xoops forums

cgunther

Just popping in
Posted on: 2006/4/6 21:52
cgunther
cgunther (Show more)
Just popping in
Posts: 59
Since: 2005/3/27
#1

Subscriptions vs. xasset vs. amember - What is the general consensus?

Hi All,

I need put a subscription gateway in to place for an organization that wishes to use it for managing paid memberships and also to govern access to restricted content. I need to have it take MasterCard and Visa and clear the transaction through a gateway product called payssl (provided by www.ecomshare.com). I had a payment module authored to work with payssl for zencart that took minimal effort and works well. I would prefer to work with a XOOPS module(xasset or subscriptions) rather than an outside product set to work with the XOOPS database(amember). I'm looking for feed back from the community on experience with any of these modules. I am interested to know about developer support and ease of understanding in regards to making a custom payment gateway for any of these products. I have a limited budget provided by the non-profit organization that needs the module, to have the payment gateway written. The resulting work would be offered to the original module developer as donated additional payment gateway to include in the module's distribution.

So...

Your thoughts, suggestions?

Curt
"Your motherboard wears Army chips"

zioncurtain4

Just popping in
Posted on: 2006/4/6 22:13
zioncurtain4
zioncurtain4 (Show more)
Just popping in
Posts: 35
Since: 2006/1/13
#2

Re: Subscriptions vs. xasset vs. amember - What is the general consensus?

I hated Amember, what a pain in the arse!
Xoops Subscription is buggy, and I haven't successfully got the PayPal IPN reoccuring billing to work successfully yet.
Xasset is great, very few bugs if any, but it is limited to PayPal right now, and it doesn't support re-occuring billing right now.

I am trying to rally a few of my clients together to pay McNaz for some upgrades though.
I would check out the latest news on Xasset: http://xasset.co.uk

cheechon

Just popping in
Posted on: 2006/6/2 9:20
cheechon
cheechon (Show more)
Just popping in
Posts: 60
Since: 2005/2/25
#3

Re: Subscriptions vs. xasset vs. amember - What is the general consensus?

I had tried both xassets and subscription module. My review might not be very fair because I only interested in certain part of those module. Well my opinion is:

xasset 0.90
Pro
1. Other than XOOPS membership, it can be set to sell other thing like digital product...which is a very important function to me.
2. Very simple and clean interface
3. version 0.88 and before had the paypal gateway intergrated.
4. Less Buggy!! (VERY WELL)
5. Support..well the owner Nazar...did quite a good job and friendly, even the site is a bit cool.
6. Grouping of product...It enables the seller to bundle the service in a package (called application).

cons.
1. configuration is a bit complicated COMPARE with subscription module.
2. No menu or index page for overview/all "application"
3. To me, some terms are very confusing such as "application" (mean a group of product/s), "package" (mean a product)

Subscription module
Pro
1. Support recursive billing? (can't remember did it work, because the paypal gateway need to purchase)
2. Support "could" be better than xasset...

Cons
1. Buggy!!!!
2. Payment gateway is not a free module
3. Well, only for membership...

Easy of coding, I think xasset is easier to add the payment gateway...

BTW, BOTH MODULES ARE GREAT!

McNaz

Just can't stay away
Posted on: 2006/6/2 12:38
McNaz
McNaz (Show more)
Just can't stay away
Posts: 574
Since: 2003/4/21
#4

Re: Subscriptions vs. xasset vs. amember - What is the general consensus?

Hey again Cheechon

Quote:

cons.
1. configuration is a bit complicated COMPARE with subscription module.
2. No menu or index page for overview/all "application"
3. To me, some terms are very confusing such as "application" (mean a group of product/s), "package" (mean a product)


1. I realise that the configuration is very complicated so I've simplified it abit with the 0.90 release. I've updated the included .HLP file to include two quick configuration steps:1. a complex one if you need tax and 2. a simpler four step configuration if you do not need tax.

I've yet to update the online documentation to reflect this.

2. I've created a ticket to add this feature into 0.95 .

3. Good point. Noted. Do you have any suggestions on simpler notation? Perhaps this can also be included into the 0.95 release.

Thanks for your feedback.