user. I am not here to argue with you either. Just wanted to make a few points. Subscriptions are basically now the norm and while as an end user I don't like it, I see why companies choose to do this. The product is never finished and so developers continue to cost money. Almost every software has gone this route from MS to Adobe to Quickbooks. Could you not just pay $4.99 for a month and see if you like it? As far as I can tell, this would unlock everything and seems pretty paltry. Then you'd have the option to purchase a lifetime license as I have. Personally I think the lifetime license is a good deal relative to the cost of other software in general.

 

You using your own media and own server is irrelevant. This software is continuously developing and as previously stated that costs money. None of the other mentioned companies provide content nor servers and nobody expects them to.

 

Personally if it were my decision I'd offer a 30 day free ride so people can make up there mind but that's irrelevant because it's not my software. Some of the fragmentation you are seeing is due to the software starting out as a community project. Currently there are still apps developed by users and how to compensate them while this is also someone's full time job is difficult to balance I'm sure. While I understand your frustration, it seems 5 bucks would basically end it so I have a hard time empathising.

I was looking at the changelog on Kodi and version 18 and it is moving towards gaming, I see the OS specific changes etc.. 

What I would like to see is a roadmap or outline of what are priorities that will be tackled.

Just an epic outline of what is a priority in respect to feature and direction.

 

I agree the money will not break the bank, but the trial period isn't adequate to go through the feature setup, even if you are very good with system integration.

There are allot of systems like Ubuntu, Oracle, and many other vendors who do not cripple software, this of course is designed for corporate usage and as such this product is targeted elsewhere

A large part of the problem is paywalls.. I as an example on't want to adjust the lip-sync of my TV and use software that avoids that.. to charge for the DVR software?   hmmmm 

This cradle to grave monetizing schemes and leaking of personal information is getting blowback

CATV is collapsing because the idea that you pay for commercials isn't sustainable.   I'd rather record and strip them with reliable tools.

somewhere in all of this is the consumer

 

I didn't get an answer on concurrency or bundle pricing, the request or option is the way Amazon wants it.

I don't want ads, trackers, cookies, or commercials.  I'll not pay for it.

 

I bet there is a direct correlation between spot-ads increase and the decrease in live sports coverage

American football is dying because they stop the game periodically to throw ads at you

Soccer and Hockey growing...

 

If you think the consumer hasn't made their minds up on this your mistaken

[dee1 3]

Some points...

 

No, "Almost every software" has not gone to subscription. Not even close. They tend to do subscription when they move to a SAAS model, which Emby is not. Even your example of Quickbooks isn't accurate. You can still buy a Windows Desktop version or Quickbooks for £118. The monthly version is for Quickbooks Online. I fully expect a monthly charge for the latter, not for the former. Emby is like the former. Adobe is actually the exception and was duly noted in the industry. Take these two examples that I actively use: https://www.jriver.com and https://www.launchbox-app.com. Both are similar products, from similar sized companies with active communities which the the developers are part of (unlike the big corporations you mentioned). Neither of these do a monthly fee. By all means charge a larger fee for a lifetime license (like LaunchBox) or just do traditional versions & upgrades (like JRiver.) 

 

This is not like paying £9 a month for WoW because of all the servers they're running or Netflix distributing movies or a cloud based app. This is like Kodi or Media Portal or Media Monkey or JRiver or LaunchBox or any other "desktop" based products.

 

5 bucks may not be a lot of money in and itself but it's all relative. It's 5 bucks recurring, every month, for software that you host yourself using your media. Even if you are paying for (hopefully) active updates, you have no choice of freezing at a feature set and deciding that you no longer need to upgrade. This should be a possibility with software sitting on your devices, when the company isn't having to pay infrastructure to host the software.

 

$119 for the lifetime license is too much in my opinion - and it is just my opinion so I'm not willing to pay it and I'm guessing a lot of other people wont either. Like I said, I have no problem paying for the apps with a one-off fee. It also is a small point and doesn't address the other 90% of my post....

 

...Which was that none of it is documented well (the price of the apps etc), some of it is contradictory (I could have unlocked an app and then STILL needed the sub because of the LG app) and some of it is just plan annoying (the nag screens).

http://windowsreport.com/media-center-software-windows/

Good rundown.. but there are trade offs on all of these systems

 

If you are going to ask $5 for the FireTv app and only have 20 items in the search limit well.. uhm 

Again everybody wants something different.

Let me be clear I wanted to see where the system supported or failed at FireTV

I'm not impressed with Roku  due to their requirement for trans-coding.. never ever really was smooth unless you bought subscribed to commercial content

The FireTV will run off of a tuner without trans-coding 

 

There is hundreds of shows of sinefeld and it was the search that made the product not a fit

Not the library support, not the rest.. where it really failed was there, especially if this isn't the first rodeo with this technology

And then Kodi was getting clobbered and blamed for all the piracy and Bezos hates free

so where is the best alternative?  well that is different for each person, but if you have a large library this product due to search will disapoint

[slikvik 2]

@@dee1 I can't help but think your posts should be in their own thread. I have no issues with the quality of the software, it's features, or (for the most part) the actual price. My post is simply to discuss 3 main points:

 

• The clarity of the website regarding pricing/features.
• The business model.
• The contradiction in the various paywalls.

[Bert 49]

Again I'm not going to argue but I buy Quickbooks and after three years have to buy a new version because they cripple importing from banks. Additionally some banks charge a subscription on top of it for the privilege of importing my own banking data. Point being there are a lot of ways to monetize software and they all seem to go their own direction. Again I have no stake in Emby and own a lifetime license. I think it's fair that users help pay for the development, obviously you don't. I think it's also important to recognize this is a limited audience software as lots of my friends wouldn't take the time to set it up in the first place so this in itself limits the monetary potential.

[slikvik 2]

You're making a very edge case with the bank thing, but again, it's not a subscription. You simply choose whether you upgrade to a new version or not, which I already stated would be fine in my opinion here:

 

 Neither of these do a monthly fee. By all means charge a larger fee for a lifetime license (like LaunchBox) or just do traditional versions & upgrades (like JRiver.) 

 

 

 I think it's fair that users help pay for the development, obviously you don't.

 

I'm not sure where you got that from?! I spent the time writing a big post about various issues, mostly not even pertaining to the overall value of someones software but regarding the implementation, and instead you're focusing on one small point and completely misrepresenting what I said. Out of the 7 recommendations I made only one was about the subscription model and none of them suggested that the developers shouldn't be paid for their work, nor that I wasn't willing to pay for Emby! I even stated I was about to pay for four unlocks.

Edited December 2, 2017 by slikvik

[Deathsquirrel 745]

Lots of people like the subscription model.  It lets them use the product for a limited time and decide if they want lifetime licenses.  There is no reason to drop it just because one person that seems disinclined to pay at all thinks a few bucks a month is unreasonable.

 

I'm hazy on what incentive there is to set prices based on the opinions of non-customers is.  Guess that's my sales background talking though.

[Bert 49]

I agree and regardless of your other seven points they can all be fixed for $5. You can't even by a value meal at McDonald's for 5 bucks. At the end of the day you can call it whatever you want but its all that you don't want to pay....Also,it took you 3 evenings to set it up? And you write software for a living? I just don't see how that could be.

[slikvik 2]

I think it's fair that users help pay for the development, obviously you don't. 

 

 

...just because one person that seems disinclined to pay at all

 

Seriously, you too?

 

Are you lot actually incapable of reading what someone writes? Not only have you both focused on only ONE part of what I wrote, but you've BOTH completely and utterly failed to even understand that ONE point you seem so obsessed with. Christ! If I'm coming across rude (now) it's because I don't appreciate being misrepresented as someone who doesn't want to give developers money when I've spent the last 18 years doing it and because I'm more than capable of reading snark and sarcasm when I see it: "I'm hazy on what incentive there is to set prices based on the opinions of non-customers is.  Guess that's my sales background talking though."

 

Two types of server - Free and $50

Two types of App - Free full versions - NOT GIMPED (LG, Roku etc) OR Ones that you only get free with the paid server or can unlock for the free server (Amazon TV)

 

How is that "not willing to pay"?

 

What about my other points that HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SUBSCRIPTION MODEL:

 

• First off, get rid of those ^$"&!(@ nag screens! That was the final straw for me. They almost never work. You sell to customers by offering to improve their life, not by purposely ruining their life and offering to stop! Research shows this.
• On the downloads page, show clearly what is and isn't available in each app for free, what is unlocked and how much the unlock costs.
• On the Premiere page, reword "Free Apps" to "Access to all Apps, fully unlocked" or something along those lines. You get my drift.
• Make the unlock feature in the Fire TV more obvious in the App and make the wording on the App store itself much clearer. THIS APP IS ESSENTIALLY USELESS IN ITS FREE FORM. 
• Does the Android App even HAVE an Unlock??? If so, apply the same recommendations as per the Fire TV app above. (If it doesn't require an unlock, GREAT. Don't add one if it's already free!)
• Create some consistency in your Apps. I get that you're charging for the ones you CAN charge for because their App store services allow you to do in app purchases e.g. Amazon and Google, but the ones that don't, need to be free, full stop. Why is the LG nagging but the Roku not? Make the free apps actually free and just swallow it.

Do you think they have NO merit at all? Nothing worth discussing there? No room for improvement? No??

 

If you can't see any value in a business speaking to non-customers, I don't care much for your sales background. 

 

I'd be interested in the Emby's view personally.

Edited December 2, 2017 by slikvik

[slikvik 2]

I agree and regardless of your other seven points they can all be fixed for $5. You can't even by a value meal at McDonald's for 5 bucks. At the end of the day you can call it whatever you want but its all that you don't want to pay....Also,it took you 3 evenings to set it up? And you write software for a living? I just don't see how that could be.

 

Jog on mate. Because I have a full time job and three kids that I actually pay attention to. How long do you think my evenings are? How many clients I had to setup, profiles to create, libraries to configure? 

[Deathsquirrel 745]

Do you think they have NO merit at all? Nothing worth discussing there? No room for improvement? No??

 

No, not no merit at all, just very, very little.  I completely agree that the licensing is more complex than I expect the company would like.  Having been around this product a long time now though, I get how we got where we are.  The licensing scheme was switched part way through the project.  They've made a lot of effort to keep the promises made to the people that bought in initially while implementing a new model with Premiere moving forward.

 

I don't expect it to be before Emby 4.0 is a thing and really, I don't mind that.  I don't see licensing terms and costs as anything like the biggest product issue at the moment.

[JeremyFr79 228]

So a lot of this has been discussed previously in length here in the forums.  Since no ops or developers have chimed in I'll share what I know that will explain a bit of the fracture here.  Not all of the app's are developed by the Emby team directly but by members of the community, these apps are priced/controlled by these shall we say "3rd party" developers.  The rest of the apps are made/controlled by the Emby team.  I won't disagree that it causes a great deal of confusion, the Emby developers are I believe a team of less than 5 people trying to make software that works with a near endless amount of devices etc.  I'm neither defending or complaining but I've been with this software since the Media Browser days and have happily supported the development as compared to other solutions available it is the only one that meets my full needs.  I for one think it's great that they allow others to take on making apps that they may neither have the time or whatever to make.  I use Emby across a wide myriad of devices from chromecasts to Roku, to dedicated HTPC's and everything in between.  Both the Emby team and community developers have worked extremely hard to make a cohesive eco system of app's.  I can tell you from personal experience where Emby is today compared to even a year ago is a huge change.  Sadly with a small team and a community of volunteers development can be a bit longer but I've always found the dev's to be willing to help with issues and add features sometimes in a matter of hours, I can almost guarantee you won't see that from other "commercial" products available out there.  

 

Personally I'd say reach out to the Dev's directly even by PM and have a discussion with them.

 

Have a great day!

[slikvik 2]

@@JeremyFr79 Thanks very much for a considered response!

 

I don't doubt the dedication of the team and their hard work, and I may well PM them directly if they don't reply here. The software really is first-class.

 

I guess if this is discussed quite often on the board then it suggests that some changes could be required? I guess the main thing is that the website does need to be made clearer. It's simple to do and even people that are happy with Emby and it's sub model don't disagree so I'm not sure why they refuse to, unless they like the obfuscation.

 

Regarding the third party devs, I feel transparency is best all round here because something doesn't feel right. Why are these devs happy to lose a potential unlock fee (which they would pocket) if the user is a Premiere subscriber and Emby get these sub fees instead of them? If these 3rd parties control the app and it's pricing then whats to stop them charging the unlock regardless of Premiere subs? I would suggest, as above, that Emby explain on the website which Apps are third party and which aren't - along with the feature sets/price/limitations of each? Not sure why there's push back.

 

Thanks again for replying and have a good day!

[ebr 16172]

The Fire TV App has an Unlock (which is also hard to find).

 

The Android App supposedly has an Unlock but I can't find it, nor is it warning me.

 

I'm interested in why you felt these were hard to find.  There is an unlock button on the "Options" row right on the home screen.  Additionally, if you were beyond your trial period, the app would have sent you directly to the Emby Premiere/Unlock page at any attempt for playback.

 

As for your comments on the confusion, yes, due to many factors including the product evolution, the system is more complex than we would like.  However, we should do a better job of communicating how it works.  To that end, we have just completed a new Emby Premiere section on our Wiki and it includes a feature matrix that lays out which features in which apps are covered by Emby Premiere vs. the single app unlock.

 

Thanks for the feedback.

[slikvik 2]

I hope you do take it as feedback and not just unreasonable ramblings. I'm on Emby's side, honest!

 

I guess I don't see why the need to hide so much of this information, unless you hope people will go "oh sod it, I'll just subscribe anyway". I've just come into work after the weekend and one of my colleagues who I'd recommended your software to on Friday (before I discovered my niggles) had Googled it over the weekend and said he wasn't going to use it because it all it seems a mess. He hasn't even got as far as seeing how brilliant the software is OR that it's "only five bucks" because the word of mouth on the implementation had put him off. And this was my point all along. I DO want to spend money with you and I DO want to see you succeed more than you are, which is why I felt compelled to invest time giving you my thoughts.

 

I'll leave you with some questions, and I'd really appreciate it if you could answer them:

 

1) Why wont you put the feature matrix and/or better details on each App on the main website, rather on a github hosted Wiki?

 

2) Why don't you outline which Apps are "official" apps and which ones's aren't so we can direct thanks/advice/criticism appropriately? If we knew that the Fire TV app is written by someone you have no control over, half this issue goes away.

 

3) If Apps are written by people you seemingly have no control over, why does an app that allows an unlock for £3.50 (for the dev), also offer it for free if when you subscribe (to Emby)? If you DO have control over them, then make the Apps more unified.

 

Thank you for your time, hard work and have a good day.

Edited December 4, 2017 by slikvik

[ebr 16172]

1) Why wont you put the feature matrix and/or better details on each App on the main website, rather on a github hosted Wiki?

 

We will.  It just takes longer to update the web site than it does to update the Wiki and the Wiki is where all of our User documentation lives right now.

 

 

2) Why don't you outline which Apps are "official" apps and which ones's aren't so we can direct thanks/advice/criticism appropriately? If we knew that the Fire TV app is written by someone you have no control over, half this issue goes away.

 

Every "official" app is listed in that matrix.  If it isn't in that matrix, then we don't control it.  There aren't a lot of these but there are a couple.

 

 

3) If Apps are written by people you seemingly have no control over, why does an app that allows an unlock for £3.50 (for the dev), also offer it for free if when you subscribe (to Emby)? If you DO have control over them, then make the Apps more unified.

 

3rd party apps are not unlocked with Emby Premiere.  Only our official ones.

 

Can you please answer my question?  Because I cannot see how it could have been hard to find the unlock option in the Fire TV app once it expired and would like to solve that.  Thanks.

[slikvik 2]

Thanks. 

 

I didn't see the Unlock on the Fire TV because I didn't think to scroll all the way to the bottom to see it? Sounds stupid, and I'm sure I would have noticed it eventually but I was only ever navigating to the Movies or TV Shows row and never went further than that. This is not the position that most other apps have Options. Either way, it's not a big complaint and happy to take responsibility for it, but it would be nice if the apps were a bit more consistent (where possible) in UX.

 

Android app isn't warning me I'm in a trial, nor can I find an unlock option anywhere, by the way.

 

 

Every "official" app is listed in that matrix.  If it isn't in that matrix, then we don't control it.  There aren't a lot of these but there are a couple.

 

3rd party apps are not unlocked with Emby Premiere.  Only our official ones.

 

See, this is what I was worried about. People keep telling me the reason these apps are all different is because they're from 3rd party devs, when they're not. If that's the case why have you created a scenario where I could have spent £14 unlocking four of my Apps (Fire and Android) only to find that the only way to then stop my LG nagging me is to subscribe - at which point I would have got those apps for free as part of the sub anyway?? It's not about the money, it's just about trying to help you guys create a consistent experience that's clear from the get go for new potential customers. By all means take it as me not trying to help because I just like ranting on the net, but I think it's a valid point.

 

That's why my suggestion would be to make the LG app nag free so it matches the other free ones, like the Roku, continue to charge for the apps you are (with a message to suggest maybe subscribing instead) and that's it. 

 

Anyway, I'll leave it there. Sorry if I've pissed you all off and I look forward to the website being updated at least.

Edited December 4, 2017 by slikvik

[ebr 16172]

As for consistency across apps:

 

1) Who is telling you these are all 3rd party?

2) Each app was initially developed to fit in with the environment in which it runs.  e.g. the Android TV app is developed with standard Android TV interface designs so it looks like an Android TV app whereas the Windows app uses more Windows-centric UI methods.  Now, we are striving for consistency in the information presented and basic features but this all takes time.

 

As for letting you know what you are getting with Premiere vs. an unlock, in the Android TV app, after your trial expired, when you attempted playback, you would have been taken to the screen below which attempts to tell you the benefit to choosing Premiere over just unlocking the app.

 

 

Then, when you chose the "unlock app" button, you got an additional message warning you that you would also not get Live TV with that option and giving you the choice to go back and choose Premiere instead.

 

So, we are trying to communicate for people the best options but, obviously, can do better in some areas.

 

Thanks.

[Jdiesel 1431]

@@ebr I may have asked this in the past or read a response to the question elsewhere so I think I may already know the answer but it seems like it would be fitting to the OP's concerns if you could address why individual app unlocks are not managed through the server much like the premiere key is? This way you could unlock all apps like the LG app without being constrained the the devices app store requirements? Or is that the problem in itself, the app store requirements.

 

I can see how it would be frustrating to not be able unlock the LG app when you have already invested money unlocking other individual apps. It should almost be an all or nothing thing when it comes to app unlocks.

Edited December 4, 2017 by Jdiesel

[ebr 16172]

Or is that the problem in itself, the app store requirements.

 

Bingo.

 

These guys are providing an extensive delivery infrastructure for free so they want their cut of the pie if any money is charged.

[Jdiesel 1431]

Bingo.

 

These guys are providing an extensive delivery infrastructure for free so they want their cut of the pie if any money is charged.

 

Thanks that is what I thought

[dee1 3]

So a lot of this has been discussed previously in length here in the forums.  Since no ops or developers have chimed in I'll share what I know that will explain a bit of the fracture here.  Not all of the app's are developed by the Emby team directly but by members of the community, these apps are priced/controlled by these shall we say "3rd party" developers.  The rest of the apps are made/controlled by the Emby team.  I won't disagree that it causes a great deal of confusion, the Emby developers are I believe a team of less than 5 people trying to make software that works with a near endless amount of devices etc.  I'm neither defending or complaining but I've been with this software since the Media Browser days and have happily supported the development as compared to other solutions available it is the only one that meets my full needs.  I for one think it's great that they allow others to take on making apps that they may neither have the time or whatever to make.  I use Emby across a wide myriad of devices from chromecasts to Roku, to dedicated HTPC's and everything in between.  Both the Emby team and community developers have worked extremely hard to make a cohesive eco system of app's.  I can tell you from personal experience where Emby is today compared to even a year ago is a huge change.  Sadly with a small team and a community of volunteers development can be a bit longer but I've always found the dev's to be willing to help with issues and add features sometimes in a matter of hours, I can almost guarantee you won't see that from other "commercial" products available out there.  

 

Personally I'd say reach out to the Dev's directly even by PM and have a discussion with them.

 

Have a great day!

Interesting so if Amazon Fire app was updated to be able to search more than 20 items, then it would be a 3rd party effort?

That explains why the JSON search that is through the web interface is a separate interface and api.

interesting.. and that sort of makes sense..  

Not to be argumentative, but do the 3rd party people who want the $ for the 3rd party apps development they are probably part of some profit sharing from premiere lifetime? And Vice Versa?

I was reading the article today that Youtube and Amazon are now squabbling.. if.. if you want to have a successful product and target an ecosystem, you need more than a 20 search limit.

Every NFL team has 4 regular season, and then 16 regular season games, in baseball the number much higher

If the Amazon 3rd party intended the search with their remote integration was to be really concise they failed.

20 search results and then for consistency that was adopted so that it appeared consistent??

I'd subscribe lifetime if the app for amazon had the same as below, as it is Kodi runs better with searches and plays the content reliably but seems to run allot more resources and has allot on Amazon that I'd prefer to skip if the apps developer would fix the search, I mean what part of Json by device do they not understand??

 

Let me guess they want moarrr money to provide search changes?  And now they got that slick legal weasel to demand it?

But guess what they get from me instead? ZERO $0.00 as I'll not pay for a search result of 20 and tell them whoever I said that.. they get nada 

 

librarybrowser.js

 

Change the two "return 100" lines to 500.

 

Find a file called searchresults.js

Within that file look for an expression 

enableScrollX()?24:16

 

Make a copy of the searchresults.js file 

and then modify

enableScrollX()?384:16

 

As the scroll is tied to screen resolution use multiples of 8 appropriately

enableScrollX()?480:16

 

 

Limit=enableScrollX()?24:16