NEW Service: Shortened / Streamlined Checkout

[DesignExtend-MSI]

DesignExtend.com is proud to announce its latest offering - Shortened Checkout service.

Our top team members will streamline your MIVA Merchant store's checkout process to 2 simple pages. No more clicking continue... continue...

Customers can now select shipping, payment methods and enter payment info all on one screen. The result? Quicker buying and better impulse shopping.

The service is available for MIVA Merchant version 4 and 5.

Read More & See an Example of a Streamlined Checkout (http://www.designextend.com/page/miva/PROD/shorten-checkout)

[chucklasker]

I clicked Order Without an Account and it still filled in the customer info. Is that what it's supposed to do?

[leslienord]

Ummmm, click on Login.

[chucklasker]

Place Order Without Account is available as a checkout option instead of logging in, it looks like in the example. But when I click on it, it shows customer information filled in, not fields available for me to fill in. Seems weird, since I hadn't logged in.

[leslienord]

I would suspect that was done intentionally - since it is a demo to show how the show the shipping rate updates the total along with the payment fields displaying when a payment method is selected.

[chucklasker]

I guess I'm just not understanding this new shortened checkout. I do pimpmycheckout.com, which obviously costs more, so I'm curious, of course, about this one. Like, when I choose PayPal, it just goes to the Invoice, not the PayPal site. And the payment method for every payment method is hard coded to American Express no matter which method or credit card is chosen. Does it integrate with CC processors like Authorize.net? I left the CC info blank, it just goes to invoice - no error screen.

Maybe it's not ready and this is a dummy demo for visual. I look forward to seeing a real one on a live site.

[Adam - FMM]

I guess I'm just not understanding this new shortened checkout. I do pimpmycheckout.com, which obviously costs more, so I'm curious, of course, about this one. Like, when I choose PayPal, it just goes to the Invoice, not the PayPal site. And the payment method for every payment method is hard coded to American Express no matter which method or credit card is chosen. Does it integrate with CC processors like Authorize.net? I left the CC info blank, it just goes to invoice - no error screen.

Maybe it's not ready and this is a dummy demo for visual. I look forward to seeing a real one on a live site.

What's not to understand? It's just a demo showing the flow of the process. The page leading into it clearly states "See an example of a shortened checkout (not a live store)".

I doubt very many people are going to want and sit and fill in information and then supply Credit Card or paypal info just for the sake of seeing a demonstration. Would you? Anyone shopping for this who doesn't fully understand can contact us with any questions, of course.

I am the one who developed this in concert with DE as the distributor and have put it in place on more than one site thus far, even prior to the announcement. Would you like to go to one and buy something?

Yes of course it integrates with every payment option. On a live site, if you choose paypal it will go to the paypal site. If you choose CC you then enter your info and it will verify it (in the case of a live processor like authorize.net - or just store it like normal for simple validation).

[chucklasker]

Sheesh! Defensive anyone? I hope you treat your customers nicer than someone asking valid questions on this forum...

[Adam - FMM]

I'm just answering your questions, Chuck. You say you don't understand if / how it works and I am letting you know it does and how. It is not a personal attack any more than your saying you don't understand it was.

[aGorilla]

I do pimpmycheckout.com
Maybe it's not ready
Somebody makes an announcement, you mention your competing product in their announcement thread, then you imply that their product is 'not ready', and then you wonder about people getting 'defensive'?

But it was all in the name of 'asking valid questions'. Yeah, clearly that's all it was.

Pam and Adam... Nicely done!

[chucklasker]

I've been doing Pimp My Checkout for over 3 months and I've been talking about it on the forum all that time. Then, a competitor announces an almost identical service with almost identical features, and claims to have "developed" it, and I'm the bad guy if I point out it doesn't appear to work based on the demo provided? Ridiculous.

I give credit when credit is due. I used to do Google Analytics setups, but then I found http://www.eComIQ.com that does it cheaper, so I now recommend them. I used to do SEO, but then I found Dave Dolak at ddolak111@epix.net who does higher-level optimization at a good rate, and www.primevisibility.com, who does excellent work with larger businesses, so I recommend them when appropriate. If something is good, I'll recommend it, especially if it saves me time, and saves my clients money. I don't even care if the concept was stolen from me.

But if I'm looking at something, and the demo doesn't actually demo what the real product is supposed to do, I'll ask questions. If Pamela or Adam had just answered my questions nicely, and maybe given a live example or two, showing it really worked, I could have recommended this to my clients just like the other services I recommend. I've got enough work on my plate to not have to play games. But instead of answering my questions, which are still valid and unanswered, I'm treated rudely and insulted. So, that eliminates my desire to refer my clients to this service, whether it works or not, because I don't want my clients to be treated badly, too.

[aGorilla]

claims to have "developed" it
It's not a claim, it's a statement of fact.

I don't even care if the concept was stolen from me.
Please tell me you're not accusing them of stealing the idea of quicker checkouts from you. I think the first time I did that was around 2000. It's a pretty common request, and most Merchant developers have done it at one time or another over the years.

Perhaps you meant those other companies stole seo optimisation from you. Shame, you probably should have patented these great ideas.

I've got enough work on my plate to not have to play games.
And yet, here you are.

You were told it was a demo before, and after, your post implying it was 'not ready'.
I would suspect that was done intentionally - since it is a demo
It's just a demo showing the flow of the process.

But instead of answering my questions, which are still valid and unanswered, I'm treated rudely and insulted.

This is the only question you asked:
Does it integrate with CC processors like Authorize.net?
And it was thoroughly answered:
Yes of course it integrates with every payment option. On a live site, if you choose paypal it will go to the paypal site. If you choose CC you then enter your info and it will verify it (in the case of a live processor like authorize.net - or just store it like normal for simple validation).
If anybody has been rude to you, it has been me. I apologize for that, but I was simply bothered by your tactic of hijacking an announcement thread and using it to mention your service, while implying that the announced service is somehow inferior. When they defend their service, you attack them.

If you'd like to discuss this further with me, feel free to pm me, or email me. This is really not the place for it.

[DesignExtend-MSI]

Sheesh! Defensive anyone? I hope you treat your customers nicer than someone asking valid questions on this forum...

Chuck:

I take offense at this statement, and you know clearly well that it's a demo to provide a very quick means of outlining how it works. As most developers, finding time to build up a full store for a full-fledge live example is not only time consuming (and takes away from currently hefty workloads), but also results in a majority of store owners not using it - they simply want to know how it works.

To answer your questions, it's fully functional with ALL payment methods. We are more than happy to fully customize it to integrate with the flow and functionality (including third-party modules) with nearly any MIVA Merchant store - one need only request a quote.

It will also allow shoppers to opt to create an account post checkout on that particular order, saving their data for future purchases.

This functionality has been implemented on several sites thus far, prior to us announcing it as a service - we always spend a few months testing features, etc. prior to releasing as a product or service.

[chucklasker]

Your answer is what I was looking for, Pamela. You shouldn't take offense to my statement that was directed at Adam, who immediately attacked me instead of answering my questions. It's how he is on all three threads of your latest announcements.

I guess the "fake" demo you created just doesn't do it for me. It might for others, but for me, it's not proof at all that you can do what you say. I can hack up a "demo" of just about any feature in a non-working scenario. It would seem like a couple real world examples would be appropriate, as I do with my services. It's not that I don't trust you, I just always prefer real world examples over theory when making decisions.

And aGorilla - please refrain from taking my statements out of context and refuting something I didn't say. It makes you look petty.

[aGorilla]

If you'd like to discuss this further with me, feel free to pm me, or email me. This is really not the place for it.
Guess you missed that part.

Hijacking somebody else's announcement thread so you can hype your own product, and criticize theirs, (followed by attacking them personally when they answered you)... well... that's beyond petty.

[DesignExtend-MSI]

I guess the "fake" demo you created just doesn't do it for me. It might for others, but for me, it's not proof at all that you can do what you say. I can hack up a "demo" of just about any feature in a non-working scenario. It would seem like a couple real world examples would be appropriate, as I do with my services. It's not that I don't trust you, I just always prefer real world examples over theory when making decisions.



In due time we will provide a working demo store, but any potential customer who requests we've pointed them one of scores of sites on which we've done this. There is one caveat with a live example, and it's the same with just about anything else - it's not going to show every possible example of what can be done. Nine times out of ten when we've sent MM users to a demo we're still inundated with requests about what can be done.

My "offensiveness" is the implication that DE (or myself or Adam) ripped off your idea. The fact is, streamlining the checkout has been done on sites for YEARS, and the very FIRST MM documentation that even discusses it is the OPT (and it's usage has been discussed online for some time) - so to say that even your idea was "original" would be entirely incorrect. We instead opted to take a service we've done upon request and for retainer clients for some time and offer it as a listing, rather than just mention it as a possible solution (which we had already done for some time).

I find it odd that you wouldn't work with anything, or purchase any service without seeing a fully functional live demo, since 99% of the modules on the MM market do not include these (and you use them). And I'm certain that many services you list are not accompanied by the same - if they were, you'd never get any paid work done.

The so-called rudeness came to play when your post alluded your disdain for us listing a "competing" service - and aGorilla was the only one who said anything. I, myself, try to refrain from getting involved with such types of conversation on that level, but please don't think I haven't been fielding inquiries about your problem with my original post offlist. You posted under the guise of being a user, when in fact you offer a competing service.

[Adam - FMM]

You're really something, Chuck.

You are the one who went on the "attack" right off trying to cast uncertainty and doubt on this new service. It was as Bill aGorilla pointed out (not that any of us needed him to) in the guise of "not understanding". Please. You understand just fine.

Am I nice to potential customers who ask valid questions? You bet. Am I as nice to competing developers with an obvious agenda who make accusations that I am "stealing" from them? No, you know what? I'm not.

Plus, does anyone here believe for one second you are going to be sending your own customers to us to purchase a competing product (which I "stole") for less than 1/3 the price? Do you believe your own BS? I know I sure don't.

Just give it up already. yeesh



Your answer is what I was looking for, Pamela. You shouldn't take offense to my statement that was directed at Adam, who immediately attacked me instead of answering my questions. It's how he is on all three threads of your latest announcements.

I guess the "fake" demo you created just doesn't do it for me. It might for others, but for me, it's not proof at all that you can do what you say. I can hack up a "demo" of just about any feature in a non-working scenario. It would seem like a couple real world examples would be appropriate, as I do with my services. It's not that I don't trust you, I just always prefer real world examples over theory when making decisions.

And aGorilla - please refrain from taking my statements out of context and refuting something I didn't say. It makes you look petty.

[chucklasker]

Plus, does anyone here believe for one second you are going to be sending your own customers to us to purchase a competing product (which I "stole") for less than 1/3 the price? Do you believe your own BS? I know I sure don't.

I've already said that I've done that before and gave examples. In fact, I've sent clients to you in the past, Adam, when I found your rate to be less than what I'd charge for the same thing.

I charge what I charge for PMC because there is so much customization in each one I do. If you can do it just as well and cheaper, of course I'd send my clients to you. Of course, your "price" isn't really a price, so much as a base rate, that increases if they have any modules or special functionality, as I understand it - correct me if I misunderstand. In my experience, that's been every PMC I've done - none have been with standard Miva checkout. So dollar for dollar, I can't really compare.

My first two posts on this thread didn't mention my competitive service, where I didn't understand how the demo was working. I then mentioned my service, only to mention that it was more expensive - hardly a sales pitch. That's why I'm saying you were defensive. If you'd just posted like Pamela did, saying it's a fake demo, and explaining what does work on live sites, without assuming evil intent on my part, this thread would have ended there, and I might have sent some people to you for the work.

And yes, that is a fact, not BS. My clients will tell you I refer them to others all the time when things are cheaper.

[DesignExtend-MSI]

Of course, your "price" isn't really a price, so much as a base rate, that increases if they have any modules or special functionality, as I understand it - correct me if I misunderstand. In my experience, that's been every PMC I've done - none have been with standard Miva checkout. So dollar for dollar, I can't really compare.

I want to point out that it's not more expensive if just any modules are used. The majority of payment methods and shipping options work - the "base" is labeled as such to accomodate any customized functionality or obscure shipping/payment issues. The majority of users will not pay more than the base rate.

[Brandon MUS]

Ignoring all of the fighting about who's idea it was, or who started the fight, I do have some real questions:

How's the support for older browsers and non-JS browsers? When I ran a test with JS disabled and I choose my shipping and payment methods, I was thrown to the INVC screen and the transaction was completed -- no questions asked. I know that demos are often not perfect, but this sounds like a core functionality problem. Is this a problem you guys have addressed?
Another issue I saw (which again, I'm assuming its a very raw demo) was that even if I logged in at the beginning of my order, it asks me to "create a new account using [y]our rapid sign up". Then when I decide to try that out, it takes me to a very static page with everything pre-filled. I realize that this is supposed to be a quick and dirty demo, but this is confusing me when I'm trying to TRY OUT this service. Its hard to test features that aren't faked.

I would love to see a true, working demo.

[Adam - FMM]

Hello,

As you may have seen, javascirpt is being used for a couple of things:

1) To dynamically update the shipping, sales tax and total displays as applicable.

As an aside, the above was one of the primary impetuses for my starting down this road. A potential customer came to us asking about the possibility of shortening the checkout. They had two things on their mind. One was that other "premade" method was very expensive. The other was that they didn't want a customer to have to "do the math" in terms of adding up the subtotal, tax, shipping and so on. As you can imagine, it isn't especially difficult to use a little JS and mivascripting to update totals onscreen in that way so I figured it was worth doing. But I digress...

2) To show / hide / change the payment information entry areas that one would see depending on the payment method they select.

Of course, if JS is off for whatever reason then 1 and 2 would not work, however in that case a customer can still complete the order albeit not in as short a process as with javascipt turned on. In that case it is a simple matter to detect that and a customer will merely be taken through the more standard checkout first to OINF and OSEL combined (if possible depending on if the store has or does not have shipping methods that need to know the address first - read more about that concept here if you like: http://www.vikingcoders.com/faq/311_321_en.html), or in some cases as short as it can be.

By "short as it can be" I mean, some stores only have and will only have one payment method such as by credit card. In those cases there is no need to show / hide / change the payment information fields that get displayed. The credit card entry fields can simply be "ever present".

As to the "rapid account creation", that is pretty simple. All it will do is redirect the shopper to the standard customer add / edit page and pass the order ship to details to that page to prepopulate as much of the form as possible. Pretty much all the fields except for login and password (and optional ones like Fax # if none was supplied in the order info).

I wrote about how to do this a while back - in response to you specifically, if you recall - for anyone who wants to give it a whirl:

http://extranet.miva.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6930

Did you ever get a chance to try that out? It's pretty easy, though a little tedious.

None of what is going on in shortened checkout is especially difficult, and as Bill aGorilla pointed out - developers were doing it in one form or another, bits and pieces quite a number of years ago. On a scale of 1 to 10, 1 being coding a large image popup window and 10 being writing UltraBatch (or anything Ivo makes for that matter) I'd give it about a 3.

All I have done is put it all together for a resonable price and add a new feature or two (the dynamic total updates, chiefly) and make it as adaptable / dynamic as possible such that a store owner who adds a new shipping method, or new tax method or another Credit card should not, in the majority of cases need to contact us or adjust anything further on their own.

In point of fact, it is VERY easy to just use OPT (or regular templates in V5) to whack up a basic static version of this for any single particular store. But I wasn't too keen on doing it that way as perhaps down the road I may very well end up with many support requests from customers who changed their tax rate or added new shipping methods or discover card or removed paypal or something and the checkout is not reflecting those things.

As to a real demo, I'm sure you can understand my thinking in that a typical unknowledgable customer may not wish to sit and provide personal information, credit card #'s or be told to just enter "John Doe" CC# 4111 1111 1111 1111 and so forth for the sake of a demo. In releasing this, I was trying to think as an everyday storeowner might and wanted to show the concept with as much brevity as possible and encourage them to contact us if they needed more information. So far that is how it has gone pretty much in all cases. Everyone seems to grasp the concept as shown.

I also figured it was ok to let Design Extend's position in the field of Miva Merchant stand on its own for that, as opposed to if we were some fly by night operation that just showed up one day promising some amazing thing that no one else had ever done before, with no evidence - instead of merely combining a few form elements and adding a widget or two.

But, I can see how a real time demo wouldn't hurt anything. How about if I equip the actual design extend store itself with this checkout process and create a test product / shipping / tax / payment method so people can "buy" it, in addition to making the real checkout on the store that way in case you should be inclined to purchase category-bubbles ;)



Ignoring all of the fighting about who's idea it was, or who started the fight, I do have some real questions:

How's the support for older browsers and non-JS browsers? When I ran a test with JS disabled and I choose my shipping and payment methods, I was thrown to the INVC screen and the transaction was completed -- no questions asked. I know that demos are often not perfect, but this sounds like a core functionality problem. Is this a problem you guys have addressed?
Another issue I saw (which again, I'm assuming its a very raw demo) was that even if I logged in at the beginning of my order, it asks me to "create a new account using [y]our rapid sign up". Then when I decide to try that out, it takes me to a very static page with everything pre-filled. I realize that this is supposed to be a quick and dirty demo, but this is confusing me when I'm trying to TRY OUT this service. Its hard to test features that aren't faked.

I would love to see a true, working demo.

[Brandon MUS]

Thank you for the great response Adam. I haven't had a chance to start work on our store's checkout process because we still working on a massive redesign on the rest of the store. I hope to get that part done ahead of our timeline so that we can work on the checkout process before the holiday timeframe.

The real demo could provide a simple button to populate the form with "fake details" to save the customer the typing. What I was really looking for out of your demo was error handling and graceful degradation (unobtrusive javascript, etc.).

Still, I applaud you for offering this service. I'm sure a lot of store owners will enjoy it.

[Adam - FMM]

No problem. In fact at some point here when I get some free time I am going to write a little FAQ for this thing and will include your question on what if one of the 1 in 15 (or whatever the stats suggest these days) people without js happens to come shopping.

I think I'll even include a little "how to" on doing an easy static version for people who have just one payment method and simple non-address based shipping and don't care about updating the order total based on shipping selection, or having an "expidited account creation" from the invoice. It is ridiculously easy to do in such a case. Ought to be common knowledge, IMO.

Thank you for the great response Adam. I haven't had a chance to start work on our store's checkout process because we still working on a massive redesign on the rest of the store. I hope to get that part done ahead of our timeline so that we can work on the checkout process before the holiday timeframe.

The real demo could provide a simple button to populate the form with "fake details" to save the customer the typing. What I was really looking for out of your demo was error handling and graceful degradation (unobtrusive javascript, etc.).

Still, I applaud you for offering this service. I'm sure a lot of store owners will enjoy it.