Proposed changes to Licensing

[Spoon]

We are aware that despite our best efforts, someone might buy R16 and 6 months later R17 is released. We typically go back a certain amount and upgrade licenses. The other side is when another major version is in beta test, there can be many who hold off purchasing the current version and wait for the next release, and software being software, schedules can slip and they might have to wait for months and months.

It is proposed to switch to an assured update model, where for example you would be entitled to any updates minor or major in a set period after purchase. Once that period is ended, then the last version of software that was entitled to would stick.

Thoughts?

[garym]

Re: Proposed changes to Licensing

seems fair to me.Seems like minor update should be free forever. That is, 17.1 to 17.2 to 17.3 to 17.4 etc. should be free (I think that is the current model). But moving to R18 would then be a new charge, unless you were within the time window you decide on after purchase of R17. (is the window 6 months? a year?, hard to say. shouldn't be more than one year I suspect).

[mville]

Re: Proposed changes to Licensing

It is proposed to switch to an assured update model, where for example you would be entitled to any updates minor or major in a set period after purchase. Once that period is ended, then the last version of software that was entitled to would stick.

Like a subscription service, renewed annually, where active subscriptions can access the latest version?

[Spoon]

Re: Proposed changes to Licensing

I would not say a subscription, as when a subscription end the software access is gone, so it not the same.

[S80_UK]

Re: Proposed changes to Licensing

For major updates, I think that a time limited update model works. For minor updates, possibly not for all users. I think it depends on the likely frequency of use of the software and on the user's preference. I tend to update with minor updates as soon as I am aware of them. Others, perhaps using the software in a more professional environment, might take a hands-off approach (if it ain't broke, don't fix it). However, to then find that a minor update would fix an issue but that the update is unavailable due to elapsed time would be somewhat annoying I think.

Personally, I am happy with the way it currently works. Again, if it ain't broke... But maybe there are benefits that I am not seeing.

[Maxpower]

Re: Proposed changes to Licensing

I think your proposal is a good one (Spoon). To add your model, for all existing paid customers, regardless of the age of their license, offer a flat percentage reduction of the retail price.

That would cover the edge scenarios where loyal customers that held off the upgrade purchase AND the set period expired. eg: If the major version upgrade price is 50% of retail... then the 'loyal customer' tier is may be 25%.

I think it is good you are asking the community.

[EdBrady]

Re: Proposed changes to Licensing

I'd stick with the current model. Not being able to get minor updates doesn't seem right. It penalizes those who buy as soon as a major version is released.