| 2:44 pm on Jun 29, 2007 (gmt 0)|
that name doesnt even appear in G.
| 9:39 pm on Jul 2, 2007 (gmt 0)|
it looks to me that they are reworking oscommerce's platform
| 9:40 pm on Jul 2, 2007 (gmt 0)|
they look like they're pretty behind schedule. i've been emailing the owner of varien and he said it will be released shortly, but they originally projected for the beginning of summer.
| 8:16 pm on Jul 10, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Roy here from Magento (not Magneto). Magento is not a rework of osCommerce but a 100% new eCommerce platform from the ground up.
[edited by: lorax at 8:41 pm (utc) on July 10, 2007]
| 9:44 am on Jul 11, 2007 (gmt 0)|
'And as if by magic the shop keeper appeared'
| 9:59 am on Jul 11, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|'And as if by magic the shop keeper appeared' |
lol. That says a lot to me. . . that is funny.
| 10:04 am on Jul 11, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|Magento is not a rework of osCommerce but a 100% new eCommerce platform from the ground up. |
Whilst I have been looking for a 100% new eCommerce platform from the ground up, I really need one which has been exclusively created to meet the needs of modern eCommerce and provides a fresh approach to solving the age-old bugbears faced by those who wish to sell their products online.
| 2:56 pm on Jul 11, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|Behind schedule and "these guys are in Culver City somewhere |
I guess one gets tech help with this new cart by posting here.
| 8:13 pm on Jul 11, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|and I guess these guys are in Culver City somewhere....set up by a company called Varien. |
If you knew this much should you be asking:
|they're using as a framework--is it oscommerce? |
Or this is Marketing 2.0
| 4:13 am on Jul 14, 2007 (gmt 0)|
the owner is pretty good about responding which is actually quite refreshing...i just wished he'd get magneto commerce out the door because the hype he built on his blog is demanding some walk behind the talk
| 7:18 am on Jul 14, 2007 (gmt 0)|
What I am curious about, since this is open source, where is all the development money coming from, and how is it making any money for the developers?
The big problem with open source software in the past has been that far too often it becomes "orphanized". Once every one is responsible for development, that means nobody is.
| 4:07 am on Jul 16, 2007 (gmt 0)|
i would imagine they would do something like creloaded and charge for certain 'types' of systems like b2b, etc, or else pay to stay branded.
what do you think?
| 8:44 am on Jul 16, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I take issue with their licensing claims. They state the main system will be OSL 3.0 and user contributions will be under AFL 3.0. This is going to be a nightmare. User contributions need to be under the same license as the core code (OSL 3.0 in this case), otherwise it will be impossible for user contributions to be integrated into future core releases without tainting the whole license.
The important part about it being open source is that it is not under the control of the developer, that is, if the developer does something that the community does not like (such as start trying to charge) then the community must be able to fork the latest version of the code without problem.
Personally, I'd far prefer if they just used the GPL (not LGPL) for everything.