License model no way !!!

[Head Under Water]

Now that I have had a definitive reply I'm happy to pay and buy into this model.

"If you don't renew your license, you get to keep the latest update as well as still having access to every other single version released within those 12 months."

"It is very unlikely that we release a totally unusable version at the end of your license period, and even if we do, we obviously will try to work out a solution. If the update does not introduce new major features, you can just go back a version. If something totally critical and unexpected happens, like the famous white screen problem on windows, for example, we even have the possibility to just add another month to your license, so that you get elevated to the next version that works again - which is great and not really possible with the traditional model."

"We don't intend to leave anyone with unusable software, why should that be in our interest? "

"Cheers, Dom "

That is the first thing I hear that kind of quells my biggest worries about the model. This should be on the homepage where the model is explained, it would do a lot to calm people down (and if it had been there from the start it would have helped me lose less sleep the last days). It still isn't ideal with just one extra month, unless bitwig plans to massively increase their bugfixing efforts. But if that were the case that'd be great!

[humanbeingbeing]

Now that I have had a definitive reply I'm happy to pay and buy into this model.

"If you don't renew your license, you get to keep the latest update as well as still having access to every other single version released within those 12 months."

"It is very unlikely that we release a totally unusable version at the end of your license period, and even if we do, we obviously will try to work out a solution. If the update does not introduce new major features, you can just go back a version. If something totally critical and unexpected happens, like the famous white screen problem on windows, for example, we even have the possibility to just add another month to your license, so that you get elevated to the next version that works again - which is great and not really possible with the traditional model."

"We don't intend to leave anyone with unusable software, why should that be in our interest? "

"Cheers, Dom "

That is the first thing I hear that kind of quells my biggest worries about the model. This should be on the homepage where the model is explained, it would do a lot to calm people down (and if it had been there from the start it would have helped me lose less sleep the last days). It still isn't ideal with just one extra month, unless bitwig plans to massively increase their bugfixing efforts. But if that were the case that'd be great!

Yeah at first thought Dom's statement was good, and I guess I'm happy to hear they're aware of the bug problem... but there is still the possibility of 12 months of buggy releases, the fact that I may get an extension if I get a buggy release at the end of the license period does not really fill me with confidence... and to be honest, when I think about this statement it makes me even more concerned... it kinda reminded me that it's probably gonna be a year of bug fixes which I have to pay for... starting at 1.0 this is not good.

I would rather pay more for the 2.0 upgrade and if it's broken at all, it gets patched regardless, that way I know I will eventually get what I paid for... rather than waiting years to get a working product... it'd be cool if they could finish 1.0, because I paid for that already.

[TheCube]

Hm, sad.
Good bye then Bitwig.

[viceverser]

Now that I have had a definitive reply I'm happy to pay and buy into this model.

"If you don't renew your license, you get to keep the latest update as well as still having access to every other single version released within those 12 months."

"It is very unlikely that we release a totally unusable version at the end of your license period, and even if we do, we obviously will try to work out a solution. If the update does not introduce new major features, you can just go back a version. If something totally critical and unexpected happens, like the famous white screen problem on windows, for example, we even have the possibility to just add another month to your license, so that you get elevated to the next version that works again - which is great and not really possible with the traditional model."

"We don't intend to leave anyone with unusable software, why should that be in our interest? "

"Cheers, Dom "

Is this reflected in any of the documentation tho??? Because I've seen a trend of them posting things like this, then deleting those posts like they didn't happen... So until there are clearer protections for these type of likelihoods in clear writing, there is the same problem of full discretion going to Bitwig... They 'could' be nice, but don't 'need' to be, (and i'm not trying to comment on whether Bitwig are trust worthy, that's a different conversation) regardless of what you choose to think of Bitwig, that's not a safe consumer position. This is the entire problem of the WHOLE model... It is stating your limited rights, and limiting their obligation, and for this we pay more. Get less rights, pay more money... Not good!!!

[craigtumps]

With FLStudio, the DAW i've used most, my old project directory is full of files like this:

awesomeSongILove20
coolTuneWithGoodBeat15
AwwwYeahFuckingGreat25
etc...

It's this way because i lost so many songs due to crashes that I had to literally save my song every like 10 minutes manually just to ensure i had access to at least a few changes back if it crashed.

Exactly the reason why I left FL Studio. Also because it performs badly even with a powerful processor and the workflow is bad. These are fundamental issues, not small bugs and as I said earlier they are up to version 12 and its still the same.

The more I read this thread and all the rants, the more its convincing me that I should pay the $169 upgrade fee. Because I dont want to go back to how it was before!

[anoise]

Lowering the price to 99 Euro (for the update to v.2 and for the subscription) with the new license model would be a good / fair compromise for Bitwig and the users...I guess and let's see what happens in the first 12 months after v.2 is released.

[craigtumps]

Yep lowering it for an intro period would take the edge off all this for sure.

[polishbroadcast]

As a 2-year Bitwig owner and dabbler I thought I would add my voice (pile on).

I loved the equal focus on audio and software instruments as I use both in equal amounts. But it looks like their focus, in the near future, is heavily on MIDI tools. I love the workflow and UI but my 3 big showstoppers were: no track comping, small selection of effects / instruments compared to similar DAWs, and the biggest one: MIDI import ignores notes. I tried migrating from Logic to make it work but I couldn't even get my tracks into Bitwig to make it happen.

I think the subscription price is a big ask. I'd be OK with $100 a year. That seems on par with comparable major DAW prices over 3 years (Live Standard, FL Studio, Sonar Platinum). If Bitwig was as feature-rich, with as many plugins and instruments as Cubase, and Ableton Suite, then I think they could ask for $170 a year. I do feel that early supporters (any current Bitwig customer) should have gotten some kind of "founders" discount at least for the first year.

If they fix some major bugs and bring in some standard audio features I'd probably try again in a year or 2.

[m00m1n]

I'll add my thoughts too ..
I'm quite disappointed with the new announcements and above all with the price itself.

Bitwig was the first DAW I purchased when I decided to start learning production more seriously (after having only Cubase 4 LE for few years and barely touching it ), and one of the main reasons I chose Bitwig over Live & Cubase was that I thought that although its not cheap, it was the most affordable of the 3. Don't know why, I although had the feeling that Bitwig will remain affordable in the future too
Although Bitwig has it's cool & unique features (like the modulations & its workflow), If I didn't care about the price, I would certainly buy Live Suite as its comes with MUCH bigger & professional sound library (e.g. Bitwig has only a single so-so piano sample ) and MUCH more versatile and powerful built-in Instruments, and some more features I really like and are still missing in Bitwig. And like others said here before, with the yearly 169$ - Bitwig becomes even more expensive than Live in the long run.

I waited for Black Friday in the hope that there will be a discount and purchased it for 199$. Now, just after few months I need to pay almost the same price to get 2.0 Unfortunately that's too much for me to spend on this still early hobby of mine so I won't upgrade ... maybe will re-consider in the next Black Friday depends on what Live 10 & Bitwig development will look like...

It seems that Bitwig team really believes in the 12-months model, and I can see its advantages, but it can't come with such a high yearly price. I truly believe that also business-wise, what Bitwig should have done with 2.0 is:
* grant 2.0 upgrade for free or for max 50$ to all 1.x users to show love and keep it's user base growing
* lower the yearly upgrade price to 99$
I'm pretty sure that if that was the case, the community would be MUCH more positive and excited for the new release and accept the 12-months upgrade plan

[.jon]

I think the subscription price is a big ask. I'd be OK with $100 a year. That seems on par with comparable major DAW prices over 3 years (Live Standard, FL Studio, Sonar Platinum). If Bitwig was as feature-rich, with as many plugins and instruments as Cubase, and Ableton Suite, then I think they could ask for $170 a year. I do feel that early supporters (any current Bitwig customer) should have gotten some kind of "founders" discount at least for the first year.

100USD/year would still be more than what it costs to keep other DAWs upgraded. For example Ableton Live Standard upgrade 8>9 is currently at about 40usd/year (still receiving updates after nearly 4 years). Unfortunately for Bitwig, the free intermediate updates to Live 9 have also contained way more substance matter than BWS2.

That's the main issue I'm dealing with right now- do I want to pay many times more than the alternative, for the kind of updates Bitwig released in the past 12 months? Rational answer is a solid LOL NO, but for some reason still I feel like I want BWS, and would like to believe in miracles. It just doesn't make much sense.

[marvotron]

That's the main issue I'm dealing with right now- do I want to pay many times more than the alternative, for the kind of updates Bitwig released in the past 12 months? Rational answer is a solid LOL NO, but for some reason still I feel like I want BWS, and would like to believe in miracles. It just doesn't make much sense.

Depends on how you approach your DAW. Some people just need to do work others use it purely for creativity and fun, and everything inbetween.

For me its the most enjoyable environment to use that matches my style of flow so the question of it costing 60 dollars more or less than something else is not that important. I've used (and own) a lot of different DAWs but Bitwig is the one that fits me best. For example someone posted a thread pointing out that the latest Logic release had a huge amount of tweaks and fixes but Logic is my least favourite DAW in terms of workflow, so nearly all the changes were irrelevant to me.

So I think a lot of the frustration is from people who like to use Bitwig but not enough when compared to the price differential between Bitwig and other products.

I would say though sometimes its worth looking at it in a positive way, look at all the choices that are available these days. Live, Logic, Studio One, Cubase, FLStudio, Bitwig, Energy XT, Renoise etc..etc..
Its just a matter of finding the one that has the right balance of features, flow and price for your situation.

[.jon]

So I think a lot of the frustration is from people who like to use Bitwig but not enough when compared to the price differential between Bitwig and other products.

That's pretty much what I think, yes. There's also many ways to look at the price- on an absolute scale and divided into monthly sum, even Bitwig with it's premium pricing isn't really that expensive for a tool, or even for a hobby. This is why I'm still on the fence, in Helsinki 159e/year is not a lot of money realistically speaking.

But when I think my music in the next 5 years, the money spent on BWS upgrades has an opportunity cost- perhaps the money spent on some other software or gear would benefit my music more? The difference in just 24 months is enough to buy, say, a Korg Monologue on top of Live Standard. Furthermore the upgrades don't have resale value, you license is still worth under 200e no matter how many thousands of euros you've actually spent on it along the years.

Anyway, the point still stands- at a more reasonable annual fee most of these discussions wouldn't have happened, people would be excited and talking about the features instead of prices. From a marketing perspective, it probably wasn't very successful move.

[marvotron]

Anyway, the point still stands- at a more reasonable annual fee most of these discussions wouldn't have happened, people would be excited and talking about the features instead of prices. From a marketing perspective, it probably wasn't very successful move.

You're probably right, although another way to look at it is maybe they expected some of the negativity but went ahead anyway?

Maybe their business analysis was that they might get less income overall but that it would be a more predictable flow of income and if you decouple the release of features from the version boundaries you release some of the burden on administration and development.

All we can do is guess as to what they thought would happen.

Personally im just excited waiting for a beta of V2 because the modulation system is perfect for me. Cant wait

[.jon]

It's possible that their userbase is larger than what it seems, and extracting more money from a subset of current users satisfies the immediate demands of their debtors. I sense some pressure behind all this, I don't think this is the 2.0 they wanted to release, and something caused them to forego long-term brand building over short-term financing.

Anyway, I'm also looking forward to demoing 2.0! My hope of them adjusting the pricing is waning, but also still alive...

[polishbroadcast]

100USD/year would still be more than what it costs to keep other DAWs upgraded. For example Ableton Live Standard upgrade 8>9 is currently at about 40usd/year (still receiving updates after nearly 4 years). Unfortunately for Bitwig, the free intermediate updates to Live 9 have also contained way more substance matter than BWS2.

Isn't Standard $450? Even at 4 years wouldn't Ableton Standard be $110/yr? I'm not that familiar with Ableton and the tiers so genuinely asking. I just looked at normal retail—I know you can get these discounted / used / as upgrades.

3 years was an arbitrary average since it seems like many DAWs get updated every 2-3 years. I personally would be OK with $100 a year, because I like Bitwig, but it needs a few more years of dev / plugins to be on par w/ the features of the competition. I agree even at that price it's too high but it's a premium I would pay if they were brought up to parity with what's in the market.

Ableton Standard / Suite = $450 / $600
Cubase 9 Pro = $545
FL Studio = $300
Sonar Pro / Platinum = $200 / $500

I didn't include other DAWs like Studio One or Logic, which are loss-leaders for those companies' main hardware business. For now I'm moving to Studio One (from Logic) but hope Bitwig is in my future.