Software Pricing

[Theo Void]

Like 'most people' Theo Void I've never really read to licensing on my copy of Live... but I bet it says; oh, yes it does "installing, copying or use of this product do not acquire any ownership rights to the Software". Therefore, Ableton still own the software on your machine

So how many would take up a subscription model of Live if to was say £10 per month for Suite or £100 per year?

Wellit certainly seems as though I own it, CFM!! And, well, perception is everything!

I bought it and I can even sell it, therefore I own it. I don't care what the fine print says.

[stringtapper]

Like 'most people' Theo Void I've never really read to licensing on my copy of Live... but I bet it says; oh, yes it does "installing, copying or use of this product do not acquire any ownership rights to the Software". Therefore, Ableton still own the software on your machine

So how many would take up a subscription model of Live if to was say £10 per month for Suite or £100 per year?

Wellit certainly seems as though I own it, CFM!! And, well, perception is everything!

I bought it and I can even sell it, therefore I own it. I don't care what the fine print says.

Nah, if you actually owned the software you could sell it to another software company for millions. All you own is a license to use it.

[3osc]

Like 'most people' Theo Void I've never really read to licensing on my copy of Live... but I bet it says; oh, yes it does "installing, copying or use of this product do not acquire any ownership rights to the Software". Therefore, Ableton still own the software on your machine

So how many would take up a subscription model of Live if to was say £10 per month for Suite or £100 per year?

Wellit certainly seems as though I own it, CFM!! And, well, perception is everything!

I bought it and I can even sell it, therefore I own it. I don't care what the fine print says.

You own the license and can resell the license. "Owning" the software itself has a more technical meaning. You can't modify Live's source code, and as Stringtapper noted, you can't resell the software itself.

[Theo Void]

Like 'most people' Theo Void I've never really read to licensing on my copy of Live... but I bet it says; oh, yes it does "installing, copying or use of this product do not acquire any ownership rights to the Software". Therefore, Ableton still own the software on your machine

So how many would take up a subscription model of Live if to was say £10 per month for Suite or £100 per year?

Wellit certainly seems as though I own it, CFM!! And, well, perception is everything!

I bought it and I can even sell it, therefore I own it. I don't care what the fine print says.

You own the license and can resell the license. "Owning" the software itself has a more technical meaning. You can't modify Live's source code, and as Stringtapper noted, you can't resell the software itself.

Well obviously. I didn't make the shit did I? I figured that was a given. I thought we were speaking of different user models. Buying and owning a license vs. subscription.

[3osc]

Well obviously. I didn't make the shit did I? I figured that was a given. I thought we were speaking of different user models. Buying and owning a license vs. subscription.

Ok, so what was your point?

[ezelkow1]

I make it a personal goal to keep my monthly/annual bills to a minimum.

That. If you have a variable income (project work/freelancing) it's a must.

another +1 to this. Even without a variable income I despise having my take home amount whittled away here and there by various monthly bills. I much prefer to be able to save up for something once and be done with it.

The other great point is being able to skip versions. IMHO you get a much better value as an end user customer when you are allowed to pick and choose when to upgrade. I couldnt imagine being forced to pay for an upgrade of komplete every year even when I might not care about the updates.

This also provides more incentive on the creators to innovate. If they know they have a bunch of customers by the balls they have alot less incentive to actually provide a wealth of new features and products rather than minor updates and support. Again back to the example of komplete, this last iteration I didnt feel a need to upgrade as alot of k8 owners probably did, so that places more pressure on NI to provide new and interesting things in k10 to lure in those who did not upgrade to k9. However if everyone was just paying them 10$/mo would they really care as much? The same person who finds the same value in k7 as k9 is paying the same as the person who uses the new stuff, they have no reason to appease the person who is happy on k7

[stringtapper]

The other great point is being able to skip versions. IMHO you get a much better value as an end user customer when you are allowed to pick and choose when to upgrade. I couldnt imagine being forced to pay for an upgrade of komplete every year even when I might not care about the updates.

As far as I can tell from Adobe's model one aspect of a subscription based license is that there are effectively no more "versions", just continuous development of the software. Features get added when they are complete instead of when all of the new features are complete and the new version is released. This has the potential to make bug fixing and feature coding more efficient from the development standpoint. I'm not completely sold on the subscription model but this part seems like one of the upsides to me.

[mr.ergonomics]

The other great point is being able to skip versions. IMHO you get a much better value as an end user customer when you are allowed to pick and choose when to upgrade. I couldnt imagine being forced to pay for an upgrade of komplete every year even when I might not care about the updates.

As far as I can tell from Adobe's model one aspect of a subscription based license is that there are effectively no more "versions", just continuous development of the software. Features get added when they are complete instead of when all of the new features are complete and the new version is released. This has the potential to make bug fixing and feature coding more efficient from the development standpoint. I'm not completely sold on the subscription model but this part seems like one of the upsides to me.

I can see your point, but this could also be possible with the current model. I would even say it's allready the case! live9 is really not what you call a finished product imho and ironically I'm more and more ok with this. It's a beta for me in the current state and I will start using it when I think it is ready.