AB7 Posted September 19, 2023 Share Posted September 19, 2023 13 minutes ago, Noel Borthwick said: Some anecdotal data. Back in the SONAR days in 2015-2017, you may be surprised to know that despite having the annual membership option, the monthly memberships were by far the most popular choice for our users despite being more expensive overall if you paid month to month. Even though that might not be the popular choice for many people on this forum, there are many who prefer to pay a smaller monthly fee because it lets them manage their finances better. Payment choices are good for everyone. Yes to payment choices! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RexRed Posted September 20, 2023 Share Posted September 20, 2023 1 hour ago, Noel Borthwick said: Some anecdotal data. Back in the SONAR days in 2015-2017, you may be surprised to know that despite having the annual membership option, the monthly memberships were by far the most popular choice for our users despite being more expensive overall if you paid month to month. Even though that might not be the popular choice for many people on this forum, there are many who prefer to pay a smaller monthly fee because it lets them manage their finances better. Payment choices are good for everyone. I will likely choose the monthly over the annual plan. I don't like having to come up with a lump sum every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pathfinder Posted September 20, 2023 Share Posted September 20, 2023 On 9/18/2023 at 7:34 PM, Lord Tim said: I'm not trying to argue with you or convince you of anything, so no need to feel defensive about my question there. This was more me offering the other perspective on this for anyone looking through the thread and going "hey hold on, this is terrible" so they can make their own balanced view of it. My point is I'm not seeing a real lot of difference personally between a yearly version you have to buy outright that gets updates for that version, and then when the next version comes out, you choose if you want to buy that if you want to upgrade and get updates for that new version, etc and it not being a subscription, versus buying 12 months at a time for the Gibson model and getting exactly the same thing, other than the wording and the option for someone to pay it off if they want rather than just paying a lump sum. For an example, it's no different to having SONAR 8.5.3 and you've decided not to move to X1. You find a bug in 8.5.3 but you won't get any updates on that because development has finished and is only active in X1, so in effect again it's the same thing - only the current version is getting updates and if you want to benefit from ongoing development, you need to buy the upgrade to the new product. X2 gets released and now X1 doesn't get any ongoing work, and so on. Sonar 2023 gets released and we get fixes and features for it. Sonar 2024 gets released and 2023 doesn't see any more work, etc. because the focus is on Sonar 2024. Development moves on. Again, everyone has a personal choice to make once this comes out - each person needs to weigh this up and make a choice, I'm just explaining things so people in general reading this aren't misunderstanding how this idea worked (if this does become the model). But let's not focus on the word "subscription" and more read into what the actual details are, because this thing wasn't ever a subscription as we're used to seeing now with a lot of apps, it was "rent-to-own" rather than "pay us or next month you won't have an app anymore, lol" Tim I understand. Just like it when "we" have the "choice" whether to buy the new version year after year. Don't mean or try to be a jerk. But my DAW is for my home use as I said. For me. I love CW, as previously stated. But there are some business decisions I do not like and never did. As far as buying the new versions I only did because I wanted to, I didn't have to. The bugs that afflicted many, way back, beginning of Sonar, never affected me. Probably because I never used the program to it's full potential. I am hoping that CW(Sonar, whatever they want to call it) allows me the "choice." That's all! Be Well 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conteloto Posted September 20, 2023 Share Posted September 20, 2023 10 hours ago, Bristol_Jonesey said: Well that's not your call to make. The bakers will decide what is right for them AND for the user base. You are wrong, It is my decision and that of other users to pay for software, we are the client, not fans of a program If someone wants to have a rented program at the price of one purchased, well, nothing to object, If I buy a car I want it to be mine, not to pay every month over and over again the same car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conteloto Posted September 20, 2023 Share Posted September 20, 2023 9 hours ago, Byron Dickens said: I got news for you, Sparky: you don't own software. Any software. At all. Ever. You are granted a license to use it. Said license may or may not involve a financial transaction. I own that license, I know you do not own the program code, but before, you bought a program and had the right to use it "forever", if you bought, for example, photoshop 5, you can continue using it today without paying anything to adobe, which does not happen with the new "licenses" that you can use them as long as you pay it every month, That is, you have a license for rent, you pay every month for the same. They hide behind updates to correct errors, even worse, they recognize that they have sold you (rented) something that has not passed a quality control before putting it up for sale. But hey, as long as there are "customers" who accept it, well all good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heath Row Posted September 20, 2023 Share Posted September 20, 2023 9 minutes ago, Conteloto said: You are wrong, It is my decision and that of other users to pay for software, we are the client, not fans of a program If someone wants to have a rented program at the price of one purchased, well, nothing to object, If I buy a car I want it to be mine, not to pay every month over and over again the same car. There are a lot of ifs, if they go this way, if it is the same as last time. But if it is you don't have to keep paying over and over, once you pass your first 12 months, the version you are at is yours (forgetting the ownership/license argument) You can stay and use that version as long as you want. If you decide sometime in the future you want to update, you can start paying again, once you past 12 months of paying again, you can stop paying and the version you are on you can continue to use, repeat and rinse. 12 consecutive months of payment in all cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heath Row Posted September 20, 2023 Share Posted September 20, 2023 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Conteloto said: I own that license, I know you do not own the program code, but before, you bought a program and had the right to use it "forever", if you bought, for example, photoshop 5, you can continue using it today without paying anything to adobe, which does not happen with the new "licenses" that you can use them as long as you pay it every month, That is, you have a license for rent, you pay every month for the same. They hide behind updates to correct errors, even worse, they recognize that they have sold you (rented) something that has not passed a quality control before putting it up for sale. But hey, as long as there are "customers" who accept it, well all good No, I believe you are granted the license, I could be wrong, but you may even find that wording in the EULA, I believe I have read it before, not necessarily Cakewalk EULA, along with the fact that at their discretion they can revoke your license. Edited September 20, 2023 by heath row Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Tim Posted September 20, 2023 Share Posted September 20, 2023 39 minutes ago, Conteloto said: They hide behind updates to correct errors, even worse, they recognize that they have sold you (rented) something that has not passed a quality control before putting it up for sale. But hey, as long as there are "customers" who accept it, well all good You could also argue people who sell each version of an outright purchase "hide behind" the next version coming out and development stopping on a previous version too. That argument is flawed because development can't be stalled on a single release or you'll never get any new development to compete against other software in the same product space, and there's no way to possibly know if every bug is fixed. The Bakers are very transparent compared to a lot of companies where they'll mention that a bug discovered was something that existed in SONAR X3 and carried on unnoticed until now. Should they then go back 14 years and fix that bug in X3, which they no longer sell or pull income from? Will they stay in business if they keep having to do that? There is a VAST amount of quality control that goes into any software this complex. Internal testing, automated testing, beta testing and even public Early Access testing. The idea that every bug can be caught even with literally thousands of eyes on it is still not realistic. @heath row is also correct too, quite a lot of EULAs mention licenses can be revoked. Nobody ever reads them of course. The FUD loop cycle is starting again, with the same replies reiterating what's already been said multiple times in this thread, and then the same concerns brought up again. I think we're done here. I do want to thank everyone for being mostly civil despite the heated topic, and I think it's fair everyone has concerns and opinions - it's all valid, but ultimately nothing can be answered for now, and the speculation is fairly pointless. Going to lock this one. Cheers, all. 4 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts