Google Checkout

[Mark H]

Final word on the subject (promise ) - I agree that it should be done properly, but the point is simply that it should have been done already as a matter of course and without us having to ask for it - other carts have done it and I bet it didn't take over two man years.

[wjcampbe]

100% in agreement with Jo. If the forum ran a survey, I would expect the majority of developers happy to wait with a few single site users screaming I want it now.

I will only ever use it if someone holds a gun to my head, so I'm in no rush.

[RuralWeb]

and I don't agree with the "minority" tag - you have no way of telling, but the length of this discussion suggests otherwise

Jo is correct - the number who have voted for GC is a VERY small minority. I did a calculation a while back and it was a very small % who had actually voted for GC. The length of a thread is no real indication of demand - just how many people are posting - if we stripped out all the crap the thread would be quite small.

I have done my own tests on this - including building a site with GC and found it to be a complete waste of time. Yes CG would be nice as an option but its not going to improve a sites sales in my experience as someone who has built and run a GC site. There are other areas of V8 I would like to see worked on before GC

[alewis]

100% in agreement with Jo. If the forum ran a survey, I would expect the majority of developers happy to wait with a few single site users screaming I want it now.

Well, Id agree with that, that the developers are happy to wait.

But whats wrong with single - or multi site but not developing for other people users screaming for it? They are entitled to pressure their software supplier.

The low value high-volume box shifter has a very, very different opinion and the developer group simply refuse to see this, leaving the sectors of the community for who this is a problem to be constantly downtrodden by the clique.

Simply because the vocal membership representative of this forum(mostly developers) dont seem to care about it, bears no relation to the amount of money, customers and free advertising that my business has lost as a result of this not being implemented promtly after release. What this forum thinks is of little consequence to the real monetary losses that Ive suffered over the past 3 months. No doubt there will be a group of developers on to shoot me down, either calling me a liar, giving me business lessons I never asked for, telling me I should consider my career options, etc.

Well to those naysayers I say you should open your mind to the fact that some sectors of the actinic ecommerce world have suffered heavily because of the lack of GC, and to repeatedly trod down on people who raise the issue is getting more boring than people raising the issue itself.

Actinic doesnt end with developers making sites for other people by a long shot. The thing Im glad of is that this whole issue has shown me that Actinic's priorites seem to lie firmly with what their small group of developers desire, rather than the group of users for whom I am a member. At least I now know where I stand with this software supplier.

[RuralWeb]

very different opinion and the developer group simply refuse to see this, leaving the sectors of the community for who this is a problem to be constantly downtrodden by the clique.

Excuse me - look who started this thread by asking for GC. I also removed it but was asked by Actinic to put it back up becuase they wanted to see the number of votes cast.

[leehack]

Good post A. and well written. One point to add into the mix is that as developers, we can deal with or have dealt with somewhere in the range of 30-100 clients each. To say we have a biased view is a little unsighted, we have the best understanding of the software and the best outlook on what (as a whole) is required with this software. Remember this is out-of-the-box software and has to appeal to the masses AND must cater for such.

Correct VAT and stock control are way ahead of GC, should it jump the queue, not on your nelly, wait patiently for it like all other features. If you want something dynamic and adjusts to every whim, you need to spend 10k and get your own shop built from the floor up. You always have to accept frustrating hold-backs on this sort of software as on the whole it is incredibly cheap for what it does.

I speak from a standpoint that moves this software forward for both me and my clients. Don't ever think that we make our feelings felt on what WE want, WE are driven by our clients. I have not had one single request or enquiry about it. That speaks volumes.

[los_design]

I have not had one single request on enquiry about it. That speaks volumes.

I can echo that, with only 1 of our clients mentioning it in passing and NOT demanding it.

We do build it into bespoke stores as Lee alluded to but you won't get one of those for the same price we charge for Actinic sites.

Regards

[jont]

I have not had one single request on inquiry about it. That speaks volumes.

Me either! Sounds like a need for a vote thread for the clique to show how many times it has been requested.

[alewis]

The impression I have got from reading this issue is that the developer group as a whole generally dont seem to bothered about its release, yourself included as while you did start this thread, you have repeatedly cited examples of why you dont think its a big concern and therefore its not worth worrying about.

Sorry if you feel insulted, if you can show me a post where you are actively promoting that sectors of the commuity are suffering from this then I will gladly retract that statement in my previous post and replace it with 'the developer group except for RuralWeb'.

I think the only positive actions shown by the developers on this issue are leehack making a comment about in the future can we have some pro-activity from Actinic and yourself starting this thread, but then your attitude shifted due to your own experience of it (thats fair enough, but your experiences are not all-encompassing)

[pinbrook]

Well, Id agree with that, that the developers are happy to wait.

But whats wrong with single - or multi site but not developing for other people users screaming for it? They are entitled to pressure their software supplier.

I agree with this sentiment entirely. I think what has irritated me is the postings from some people demanding it tomorrow and then making silly threats to move to another cart as they feel Actinic are not listening.

We are all agreed (inc developers) that is is something we'd all like to see, the only difference really seems to be the time scale.

I also have not had a single client ask me about it though.

[los_design]

I fully understand your frustration Alan and I am sure there a many home users who do not frequent this forum who would like to see it implemented.

As a developer I can also point out that non-public pressure has been applied offline to our CM's (and I am certain others have too) to ensure this is not dismissed and is included in the integration plans of a future version.

Pretty much like PPP which was launched after much developer pressure into V8.5.1. We do, as a group consider the home user, after all, many of our clients have the stores built and then manage them for themselves and of course, they want the latest payment options if made public (or at least the chance to switch it on)

From our stand point, this was not a priority in direct contention with getting v8 stable for many of the home users you mention who do not have the skill base to work around the issues that we, as developers, uncovered (with much appreciated input from forum regulars).

[alewis]

Requests - If I was seeking someone else to write a website for me, I would expect them to provide advice and direction for me. Not the other way round.

If I had little in depth knowledge of ecommerce and was a high volume box shifter of low value items having a website designed, then GC would be good advice to be given, to not be informed of it would be a black mark against the company/developer who didnt recommend it.


And the lack of requests to developers is not releveant to the point I was making; that regardless of how many requests you have or havent had, some sectors of the community have suffered as a result, and a group of developers all hitting the thread with comments on that line only adds weight to my argument that they are not accepting that for some, this has been a problem.

[los_design]

Alan

I really do think you may be over estimating the weight developers carry with Actinic towers.

If they thought adding a picture of a goat pulling a cart and ringing bells would sell more copies they would add it without any input from us.

We always advise clients on suitability and limitations of each variant of cart software and I know for a fact that others do too.

I am at a loss as to how you can blame the lack of advancement to implement GC has cost you money and attribute this to Actinic?

If it was this big an issue surely, as a businessman, you would have evaluated the risk and acted accordingly?

Do not misunderstand my point, I am just trying to get at where you are coming from...

[leehack]

GC is an important part that needs adding, but we have to lift ourselves out of the tunnel vision for it and look at the software on the whole.

If you keep tabs on the forum, you will note that the PPP integration has been an absolute shambles, poorly thought out, poorly tested, no communication and no instructions once released. We can ill-afford anything like that debacle ever again.

The clique may well have biased views, i cannot comment, there are ways in which we want it to move for sure and this may differ from your requirements, however on the whole what we all want is a stable, up-to-date, dynamic, well communicated piece of software. Also without a 'clique', this forum is just a host of people telling other people about their problems and ultimately having to buy support cover or employ a designer.

Don't rush them on this, otherwise we will just end up with another solution in the payment settings, that is of no use to man or beast.

[RuralWeb]

Sorry if you feel insulted, if you can show me a post where you are actively promoting that sectors of the commuity are suffering from this then I will gladly retract that statement in my previous post and replace it with 'the developer group except for RuralWeb'.

OK - you need to read this whole thread from the start and you will see that shortly after it started I was accused of starting a one man campaign to get GC implemented by several of the clique you refer to.

As a result I removed the thread from the forum - I reinstated it after direct request from Actinic and let it run. In the meantime I got off my fat arse a built a site that used GC - that site has run for a few months now so I thought I would post my findings ie GC is a waste of time - Im sorry if that dose not meet with your expectations but thats what I found.

As others mention we "Developers" get NO special treatment from Actinic and if you look at many of my posts I am one of the most critical of the software. The attitude you show only convinces me that my decission not to post as much on the forum is correct.