License model no way !!!

[Cyoon]

I think the price is reasonable, do you want all those impulse buyers who don't get into the demo before buying, and then start to moan and sell it afterwards?

[stamp]

[polishbroadcast]

Studio One and Logic are not close to comparable simply because they are loss-leaders for hardware companies. If Logic was Apple's primary product you can believe it wouldn't be $199. Likewise, Presonus wants to sell you an ecosystem of interfaces, preamps, and mixers. As an aside: when I bought Logic, it was $900, and then got Logic X for $199—that works out to $122 a year.

Cubase and Live are fair comparisons though they also started selling hardware presumably because software is a tough living as your only business. As mature products Cubase and Live offer far more instruments & effects for the price, compared to Bitwig, and that was my main complaint about the yearly price ... it is too high ... but I agreed to pay it for now because I like Bitwig more than the others.

[maschinelf]

Not interested in Bitwig pricing politics or comparisons with Logic or any other DAW. I like what they have done with 2.0 and the future promise it holds, that's all. Their pricing seems similar to cakewalk's model & afaik cakewalk offered a one-time lifetime update plan, so again I reiterate:

Just a suggestion .. would there be many takers if Bitwig team were to offer a one-time lifetime update scheme, similar to what cakewalk did? Say $479 for existing 2.x owners, $599 for 1.x owners, and $749 for new licenses.

[Unameit]

Hey,
There are also industries on the planet where you pay 400$ for a 2 hour subscription and the blow**b costs extra.

[bolba]

As a newcomer to Bitwig, I find the annual commitment from Bitwig to provide $169 worth of enhancements every year a bit off-putting. Why would they lock themselves into charging yearly? If they want to keep the revenue flowing, work your butts off and put out a killer 2.5 release or 3.0 by this time next year. If you didn't quite pull it off, then take another 6 months to get it right before asking for another $169. They've got one foot in the water and one on dry land. Either go all in on a subscription or stick with a traditional licensing model. I would love to jump in on Bitwig believe me. Despite the relatively high price provided I think it has a great workflow.

I think Bitwig will find themselves in a difficult situation. They'll be asking users to upgrade after a year and saying "we expect to have features a, b and c done mid year". Users will just wait until features a, b and c and done. They're going to find people just wait until they can deliver, regardless of the renewal date. Just my thought. I don't intend to upset anybody that totally loves this approach and if it works out then hey that's great.

THIS!
Best opinion in whole thread.
I believe Bitwig's team just shoot themselves in the foot with that strange decision.

As I said in another thread, better option will be "true subscription" + ability to purchase "perpetual license", like here for example: https://corona-renderer.com/prices-licensing/

[aced411]

As a newcomer to Bitwig, I find the annual commitment from Bitwig to provide $169 worth of enhancements every year a bit off-putting. Why would they lock themselves into charging yearly? If they want to keep the revenue flowing, work your butts off and put out a killer 2.5 release or 3.0 by this time next year. If you didn't quite pull it off, then take another 6 months to get it right before asking for another $169. They've got one foot in the water and one on dry land. Either go all in on a subscription or stick with a traditional licensing model. I would love to jump in on Bitwig believe me. Despite the relatively high price provided I think it has a great workflow.

I think Bitwig will find themselves in a difficult situation. They'll be asking users to upgrade after a year and saying "we expect to have features a, b and c done mid year". Users will just wait until features a, b and c and done. They're going to find people just wait until they can deliver, regardless of the renewal date. Just my thought. I don't intend to upset anybody that totally loves this approach and if it works out then hey that's great.

THIS!
Best opinion in whole thread.
I believe Bitwig's team just shoot themselves in the foot with that strange decision.

As I said in another thread, better option will be "true subscription" + ability to purchase "perpetual license", like here for example: https://corona-renderer.com/prices-licensing/

Thanks for the props Unfortunately I'm sort of a hypocrite now b/c I ended up grabbing V1 on an impulse so I could get the free V2 upgrade (despite my complaints). Now I'm regretting that decision and trying to sell my license

[anttimaatteri]

As a newcomer to Bitwig, I find the annual commitment from Bitwig to provide $169 worth of enhancements every year a bit off-putting. Why would they lock themselves into charging yearly? If they want to keep the revenue flowing, work your butts off and put out a killer 2.5 release or 3.0 by this time next year. If you didn't quite pull it off, then take another 6 months to get it right before asking for another $169. They've got one foot in the water and one on dry land. Either go all in on a subscription or stick with a traditional licensing model. I would love to jump in on Bitwig believe me. Despite the relatively high price provided I think it has a great workflow.

I think Bitwig will find themselves in a difficult situation. They'll be asking users to upgrade after a year and saying "we expect to have features a, b and c done mid year". Users will just wait until features a, b and c and done. They're going to find people just wait until they can deliver, regardless of the renewal date. Just my thought. I don't intend to upset anybody that totally loves this approach and if it works out then hey that's great.

THIS!
Best opinion in whole thread.
I believe Bitwig's team just shoot themselves in the foot with that strange decision.

As I said in another thread, better option will be "true subscription" + ability to purchase "perpetual license", like here for example: https://corona-renderer.com/prices-licensing/

Thanks for the props Unfortunately I'm sort of a hypocrite now b/c I ended up grabbing V1 on an impulse so I could get the free V2 upgrade (despite my complaints). Now I'm regretting that decision and trying to sell my license

the bitwig crew put a lot of pressure on themselves, no doubt. but the main difference to other subscriptionmodels is: you dont subscribe anything. you are not forced into buying something. if you decide to buy the product you get 1 year of support and updates for a said price, which you are free to accept or not. you dont get the double price to update from for example 1.0 to 3.0 (at least as far as i understood their policy NOW. i sure hope they dont change it ).

the pressure is on THEM not on the customer. sadly enough some customers feel the urge to yell evrywhere that the pressure is on their arse, for god knows what reason, and that they want a special treatment or cure for that pressure.

[bolba]

Well, you probably need to re-read what aced411
Because from your words it looks like there is no difference between previous payment scheme and current one. So why bother at all?

Also, I don't believe that upgrading from 1.0 to 3.0 will be the same as 1.0 to 2.0
because it doesn't make that much sense for loyal customers and from market perspective of view.
We can see already that each new version of Bitwig will be more expensive than previous why (which is okay).

The problem with current payment scheme is that looks like half-measure, draws no real pros for the team/customers, only misunderstanding.
I'm ready to upgrade to 2.0 but still waiting before I'll see first patches/some changes or response from dev's side.
I don't believe Bitwig devs don't need my money (or someone else's money who also waits as me).

[pekbro]

I think the thing folks need to realize about Bitwig is that due to its modularity,
once they have a solid framework in place (and I think its fairly obvious that's what
they've been doing for the most part up to now), they should be able to dole out
features and content relatively easily. They've already alluded to withholding
features for major (paid) releases, citing in fact, that the "non-sub" subscription
model would prevent such things.

Case in point: Color themes, a popular requested feature that's obviously already built in,
yet remains unavailable.

They just need to secure a regular income, there's no reason to think they shouldn't
be able to create an endless supply of new gadgets and content to keep people
interested with the marvelous musical erector set they've created here.

The only real question is, will it be enough?

[pdxindy]

Also, I don't believe that upgrading from 1.0 to 3.0 will be the same as 1.0 to 2.0
because it doesn't make that much sense for loyal customers and from market perspective of view.

My understanding is that you can let your 12 months of updates lapse, wait a year, and then pay for another 12 months with no additional cost.

[dentnile]

$169 per year to have the latest version of a DAW is pretty pricey.

[Cyoon]

$169 per year to have the latest version of a DAW is pretty pricey.

subjectively

[craigtumps]

Wow this convo is still going. One thing you know is there will always be sales. So the headline price is $169 but there will be offers, just jump on it then. I have paid more than this for one single plugin, look at the cost of Ozone for example.

Check these guys out https://roonlabs.com/pricing.html look how much they are charging for just a media player! $119 per year or $499 lifetime to play your music files looooool.

you could easily spend $169 per year on Steam playing games. actually I bet some of you spend more than that. If you are really serious about making music, if you are a pro or if its just your main hobby then its worth it surely? Some people spend more than that on a pair of trainers lol.

If you ask me I think Bitwig is better than all the other DAWs, so its worth every penny. If you disagree and dont think its the best then why are you using it? You can get a lifetime licence for FL Studio if you want value and you can make music perfectly fine on that. I have FL already but Im here paying my money for Bitwig because I think its better simple as that.

[craigtumps]

Deleted!