Introducing the new SONAR: New lineup, new features, plus membership

[xamido]

so Studio One's "maintenance updates" don't actually count as "minor updates" then, since they add features?

That's even better for customer. They have always given free update before major version. Doesn't matter if it's just minor bug fixes, or actually added new features.

[xamido]

Name other DAW that charge for a minor update?

Name any DAW which has never fixed outstanding minor bugs in a next major version.

You name the one in my question first, then i'll answer yours.

No, wrong way round. Your claim, your burden of proof and all that.

Yup, you have just proven my previous reply 100% there.

You're not here to add anything to the discussion, you're here to 'win' the internet.

[basslinemaster]

FL Studio pisses all over this sort of ridiculous 'Software as a service' malarkey. Some bright spark came up with this idea to make more money out of customers, but it's going to backfire, because it's so obviously not good for customers!

[basslinemaster]

Damn this update plans suck big time.

Can't believe they seem to make the same mistake as Avid.
I can see no information what happens, if you opt out of the membership after 12 months, and want to be a member again after some time.

Read the FAQ's under Membership - it's covered there.

I've just read a few more posts here and now I understand how it works - why would they even use the description they have to describe it, when it just puts people off? Why not just say it's for sale at such and such a price, you get a year's support and upgrades, and that's it? I can just imagine the meeting of 'great minds' round the table when this stupid decision was made at Cakewalk...

[Burillo]

That's even better for customer. They have always given free update before major version. Doesn't matter if it's just minor bug fixes, or actually added new features.

but then this is down to the policy. Studio One doesn't charge for updates inbetween major versions. REAPER doesn't charge for n+1 major version upgrade. FL Studio doesn't charge for updates, ever. so why does Sonar's particular model cause so much grief because it's (theoretically) inferior to what others have, but other models that are inferior to others, don't?

also, i will repeat my question again. i'll even rephrase it, so you will understand what i'm talking about.

let's say there's a bug X. in a perfect world, the next minor update would fix X, and you'll get the fix for free under the old policy. under new policy, you're not getting the fix for X unless you have a subscription.

in the real world though, give Sonar's track record, most likely the bug X will either be fixed in a major update, or won't be fixed at all (compare total bug count to ones that were fixed in minor updates, and you'll get the approximate chance of a bug being fixed in a minor update). either way, you have to pay if the bug is fixed. so, what's the problem here? what good is theoretical possibility of getting free bug fixes if in reality you ain't getting any?

[whyterabbyt]

You're not here to add anything to the discussion, you're here to 'win' the internet.

Not particularly capable of dealing with people who disagree with you, then?

[riley4reason]

Cakewalk wanted to make more money and they figured out a way to do it. Maybe it would have gone over better if they told people that instead of all the smoke and mirrors that has some people confused.
Riley

[whyterabbyt]

That's even better for customer. They have always given free update before major version. Doesn't matter if it's just minor bug fixes, or actually added new features.

but then this is down to the policy. Studio One doesn't charge for updates inbetween major versions. REAPER doesn't charge for n+1 major version upgrade. FL Studio doesn't charge for updates, ever. so why does Sonar's particular model cause so much grief because it's (theoretically) inferior to what others have, but other models that are inferior to others, don't?

also, i will repeat my question again. i'll even rephrase it, so you will understand what i'm talking about.

let's say there's a bug X. in a perfect world, the next minor update would fix X, and you'll get the fix for free under the old policy. under new policy, you're not getting the fix for X unless you have a subscription.

in the real world though, give Sonar's track record, most likely the bug X will either be fixed in a major update, or won't be fixed at all (compare total bug count to ones that were fixed in minor updates, and you'll get the approximate chance of a bug being fixed in a minor update). either way, you have to pay if the bug is fixed. so, what's the problem here? what good is theoretical possibility of getting free bug fixes if in reality you ain't getting any?

we'll have none of that kind of rationality here; stop trying to win the internet.

[whyterabbyt]

Cakewalk wanted to make more money and they figured out a way to do it.

Sonar was pretty much on an annual upgrade cycle anyway. By giving people the option of dropping out of that 'midway', they risk making less.

[xamido]

You're not here to add anything to the discussion, you're here to 'win' the internet.

Not particularly capable of dealing with people who disagree with you, then?

Nah, i just happen to know your modus operandi by now. You're the kind who avoided answering something, but responding by cherry picking people words. That's why you don't come up with original answers, only counter argument.

Let's keep it simple.

Are you okay with cakewalk new subscription model or not?

[basslinemaster]

Love It!

FL Studio: Pay Once = Upgrade For Life.
Sonar: Upgrade Once = Pay For Life

But that also comes with a penalty.

Sonar has been 64-bit now for 10 years.

FL Studio now 64-bit for one year - or was it two.

Development cost - so as long as paying give you more sooner - then it's alright by me.

ImageLine policy sounds good doesn't it - but is it, really?
I talked to ImageLine when I bought my new computer 2010 - and they had nothing planned for 64-bit was answer then.

LOL. I think the Image Line policy is just fine, I never ever have to pay for an upgrade to FL Studio. So in ten years' time, I'll still be using the latest version, and it won't have cost me a penny. Their lack of 64 bit support was nothing to do with a lack of money coming in...

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

so why does Sonar's particular model cause so much grief

because you aren't getting what you have already paid for, instead being penalised

in such a model, there seems to be a direct correlation between customer monthly payment, and monthly company action. if my last full version was xxx, and i have paid 6 months, i would expect that any bug fixes that had occurred in those 6 months be mine to keep (as my money would have been directly, or indirectly, supporting that development) if i then defaulted (voluntarily or otherwise), i would then have to go back to software that had the bugs i helped finance to fix

to clarify, i am not expecting that i should also keep use of extra included software. i don't expect to pay for 6 months of 'addictive drummer' and have it 'for life'

[riley4reason]

Cakewalk wanted to make more money and they figured out a way to do it.

Sonar was pretty much on an annual upgrade cycle anyway. By giving people the option of dropping out of that 'midway', they risk making less.

I like the sound of that! I'm pissed off at them for loosing half my products in their SSO migration and then putting the burden on me to find all my reciepts and send it to them. Then offer nothing to make amends. Why would anyone want to be a member of this kind of service either all upfront or monthly?

[xamido]

let's say there's a bug X. in a perfect world, the next minor update would fix X, and you'll get the fix for free under the old policy. under new policy, you're not getting the fix for X unless you have a subscription.

in the real world though, give Sonar's track record, most likely the bug X will either be fixed in a major update, or won't be fixed at all (compare total bug count to ones that were fixed in minor updates, and you'll get the approximate chance of a bug being fixed in a minor update). either way, you have to pay if the bug is fixed. so, what's the problem here? what good is theoretical possibility of getting free bug fixes if in reality you ain't getting any?

Here's the difference.

If they sell major version upgrade (the old business model), people can actually check out the update first, the bug fixes, and demo before deciding they will get it.

With this new business model, people are buying in to cakewalk intangible promise. Cakewalk promises that they will provide further development and bug fixes routinely. This promise is coming from a dev that's renowned for their buggy DAW and lack of routine bug fixes.

[Burillo]

so why does Sonar's particular model cause so much grief

because you aren't getting what you have already paid for, instead being penalised

in such a model, there seems to be a direct correlation between customer monthly payment, and monthly company action. if my last full version was xxx, and i have paid 6 months, i would expect that any bug fixes that had occurred in those 6 months be mine to keep (as my money would have been directly, or indirectly, supporting that development) if i then defaulted (voluntarily or otherwise), i would then have to go back to software that had the bugs i helped finance to fix

to clarify, i am not expecting that i should also keep use of extra included software. i don't expect to pay for 6 months of 'addictive drummer' and have it 'for life'

if you're afraid of defaulting, pay in advance for a year's subscription. problem solved. while i think it's unfortunate that you'll lose everything you got at that point, it's not like there's no way around it.