I feel a bit uncomfortable at the 'bad press' that's being created here.
There may be feelings of outrage at price increases, but it's up to each one of us to decide what a product is worth, and I don't really understand the strength of ill feeling. Let the market do its job and assess the price/value ratio.
My only outrage was being cut out of the upgrade pricing. I can understand some companies arguing that upgrades are only by one version number (so you can't skip version 2 and go from 1 to 3 at the standard upgrade price) - though I feel that is short sighted - but Nev decided that an arbitrary date meant that people who have version 2 can't upgrade to version 3. There are two things that strike me as odd about that:
- it alienates the early adopters that helped build the business
- it penalises people for that fact it took them a long time to launch the next version
Add to that the huge price hike since it was originally released and it makes me worry what will happen in the future - why buy into an expensive program when there is no certainty that you can upgrade to the next version and that the next version may be more than double the price of what you have paid.
Its all very well to say stick with version 2 if you like - but is there any guarantee that it will be updated as new versions of Windows are released? If not why invest time, effort and money in that product when there are alternatives that don't behave or limit your choices in this way.
OK this thread is about a 50% discount - but it isn't the initial purchase that is the problem - what happens in 18 months time when version 4 is released and only people who bought after the discount get the upgrade price?