News and Reviews > Mini-Reviews by Members

GS-Base Mini-Review

<< < (4/7) > >>

mwb1100:
finding out that this is basically a subscription by another name
-wraith808 (July 31, 2016, 12:27 PM)
--- End quote ---

Can you clarify that? The purchase page says that the version you buy is good forever.  You don't get free updates after a year, but you don't need to pay again to keep the version you bought working (as I understand it).

oblivion:
finding out that this is basically a subscription by another name
-wraith808 (July 31, 2016, 12:27 PM)
--- End quote ---

Can you clarify that? The purchase page says that the version you buy is good forever.  You don't get free updates after a year, but you don't need to pay again to keep the version you bought working (as I understand it).
-mwb1100 (August 01, 2016, 12:42 PM)
--- End quote ---
Pretty sure your understanding is correct.

wraith808:
finding out that this is basically a subscription by another name
-wraith808 (July 31, 2016, 12:27 PM)
--- End quote ---

Can you clarify that? The purchase page says that the version you buy is good forever.  You don't get free updates after a year, but you don't need to pay again to keep the version you bought working (as I understand it).
-mwb1100 (August 01, 2016, 12:42 PM)
--- End quote ---

If you kept the downloaded version (which I did), then you can use it.  However, if you need to download it after your year is up, when you click the download, you get this message:



And you're not informed of that need before hand.  I didn't like that practice.

IainB:
finding out that this is basically a subscription by another name
-wraith808 (July 31, 2016, 12:27 PM)
--- End quote ---
Can you clarify that? The purchase page says that the version you buy is good forever.  You don't get free updates after a year, but you don't need to pay again to keep the version you bought working (as I understand it).
___________________________
-mwb1100 (August 01, 2016, 12:42 PM)
--- End quote ---
This arguably has a lot to do with ethics in business.
I consider that @wraith808 has probably hit the nail pretty squarely on the head, and then later provides further substantiation of his comment.
It could arguably be called "a subscription by subterfuge" based on a position of pseudo-"lock-in". It's also a variation of a sort of bait-and-switch I suppose. Clever though, but then that don't impress me much. That sort of thing is known as "sharp practice" where I come from. In the long term, it could potentially and probably turn out to be  a self-destructive commercial/marketing tactic. Co-incidentally, I notice that Malwarebytes have been subtly shifting their licensing terms in what ominously looks like a turn in a similar direction.

Having studied and applied marketing and commercial/contract law in business, my understanding is that one shouldn't need to have to hunt around for the embedded hooks/gotchas, if one can reasonably trust the person one is dealing with to be dealing in a straight-up-and-down manner.
It always disappoints me when people let me (and themselves) down in that regard of trust.

In some of my job roles I've been responsible for the selection and financial sign-off of software licencing purchases for quite large farms of client-server and thin client systems. One of the primary risks in those cases is projected future cost, and if it turns out that a good product is available at what looks like a good price, but that in the longer-term it's pricing structure would force you down a potentially more expensive route, then you go for another product that doesn't stitch you up that way. I have to say that, in my experience, Microsoft has always been pretty straight-up-and-down and fair in its licencing schemes. Buyers of MS software can project future costs/budgets, and on functionality and price (risk) they would tend to usually win against their potential competitors.

So, sadlement, I'll not be buying an upgrade to GS-Base, and I'll not be committing myself to using GS-Base, even though I think it's quite a good product, and I'll certainly not be wanting to do repeat business with Citadel5 - or other people/organisations - if they demonstrate sharp practice. I risked very little, buying a licence for what, for me was a trial, at 50% off, but though the product was good, when I realised the subterfuge, I just uninstalled it and determined to continue to use the well-integrated MS Office 2016 product suite (Access, Excel, Word, OneNote, etc.), via the excellent $10 corporate home use licencing scheme, and it's a superb product set that is regularly updated, with only infrequent primary version number changes. Why would I use a single short-lived database product for the same cost, with a limited 1-year upgrade life? It wouldn't make commercial sense. So, regrettably, my trial of GS-Base is short-lived and it becomes one of my dusty "also-rans", with a note to self to not waste any more time on it in future.

We will nevertheless probably see GS-Base continue to come up under BitsDuJour and elsewhere at the artificial "50% off" (or whatever) price, appealing to uninformed and price-sensitive demand where, after 12 months, the suckers/buyers will find themselves caught up in an upgrade costing them - guess what? - an artificially-motivating "50% off" price again. Everything is 50% off all the time! Isn't that great? If the offer sounds too good to be true, then it probably is.
Economic and accounting theory would indicate that, under such a pricing scheme, the real price is always going to be 50% (or whatever) off whatever number happens to have been arbitrarily set as the supposedly undiscounted price.

This could even seem like a simple scam. Call a spade a "spade", as they say. @wraith808 would seem to be correct and it's arguably "Subscription" by another name.

Steven Avery:
Sometimes you can find the old version on FileHippo or OldVersions.  Apparently not with GS-Base.  So yes, trickery or subterfuge is involved.

And I keep all program install (.exe .msi style) downloads in a "Temp Download" folder, usually on a d: which is more subject to being saved.  Then occasionally that is backup up to the cloud, or it might be on the local backup thing.   This is small potatos in terms of size.

On GS-Base I have changed the folder name (every download is put in a descriptive folder name) to indicate that is a 12-month deal (indicating that even if I trim the files, this one is important.  And it acts as a quick reminder on a new install.)

Generally by saving the downloads you bypass this shark attack. My CAM Business Card program is an example, I have a valid license for Ver 9, they are up to 12, it is a good program, but not one I want to be forced to upgrade.  I went to the backup.  Maybe my old SiteSpinner.  Stuff like that.   When upgrades are based on new important features, normally you don't mind a modest upgrade if you get a lot of use from the program, but the programs vary wildly as to whether much is involved in an upgrade.  And you may be simply doing a retest. And some do "churning" of versions.

In semi-defense of the programmers, apparently it is hard to monetize this type of software after the first blasts of interest, ergo all the various advertising, install and pseudo-subscription tricks. Nonetheless, if you have a trick that you hide, that is not good.  I remember one program recently (maybe GS-Base) offered download protection for about $3. Meaning, we will save your version handy later.  Without saying that it would force an upgrade if you did not have the file.

Steven

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page