We are building an m-learning solution[IOS and Android compatible] at our company. The product needs to be SCORM compliant. I would like to know whether it should be developed in-house by the developers or other paid options should be pursued? What are other ways of making our product SCORM compliant? We are not rally positive about using SCORM Engine for this due to its high cost solution to our problem here.Any suggestion/help is appreciated.
You can include SCORM within content using a number of open source options available on GitHub.
Getting SCORM in the content (free) is step 1.
Packaging, bundling and deploying is really step 2.
This typically has a close relationship to how Curriculum defines a structure of lessons, modules, units etc. Not knowing exactly how they want to organize this, I can speculate that you may just have a simple "I want to know that the student viewed the content" approach. If you get into a more rich dependency on how the student performs dictating what they see or do next, that requires a much for up front design so you can bridge the design, development, and deployment of your content.
Including SCORM Support in content -
Like mentioned if you search google for my SCOBot project or Pipwerks you'll hit the ground running.
Requires JavaScript friendly developer and some base SCORM knowledge attained thru reading. This could be outsourced.
Knowing the version of SCORM you wish to support can help. Consult the LMS to find out that info.
Far as presenting / creating content; if you are doing this from scratch you'd need a HTML/JS developer or if its more interactive your dipping into WebGL, Canvas or beyond. There are other paid services like iSpring, Captivate and others that offer content creation with SCORM Standards support. They may even take care of the packaging for you (covered below).
Packaging -
This requires a zip (CAM content aggregated model) which includes a imsmanifest.xml file to describe a one to many relationship of a TOC. Again simple is 1, many begins to allow you to group tiers and add objectives and other things increasing complexity but doable.
You can perform creating this package with XML, Zip and specification knowledge. I have a Packaging app on my site and a Mac (free) applescript which can also perform very basic packaging. I am not away of any other free options.
Deployment
Commonly performed thru FTP/FileShare by uploading these CAM (zip) packages. LMS decompresses and reads the manifest. Sometimes you can just copy the raw files up to the LMS thru a media / content server but this greatly depends on the options.
I need to make an internal application for personal use where i can write with pen on paper, and it can be stored digitally.
This must have minimal hardware requirement, to avoid extra cost.
What are the services and devices available for building such application.
Introduction of tablets, mobile, touch screen devices will overshoot the cost.
How this can be implemented in cost effected way.
Assuming platform and language agnosticism:
Hardware: Raspberry Pi provides an open-source, bare-bones, inexpensive solution in the $5-30 (USD) range. You would, however, need to purchase appropriate peripherals on an as-needed basis (e.g., camera, enclosure, power-source, etc).
Software: The Python programming language features a wealth of robust libraries that would help you accomplish such a computer vision application without having to bother learning the nuts and bolts of computer vision algorithms. I recommend searching the Stack Exchange for inquiries into the applicability for OpenCV toward handwriting recognition. Here are some resources to get you started:
OpenCV Documentation
A research paper exploring the idea in depth
Video demonstration
Another academic paper
Remember, there might be many ways to get the job done. Each approach carries merits and faults in terms of performance and practicality, and the question is likely still an area of very active research (machine learning, neural networks). My suggestion is that you weigh your priorities carefully and proceed accordingly (i.e., value learning experience or getting the job done?). I'll try to tag the question that might attract more seasoned, precise answers for software implementation.
It seems Neo4J High Availability is only available for the Enterprise edition which is paid- is there another alternative to achieve replication without that module? (i.e. without cost). Thanks for any help!
Update:
This answer has changed. Neo4j is now open core, so the Enterprise code is no longer dual-licensed - only the commercial license option remains.
You can find more details here: https://neo4j.com/open-core-and-neo4j/
Original Answer:
Enterprise is available as quid-pro-quo - if you put your code out under an open source license, then you get access to the open source Neo4j Enterprise free of charge. However, if you are closed source, Neo Tech charges a license fee. This fee is determined by your needs and your ability to pay - if you are a small outfit with no venture capital, it's still free, and then the licensing cost increases as your ability to pay back to the development of Neo4j increases.
If your application is open-source as you mention, then you are free to use Neo4j Enterprise without paying for it, simply download it at neo4j.org.
Actually Neo4j Enterprise is free under the open source AGPLv3 license.
Neo4j Inc can't modify the terms and still call it AGPL.
If you use Neo4j Enterprise as a server (like most people do) and communicate with it via its REST API or any of the official BOLT drivers then you never trigger AGPL's copyleft requirements.
In other words - the software that connects to it does not have to be open sourced.
You can download Neo4j Enterprise open source licensed binaries up to version 3.2.x from dist.neo4.org. The links for the windows and unix packages are below. (Replace the version number for specific versions)
http://dist.neo4j.org/neo4j-enterprise-3.2.8-windows.zip
http://dist.neo4j.org/neo4j-enterprise-3.2.8-unix.tar.gz
If you want Neo4j Enterprise 3.3.0 and on under it's free open source license, then you can build them from source like we do for our US government clients, or just grab them from our free distribution site.
Check out the blog post if you want to understand why this has happened.
https://blog.igovsol.com/2017/11/14/Neo4j-330-is-out-but-where-are-the-open-source-enterprise-binaries.html
Are there any restrictions for using coherence.jar without any license?
coherence.jar is open for downloading without any fee.
You can use it for development purposes. Any other purpose means purchasing a license. On the download page is a link to the license agreement that states:
You may not:
use the programs for your own internal data processing or for any
commercial or production purposes, or
use the programs for any purpose
except the development of your
application;
use the application you develop with the programs for any internal data
processing or commercial or production
purposes without securing an
appropriate license from us;
continue to develop your application after you have used it for any
internal data processing, commercial
or production purpose without securing
an appropriate license from us, or an
Oracle reseller;
remove or modify any program markings or any notice of our
proprietary rights;
make the programs available in any manner to any third party;
use the programs to provide third party training;
assign this agreement or give or transfer the programs or an interest
in them to another individual or
entity; - cause or permit reverse
engineering (unless required by law
for interoperability), disassembly or
decompilation of the programs;
disclose results of any program benchmark tests without our prior
consent.
The first two points are the most relevant.
On the Coherence download page it says you need to agree to the Oracle Technology Network (OTN) License Agreement to download the software.
That license contains this text:
We grant you a nonexclusive, nontransferable limited license to use the programs only for the purpose of developing, testing, prototyping and demonstrating your application, and not for any other purpose. If you use the application you develop under this license for any internal data processing or for any commercial or production purposes, or you want to use the programs for any purpose other than as permitted under this agreement, you must obtain a production release version of the program by contacting us or an Oracle reseller to obtain the appropriate license.
So it's a free download only for development purposes. (Most Oracle Products are available free to developers.)
But if you want to use this code in production or in a product you're selling you will need a license.
Have you considered using Infinispan as an open source alternative to Coherence?
Don't forget that the version that you download from the public website is usually just the major release. The minor release, with all the many bug fixes, is only available if you have a support contract.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 11 years ago.
One thing that I keep hearing in reference to ASP.NET and MSFT technologies is that they cost money to use. Often when they are being compared to open source languages someone will mention that one factor in favor of open source is that it's free (to an extent). My question is, when does ASP.NET actually cost money to use in terms of using the proprietary technology?
Understandably there are the hosting fees, but I'm curious about the fees outside of these hosting fees. I'm especially curious about this as it relates one-person smaller-site development (non-team/large enterprise). Any help is appreciated.
(edits)
Some excellent answers. Much appreciated
The projects that I'm looking to use the technologies for would be personal sites and very small business sites (1 or 2). The intent would of course be that these projects get much bigger. It seems that for commercial production, fees will apply. What about just basic dynamic "shared hosting" sites that provide information?
You have to measure many things when you determine cost. We recently went through an evaluation of platform choice by an outside vendor, and the recommendation is that we stay with a Microsoft.NET platform. Why? For us, the reason is that once you get to an enterprise-level product suite, the difference is not as big as people would like you to believe.
Purchasing Microsoft products is a sound choice. The initial cost might seem high, but keep in mind if you get Software Assurance on your purchase (Visual Studio, for example) you are entitled to free upgrades as long as you keep you SA current - and it is at a fraction of the cost of a repurchase. Many people think you need to buy the full retail version every time, and that is just not true. Work with a larger vendor, like CDW, to help with licensing questions. They got someone from Microsoft's Licensing Division on the phone with us and helped us choose what was right. Not high-pressured at all. They actually talked us down on some of the things we thought we needed.
MSDN subscriptions are great. I have one through my employer, but also used to maintain one personally. If you are a contractor/self-employed, it is an operational expense. Like buying full products, renewing a MSDN subscription is very inexpensive compared to a purchase, and especially considering what you get. The licensing within MSDN is rather generous, and since you are a one-person shop, if I read that correctly, one MSDN is more than enough for your non-production needs. Plus, the bundled Support Incidents are a nice plus, as well.
There are many versions of Visual Studio, from the Express Editions all the way up to the Team Editions. For example, we are rolling out Team Foundation Server right now, so our costs are obviously higher. For a startup or small shop, there are TFS hosting partners and you can get Team Explorer for free. Or you can mix and match, using Visual Studio for development and something like VSS, SVN, or countless other version control products out there.
Just because someone "goes open source", that does not mean that it is free. Yes, the platform choice might be free, and the tools might be free, but there is a definite chance that you will need a commercial library or component some day. Plus, nothing prevents you from going with Open Source products with Microsoft, either. There are many open source projects written in .NET that can be leveraged with your solutions, and Microsoft is becoming a lot more transparent. We are working on a very large, enterprise solution right now and we are using only one "commercial" product, outside of our development tooling. There is a lot of Open Source usage, and a lot of implementations cobbled from community musings and examples.
The one thing that often goes unmentioned is the human cost that goes into these decisions. Microsoft is hated by many and their solutions might not be the fastest or most robust (although I will take IIS7 on W2K8 over any other web server configuration any day) they are focusing on making people more productive at what they can do. You aren't just buying products with them, you are actually buying productivity. As someone who has worked in a few Open Source shops, I am very appreciative of all the things that they have gotten right and understand that free does not always mean better.
I have a "one-person" side business and I really recommend looking into an MSDN subscription. It will give you access to tools and technologies that you would not otherwise be able to get your hands on without going a la carte in a retail route. Talk with someone, like a CDW, to help you figure out your licensing needs. If it works out, definitely try that route. You can cover all your in-house needs in a one person shop with an MSDN subscription, most likely (for example, a lot of the products are available to install to you (as a user) up to ten times as long as the machines that they are installed on are "yours" and non-production. There are exceptions to that, but not many.)
If that does not work, try the free route. You can definitely use Mono for .NET Development, as well as the Express Editions. I know a few C# developers who swear by Mono and could not be happier.
Best of luck to you!
Often when they are being compared to open source languages someone will mention that one factor in favor of open source is that it's free (to an extent). My question is, when does ASP.NET actually cost money to use in terms of using the proprietary technology?
Usually when people refer to "cost" in the way you described, they're implicitly referring to TCO, or total cost of ownership. The cost is not an explicit cost in that you've paid for something directly, but rather the long-term price of using something over its lifetime.
For example, even if a particular proprietary technology is free, it may be more difficult to hire and find people who know about it to work on your project. Consequently, if it is less popular than some open-source equivalent, you may wind up paying more for the same amount of labor because appropriately talented staff will be harder to find and in higher demand.
Conversely, if an open-source product is free but has low mindshare or performs poorly, it may well be worth it to pay for an expensive, closed-source proprietary solution rather than having to learn the idiosyncracies of the open-source version.
Naturally, there is some controversy surrounding just how to measure TCO, with both camps having some valid points.
.NET is free
C# compilers are free
Certain versions of Visual Studio are free, and you don't actually need it to write for .NET anyway (though it really, really helps!)
There are many free online resources for learning .NET, such as http://asp.net
In short, there's no real cost to using ASP.NET other than the hosting fee of the website or options you might buy to make things easier (better versions of Visual Studio.)
There's more of an ideological divide, with open source guys on one side being pretty anti-microsoft and so claiming it's high cost to use. I wouldn't worry about them. ;)
There are a couple of good answers already, but I'd like to add "it depends".
joseph.ferris obviously works in a large organization, where the cost of switching platforms is going to be very, very expensive, so the cost of paying the licensing costs is much less that the cost of switching. Take a look at Jonathan Schwartz's blog entry for Mar. 11, especially the section titled "When Free is too Expensive" for another reason to go with fully-supported infrastructure.
But consider a couple of other scenarios.
First, there's the hobbyist, which is what you seem to be addressing - you want to play around with the technology, and maybe put up a website or three. There aren't any issues with privacy or scalability, so you can deploy your application on an inexpensive shared hosting solution. In this case, costs are pretty much irrelevant - whatever platform you pick, you can get free tools to get you started. Remember kids, the first hit is always free.
For a startup, things are a bit different. If the goal is to build a large website, the potential licensing costs can be daunting - it's probably going to a lot cheaper to go with open source. In addition to the production environment, you need to pay for development environments, testing, etc. Even for a small company, licenses may be more than they have in the budget - a single Windows 2003 server Enterprise license lists for $4k. If you're trying to break into a competitive environment and compete on price, this alone may make you uncompetitive. I have seen situations where a Windows-based solution (server, database, and custom development coupled with a content management system) is two or three times the price of an open source solution.
I know that it has been answered, but I will put my 2 cents. Why are you wondering about the cost of ASP.net? In my opinion, the choice of technology in your case (1-2 ppl development freelancer team) should be governed by technology familiarity. If you are an ASP.net expert, the expense of buying the products and MSDN subscription is well-worth it, because it's your primary language of choice that you know well, hence the projects that you implement, will be done better and faster, so it makes sense to stay with it.
However, if you happen to know another technology just as well and you are comfortable that you can deliver a robust product on-time with it, it may be worth it to go low cost. As a contractor, the main objective is to not lose time/money hence you pick a technology that balances your expenses and time spent learning it. In other words, if you are a Java expert, there is no point of paying for asp.net. If you know asp,net well already, then sure, stay with it.
The clients rarely care whether you used Ruby, PHP, Python, Java or ASP.net. They care about time lines, their cost and quality.
I find that it does not cost much money to use. It does infact cost a pretty penny to get windows based hosting. Visual studio is also expensive. After those, though, not many expenses are encountered.
If you want to use the more professional versions of Visual Studio to develop your applications: you will need to pay for that.
Also, there are a lot of commercial components available on the market. These will save you time or improve your product, but at a cost.
For open source, there are also a lot of components, but in this scene most is free/open.