Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
Another 'Lifetime' license bites the dust
Hirudin:
I'm a big fan of AnyDVD, but I did not opt to upgrade to AnyDVD-HD. I still get all the updates I want*. I think SlySoft has really proven themselves capable of and willing to provide updates to old customers. The only gripe I have with them is I bought CloneCD back before it was sold to the current owners, I was forced to buy it again in order to get updates. Now, I don't use either of them as ImgBurn does everything I need.
Lets just be thankful that SlySoft hasn't adopted the Nero strategy: add a bunch of crap that hardly anybody wants, don't change the core program, and steadily increase your prices of every new "version".
The pre-change announcement shows a lot of integrity in my opinion. The stuff I'm hearing about Total Commander really makes me want to try their program, and maybe even buy it even though I already have "DOpus".
*I only actually download about 1 out of 5 of the updates that are available, they're so frequent I get tired of downloading them all the time.
CWuestefeld:
AnyDVD and AnyDVD HD support two totally different technologies. Just because they both come on an optical disc does not mean they are the same. Slysoft promised free lifetime UPDATES, not UPGRADES. AnyDVD HD is an UPGRADE.
-Josh (December 12, 2008, 02:17 PM)
--- End quote ---
Can you give us a rule to help determine what, in an arbitrary piece of software, constitutes an upgrade versus an update?
Is an update nothing more than a bug fix?
You say that DVD vs HD is a diffferent technology. What if the developer change back-end databases, or rewrites the code to move from C++ to .Net? Those are different technologies; is it an upgrade or an update?
What if the developer releases a translation in a new language?
What about adding new fields in a contact management app? Some people won't need the new fields, and don't want to pay for that new stuff, right? So that makes in an upGRADE?
What if the developer uses a new search algorithm, speeding up the app. A new algorithm is new technology, so it's an upGRADE?
I think you can see my point that the only reasonable way to draw this line is that anything that's more than a strict bug fix would, under your rules, require an upgrade charge.
Also, you haven't addressed my earlier concern about apps that store my data (and I granted that AnyDVD is not one of these, but I'm looking at the larger picture beyond this one company). Is it morally right for a developer to lure the user in, and later hit them with large price increases if they want to get back into their data? It seems to me rather like a drug dealer getting you hooked with some free hits first, then starting to charge you later.
Josh:
In my book, yes, updates are merely bug fixes and functionality fixes for existing features. In AnyDVD's case, the product was DESIGNED to handle DVD restrictions. BRD and HD-DVD are new technologies, not just to AnyDVD, but to the market as a whole. As such, the research behind cracking them (which slysoft was the first) is something I would think deems an UPGRADE as opposed to an update. Another example would be a board game catalogging software program expanding into video games. The originally program was designed to catalog board games, not video games. As such, an upgrade would be warranted since video games were not the original intended purpose of the application. AnyDVD decrypted and still does decrypt DVD's. AnyDVD HD is an UPGRADE as it now supports something more than the program itself was intended to support.
As for app's which store data, I rarely use ANY application which locks me in. The only exception to this is Roboform since it is unparalleled in what it does. People would say Microsoft locks you in with Office, however, I fail to see how they do as office can save to quite a few different formats. If the user chooses to use a closed source and locked format, that is their choice. Lack of education is not the fault of the author.
tranglos:
Can you give us a rule to help determine what, in an arbitrary piece of software, constitutes an upgrade versus an update?
Is an update nothing more than a bug fix?
-CWuestefeld (December 12, 2008, 02:48 PM)
--- End quote ---
The terms are fuzzy, but in general yes, an update is more or less a bugfix release, or a minor version change - from 1.1 to 1.2. Upgrade is a major version change - so from 1.1 to 2.0. A service pack for Windows is a free update, but Vista is a paid upgrade to XP. Apple uses the terms in the same way, but their explanation is a ittle more involved.
That said, it will often be an arbitrary decision what to call a release. If you've fixed 10 bugs and added one new feature, you can still call it an upgrade and charge for it, though it will make a lot of people unhappy - especially that some of them may have reported the bugs to you in the first place and have had to work around them for a year or more (CodeGear!). Or do what TuneUp Utilities do: never release free updates at all, put out one new version each year named after the year of publication plus one, change some UI colors and shapes of buttons and call it a major upgrade.
*That* said, I have no idea what technology change is involved in moving from DBD to HD DVD, so I have no opinion there at all :)
CWuestefeld:
Then I'm confused about what you're paying extra for if you buy a "lifetime" license. To me, everyone should be entitled to bug fixes -- those are places where you're currently being denied the functionality that you thought were paying for in the beginning. That should be free, included in the base price.
Since these lifetime licenses cost more, you must be getting something beyond the basic "fix what I already paid for", don't you think?
I suppose at the bottom line, the developer can do as he sees fit. But they certainly ought to be explaining the terms clearly. If I'm only paying for bug fixes, that should be made crystal clear.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version