Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Should I pay to go from 3.0 to 3.1?

<< < (2/3) > >>

MilesAhead:
But the other question is, will they pay you if you downgrade?

It seems only fair.

mouser:
as for reasonableness, i don't think one should get hung up on major vs. minor version number changes; different authors have different standards for what accompanies such changes.  some companies will base the change purely on specifically when they want to charge people for an upgrade.

in general, i think 1yr seems like a reasonable amount of time after which to ask for an upgrade charge, and 50% seems like a reasonable discount to existing owners.  of course i much prefer lifetime upgrades, i'm just saying what sounds about reasonable.

one exception though i think has to do with security or severe bug fixes -- no one should be forced to pay for such fixes, even if (or especially if) they took a year to fix.

Darwin:
Seem like this is a subscription based licensing system in all but name. I don't particularly like this licensing model, but it's not unreasonable.

MilesAhead:
I agree with Mouser that the label/version # doesn't really mean anything. I'm on another board where a beta application that has allowed free usage is going to go commercial.  The program works in its major functions.  All programs have some bugs.  But some of the denizens of the forum don't want to pay for "beta software" on principle.  That's fine but it's just going to be a relabel to V. 1.0.

To me the programmer has perfect right to charge if the program works and it is stable. If it's a "beta" because it keeps crashing, that's another matter.  But if it's just a "beta" so people can try it and report their experiences, I don't know why they would be sad if it works but the about box doesn't say "1.0" on it!  It must be the placebo effect.

mouser:
Seem like this is a subscription based licensing system in all but name.
--- End quote ---

i think there is a key distinction one needs to make in terms of what is and is not a subscription based license.  as long as the previous version still works after the period, then i think you are talking about an upgrade price not a subscription fee.  it's only when the program stops working and you have to pay to continue using the software, that you have a subscription system.

where the line starts blurring is the case i mentioned -- where you might have a critical bug or security flaw, and don't get a fix unless you upgrade -- in that case you are basically being forced to pay or risk damage.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page