Investor pumps 50 million Euro into NI

[Aloysius]

[elassi]

Had to read this story as a pupil.

If you think about it a bit deeper, that person's view and the story's moral is rather dumb.

Of course he can live his life as he wants, but what if when illness strikes, or other accidents. Can he than pay the bills for his family, "snoozing in the sun"? Life is not that simple, unfortunately.

Capitalism is the devil I know, but that story does not really prove anything nor does it show any solutions...

Well, of course it's a simplified description. Wouldn't say it's "dumb", though. One can gain different aspects from the story's hints and work with them. As you had to read it as a pupil I suppose you understand German? If so, you might know the slogan "Mehr Eigenverantwortung" and its wanted and not wanted results - just to give an idea.

However, chk071 is right, imho, that this discussion rather belongs to the HPC. Nonetheless, if you want to elaborate on it you're welcome.

[elassi]

Did somebody say "endorsement"?

[mrj1nx]

Im just curious, if NI is simply to big to be getting any of your hard earned money, then what os do you use. From what computer or phone are you writing this. What car do you drive, etc...

Anyhow, I would welcome a subscription model, especially a rent to own version. Probably mostly since I dont currently own komplete but would be happy to have it. I would guess ~19.99/24.99 per month could be the ballpark for Komplete if theyre aiming to democratize. For KU idk.

[Jace-BeOS]

Did somebody say "endorsement"?

[bungle]

Im just curious, if NI is simply to big to be getting any of your hard earned money, then what os do you use. From what computer or phone are you writing this. What car do you drive, etc...

Anyhow, I would welcome a subscription model, especially a rent to own version. Probably mostly since I dont currently own komplete but would be happy to have it. I would guess ~19.99/24.99 per month could be the ballpark for Komplete if theyre aiming to democratize. For KU idk.

Rent to own doesn't work with anything that has upgrade costs, not sure why people dont understand that, before you have finished paying a new update is out and cycle begins again, it is subscription.

[kbaccki]

Im just curious, if NI is simply to big to be getting any of your hard earned money, then what os do you use. From what computer or phone are you writing this. What car do you drive, etc...

Anyhow, I would welcome a subscription model, especially a rent to own version. Probably mostly since I dont currently own komplete but would be happy to have it. I would guess ~19.99/24.99 per month could be the ballpark for Komplete if theyre aiming to democratize. For KU idk.

Rent to own doesn't work with anything that has upgrade costs, not sure why people dont understand that, before you have finished paying a new update is out and cycle begins again, it is subscription.

Vendors have purposefully blurred the line between "update" and "upgrade". Simply speaking, major releases were always accompanied by some period of maintenance updates. Updates int eh form of minor releases were always "free" -- free in quotes; the price of the product should take into account money require to cover maintenance costs. Once in a while a minor release would be introduced between major releases containing so many significant updates in the form of functional enhancements, that the vendor charged for the update. Steinberg, Avid, Cakewalk all did at some point, and some more frequently than others. But for the most part, minor releases were part of the maintenance cycle between major releases.

Now, and to their own advantage, vendors have decide "hey, there really is no difference between continuous bug fixes and releases of major versions... you keep paying us, and we keep writing code". So your notion of "cycle" and "upgrade" is no longer relevant with a traditional/classic subscription model -- the whole point with subscription is that the "cycle" is continuous, and there are no "upgrades", only continuous updates.

The pre-pay mechanic of the traditional subscription model is very much in favor of the vendor. Continuous and predictable revenue stream, which translates to more efficient business operations, etc. etc. In theory, the value to the customer is that they are always running the latest and greatest version (until they stop paying, in which case they ain't runnin' nothin'). The vendor says "you'll get an update per month! how great is that?!?". However, practical reality of software development is that vendors are not going to be developing major new functionality in the span of a couple months here, a couple months there. It still takes 12-18 months (and closer to the 18 month end) to develop major new enhancements. So... there's a traditional dev cycle after all, isn't there? Meanwhile, the user is pre-paying for something that may or may not exist in the future. The fact is that the customer pre-payment is financing now the update and upgrade costs for releases that may or may not happen in the future. Oh, and did I say when the user stops paying they can't use the software anymore?

This is why "rent-to-own" is significantly better than straight out subscription. There's a win for both vendor and customer. Vendor gets the revenue, customer gets to stretch the cost of (typically expensive) software out over many months, if that's to their advantage. The user should at least get the $$$ credit toward owning a perpetual license for the software at some point in the future. The vendor gets a significant advantage, why shouldn't the customer get something in return? In the interim, the user does get to use other products attached to the subscription (which, BTW, does not necessarily mean all products are available for a flat fee -- some subs have levels), which is also good in the near term and long term for the vendor. This is why I think the Cakewalk, Roland Cloud, et al model is the better way to go. I stopped using Sonar at 8.5, and I think $240 for a D-50 plugin is outrageous... but I still think the $$$ credit is good for everybody at the end of the day.

[Jace-BeOS]

Only people who can afford yet another monthly bill can afford "software as a service". I'm not one of them and I'm pretty sure there are lots of other people like me who base their musical development on saving for a long time to make monolithic purchases because we have no disposable (and very unreliable) income.

These companies want subscription models to ensure consistent monthly (quarterly, really) income but they can't get that from people without reliable income themselves. This model will eventually filter out every consumer who's in the lower-middle-class to poverty range. I'm sure that'll be good for everyone... [rolls eyes]

[andrew71]

I'd consider Komplete as a subscription provided it had regular, worthwhile content updates, and that I'd be rewarded as a long-time customer. I bought the original Komplete, when it was literally a bundle of the individual boxed products, Komplete 2 (and Komplete Care), 4, 7 and 9 Ultimate. Over the years that's quite a bit of cash that has been spent. I vaguely recall that the original bundle was around £1,000. I am far more cautious with money these days though...

[whyterabbyt]

This model will eventually filter out every consumer who's in the lower-middle-class to poverty range.

Not sure how you figure that. If you're in the 'poverty range' then finding a few bucks each month is a lot easier than finding a couple of hundred as a one-off.

[classic]

Make NI greate again.
NI first or what will bring the future.
Eat the small developers, and absorb their ideas as well?
Feels as if a cold hand graps into my neck.........howwww

[sjm]

This model will eventually filter out every consumer who's in the lower-middle-class to poverty range.

Not sure how you figure that. If you're in the 'poverty range' then finding a few bucks each month is a lot easier than finding a couple of hundred as a one-off.

Cause or effect? If you're spending more money on your software, it stands to reason you'll be poorer. I have yet to see a subscription model that works out cheaper in the long run if you actually intend to use the software regularly.

It's how pay-by-installment works after all, low barrier to entry, gouge them over time. And it's the people without the money to pay upfront that are those getting gouged.

[Spencer Maddox]

This model will eventually filter out every consumer who's in the lower-middle-class to poverty range.

Not sure how you figure that. If you're in the 'poverty range' then finding a few bucks each month is a lot easier than finding a couple of hundred as a one-off.

Cause or effect? If you're spending more money on your software, it stands to reason you'll be poorer. I have yet to see a subscription model that works out cheaper in the long run if you actually intend to use the software regularly.

It's how pay-by-installment works after all, low barrier to entry, gouge them over time. And it's the people without the money to pay upfront that are those getting gouged.

I agree for the most part. Although It is worth noting that the East West Cloud would take 40 YEARS to become more expensive then to buy its contents outright. That is one of the notable exceptions due to the sheer amount of content in the East-West Cloud. Also, of course, by its very nature, Rent-To-Own comes out as the same as well but I'm guessing that you were not referring to those sorts in your statement.

[whyterabbyt]

Cause or effect? If you're spending more money on your software, it stands to reason you'll be poorer.

No it doesnt. If you're spending more money on your software and your income remains the same you'll be poorer than you would have been.

Spending more money on software doesnt preclude a rise in income based on using that software though. You cant draw an absolute conclusion from incomplete results.

Also note that 'poorer than you would have been'; it's relative to ones own existing level of wealth, its not inherent that 'spending more money on your software' makes you poor. Leveraging from 'poverty' to 'poorer than you would have been' is misleading.

[fluffy_little_something]

Only people who can afford yet another monthly bill can afford "software as a service". I'm not one of them and I'm pretty sure there are lots of other people like me who base their musical development on saving for a long time to make monolithic purchases because we have no disposable (and very unreliable) income.

These companies want subscription models to ensure consistent monthly (quarterly, really) income but they can't get that from people without reliable income themselves. This model will eventually filter out every consumer who's in the lower-middle-class to poverty range. I'm sure that'll be good for everyone... [rolls eyes]

I agree. Software as a service is a total taboo for me. I am old-skool, I want to buy my license and then use it till I drop dead.