Fabfilter Subscription!!!

[Lesha]

I think the thread should be titled Fabfilter too smart for subscription!

+1

[andymcbain]

further more, you will inevitably end up with situations like the current bitwig model, whereby you would only own (a license) for the version that was current at the time of the last payment .... bugs n all. in otherwords, you'd end up owning a license to Synthesizer v 2.0.4 or some such. And should you want the bug fixes included in v 2.0.5, you'd have to sign up for another rent to own purchase of a year or whatever.

Not the case with xFer Serum. You are paying towards a license for the plugin and that's it. I log into xFer's user area and download updates as I would with any other plugin I own.

[Trancit]

Not the case with xFer Serum. You are paying towards a license for the plugin and that's it. I log into xFer's user area and download updates as I would with any other plugin I own.

I think, that´s the case/sense with all rent to own models... and I like it

[Daags]

further more, you will inevitably end up with situations like the current bitwig model, whereby you would only own (a license) for the version that was current at the time of the last payment .... bugs n all. in otherwords, you'd end up owning a license to Synthesizer v 2.0.4 or some such. And should you want the bug fixes included in v 2.0.5, you'd have to sign up for another rent to own purchase of a year or whatever.

Not the case with xFer Serum. You are paying towards a license for the plugin and that's it. I log into xFer's user area and download updates as I would with any other plugin I own.

do you have trouble comprehending the future tense ? aren't you familiar with the idiom 'the thin end of the wedge' ? You've somehow managed to miss my point entirely, or you just like to make irrelevant replies to crudely cut comments ? I don't know which, but assuming it's the former I will repost my comment (in its entirety) with added emphasis to aid in comprehension.

people wetting their knickers over 'rent to own' should consider that model to its natural conclusion.
should such a scheme become commonly accepted it will lead to higher overall prices. Prices will be pitched as the per-monthly, rather than the total... and psychologically, it's easier to drive up the price from $6 a month to $9 than it would be to drive it up from $100 to $150.

further more, you will inevitably end up with situations like the current bitwig model, whereby you would only own (a license) for the version that was current at the time of the last payment .... bugs n all. in otherwords, you'd end up owning a license to Synthesizer v 2.0.4 or some such. And should you want the bug fixes included in v 2.0.5, you'd have to sign up for another rent to own purchase of a year or whatever.

so wet your knickers at your perile.

if you don't agree that this is the natural conclusion of 'rent to own' becoming the/a norm, so be it ... but pointing out the rent to own schemes that exist today (i.e the thin end of the wedge) is utterly and absolutely pointless in the context of my comment.

[andymcbain]

further more, you will inevitably end up with situations like the current bitwig model, whereby you would only own (a license) for the version that was current at the time of the last payment .... bugs n all. in otherwords, you'd end up owning a license to Synthesizer v 2.0.4 or some such. And should you want the bug fixes included in v 2.0.5, you'd have to sign up for another rent to own purchase of a year or whatever.

Not the case with xFer Serum. You are paying towards a license for the plugin and that's it. I log into xFer's user area and download updates as I would with any other plugin I own.

do you have trouble comprehending the future tense ? aren't you familiar with the idiom 'the thin end of the wedge' ? You've somehow managed to miss my point entirely, or you just like to make irrelevant replies to crudely cut comments ? I don't know which, but assuming it's the former I will repost my comment (in its entirety) with added emphasis to aid in comprehension.

people wetting their knickers over 'rent to own' should consider that model to its natural conclusion.
should such a scheme become commonly accepted it will lead to higher overall prices. Prices will be pitched as the per-monthly, rather than the total... and psychologically, it's easier to drive up the price from $6 a month to $9 than it would be to drive it up from $100 to $150.

further more, you will inevitably end up with situations like the current bitwig model, whereby you would only own (a license) for the version that was current at the time of the last payment .... bugs n all. in otherwords, you'd end up owning a license to Synthesizer v 2.0.4 or some such. And should you want the bug fixes included in v 2.0.5, you'd have to sign up for another rent to own purchase of a year or whatever.

so wet your knickers at your perile.

if you don't agree that this is the natural conclusion of 'rent to own' becoming the/a norm, so be it ... but pointing out the rent to own schemes that exist today (i.e the thin end of the wedge) is utterly and absolutely pointless in the context of my comment.

You referred to the "current" Bitwig Model, which sounds like present tense to me. I may be misunderstanding you entirely, in which case I bow to your superior knowledge

[Daags]

............................... ordinarily, calling someone an idiot on the forum here is an insult but in your case it would be an accurate assessment. Nevertheless, I will rise above and refrain from making such an observation. Good day, sir.

[Nielzie]

I think the thread should be titled Fabfilter too smart for subscription!

+1

+1

[andymcbain]

............................... ordinarily, calling someone an idiot on the forum here is an insult but in your case it would be an accurate assessment. Nevertheless, I will rise above and refrain from making such an observation. Good day, sir.

I could also be exceedingly judgemental about someone getting on their high horse over a simple forum post...

[zvenx]

When it was unusual:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/13/busin ... 79822.html

and today:

https://www.tripadvisor.com/AirlineFees

it is the norm.




rsp

[plexuss]

I have a number of Fabfilter plugins. I do not use subscriptions because after a few years I would have shelled out as much as buying them, typically. Even still, I prefer to own the "capital" rather than just having an "expense". I prefer the ability to sell my license if I decide to do so. Ownership vs renting basically. With ownership there is a part of the cost that is capital or equity. With renting, I'd own nothing - its all expense.

I do use software subscriptions for other software that I only use for client work because I can charge it back to the client. I can also cancel the subscription if I don't need it for a particular job. But with music software, I use it every day and prefer to pay for the ownership of it, and ideally be able to sell later if I am not using it.

For Fabfilter, it's the same: its music software I use every day and so it makes more sense for me to own it and not subscribe. If FF has a subscription, that's fine as long as they don't move away from license ownership.

[Trancit]

To break a long story down:

Many people are against a subscription model... that´s ok, subscription wouldn´t be my first choice anyway...

But is there anybody against a rent-to-own model???
Or even better, is there (apart from me) somebody out there wishing they would offer this (additional to normal buying)???

[ATS]

Subscription is a big no!
You buy something and you own it.
Would never and will never pay for something that is based on subscription.

no, if you buy a fab filter plug you don't own it.

[plexuss]

Subscription is a big no!
You buy something and you own it.
Would never and will never pay for something that is based on subscription.

no, if you buy a fab filter plug you don't own it.

you own the right to use it. its called "a license". it has value because you can sell it for cash or gummybears.

[daniloo]

In my opinion, FabFilter has already one of the best and fairest purchasing models. It doesen't matter which FF plugin you own, you always get a better price on the next purchase (also during promotions). There is no need for a subscription model.

[stardustmedia]

No thanks. I rather buy, and also pay worthy upgrades later, than just paying monthly where I don't know what I get for. Worst case you pay way more this way, but don't get back something for it.