5 ms·

The presentation of Creditcard.js is great in terms of styling, and I'm sure the practical example goes a long way in selling something like this to non-develop

by niel 13y ago

The presentation of Creditcard.js is great in terms of styling, and I'm sure the practical example goes a long way in selling something like this to non-developer decision makers. This is probably the market they are aiming for. Personally, I would much rather use the MIT-licensed jQuery.payment by Stripe. I think $300 or even $149 is prohibitively expensive, and would prefer a script that is actively used and reviewed in public by many developers. Thanks Alex!

cookiecaper 13y ago
Agreed. I wouldn't be opposed to paying $150 for a form that would take me a while to build, but there's already a lot of good open-source solutions for card inputs.
pclark 13y ago
"prohibitively expensive" ? Surely if you're a business of any merit – making even $500/month – $300 for a javascript library that'll remove bumps in the checkout process is worth it? I fail to see why this cannot co-exist alongside the Stripe alternative library. Heck, just taking the stripe library and offering commercial grade support, and charging $300 seems like a pretty good business.
- dlss 13y ago
  Try checking out -- they're are still plenty of bumps in their checkout process...
- EGreg 13y ago
  Can you explain how commercial-grade support for a library that hasn't been tested by many people is better than a community of people who have run and tested a library? What exactly are they going to do for the support?
  - kamjam 13y ago
    I'd also argue that a library developed and used by Stripe is pretty commercial grade too.
- cenhyperion 13y ago
  >I fail to see why this cannot co-exist alongside the Stripe alternative library. It certainly can, anyone is more than welcome to pay for something done by open source software available for free. >Surely if you're a business of any merit Just because you're a business doesn't mean you should pay for things that you can do cheaper. The point is that a decent web developer could recreate that form in 20 minutes with jquery.payment and a little bit of CSS, so why should you pay $300 for the same thing?
Justsignedup 13y ago
Thinking price point, 300 is about a couple of hour's worth of work which they save your developers. Not a big deal.

by niel 13y ago

cookiecaper 13y ago

Agreed. I wouldn't be opposed to paying $150 for a form that would take me a while to build, but there's already a lot of good open-source solutions for card inputs.

pclark 13y ago

"prohibitively expensive" ? Surely if you're a business of any merit – making even $500/month – $300 for a javascript library that'll remove bumps in the checkout process is worth it? I fail to see why this cannot co-exist alongside the Stripe alternative library. Heck, just taking the stripe library and offering commercial grade support, and charging $300 seems like a pretty good business.

dlss 13y ago
Try checking out -- they're are still plenty of bumps in their checkout process...
EGreg 13y ago
Can you explain how commercial-grade support for a library that hasn't been tested by many people is better than a community of people who have run and tested a library? What exactly are they going to do for the support?
- kamjam 13y ago
  I'd also argue that a library developed and used by Stripe is pretty commercial grade too.
cenhyperion 13y ago
>I fail to see why this cannot co-exist alongside the Stripe alternative library. It certainly can, anyone is more than welcome to pay for something done by open source software available for free. >Surely if you're a business of any merit Just because you're a business doesn't mean you should pay for things that you can do cheaper. The point is that a decent web developer could recreate that form in 20 minutes with jquery.payment and a little bit of CSS, so why should you pay $300 for the same thing?

Justsignedup 13y ago

Thinking price point, 300 is about a couple of hour's worth of work which they save your developers. Not a big deal.