Localized applications in 8th

This sounds great, but in order to produce "packaged applications," it'll cost you $199 per year: https://8th-dev.com/get.html

If you can really create a great application across all of these platforms, and there's no other way to do it as quickly or as well, then it's totally worth $199 per year.

But if not, then it's ... not.

Thanks for the feedback. In fact, the next release of 8th will let non-commercial licensees produce a time-limited packaged application as a proof-of-concept. Then if the user is satisfied 8th is what we claim, the license fee should not be an issue.

What I'd like to see are some actual 8th apps out in the wild.

It's a closed source programming language (binary-only libraries).

In 2015 that a huge red flag already from a security point of view.

I wouldn't even consider using 8th unless it was all available in source code form. I don't mean with a FOSS license, I have no problems with commercial licenses, but being able to access the source code, review it and build the libraries from source myself is a must.

Regarding apps in the wild, it's a bit of a chicken-and-the-egg. We will be releasing a port of one of our Android-only applications very soon, as a proof-of-concept.

Regarding closed-source: WADR, I don't think the FOSS world has had a great run of luck in the security department over the last year.

However, if you were a serious user we would be willing to discuss terms for a source audit, under appropriate licensing terms etc. Needless to say, that's not going to happen for a $199 licencing fee. The libraries we use are already disclosed on our site at the bottom of the "About 8th" page (http://8th-dev.com/about8th.html).

@8thdev: sorry but your answer with regards to closed-source is completely beside the point but at the same time tells me to stay away from your products. I especially don't like the arrogant undertone towards the FOSS world that I'm sensing...

This kind of attitude in 2015 is a quite staggering.

My concern is about making sure that your binaries don't contain any back-doors (which these days is the number one concern for anyone outside the US when it comes to using close-source software that originates from the US), not just generic security issues.

"Arrogant undertone"? I'm merely pointing out that e.g. "OpenSSL" and many other projects which are Open Source, have had serious security issues which were not discovered for quite a while *despite* their source being open to all. It is a fallacy to assume that FOSS means secure, and it's ... to use your terminology ... staggering to hear such a view posited in 2015.

In any case, we're not a US-based operation, so I'm not sure what the connection is with the US. I already mentioned that we are willing to engage in a source audit for *serious* customers. If you don't want to use our products, that is your absolute right. Sorry you feel that way, but we understand.

Speaking about it, where are you actually based?

I can't find any info about that on your web site, there are mentions of the US and Israel but no physical address or phone number of your company. That's not exactly confidence inspiring for a serious business...

Good luck with finding any *serious* customers given how shady your operation comes across without any company details...

Oh and by the way, you are again completely missing the point (maybe language problems?), I never said anything about FOSS being secure, I said I would want the source as that would allow me to audit it if I think I need to.

We are actually based in Israel, which is clear from the web-site as well as our other linked pages. We don't list a physical address because it's not important (though you can find it from the Israel Business LIcenses web site, we're a registered corporation); you can find our phone number on our LinkedIn page, if you choose. Not particularly shady, IMO but I guess there's all kinds.

However, we prefer being contacted via email or our contact form from our page, as that ensures the communication is logged and can be referred back to.

OK, our 'about us' page has been updated to make contacting us directly simpler and to give that background information you were looking for.

I just noticed your last comment about the source. The source *is* available, as I mentioned; but not for free. Does that adequately address your concerns?