Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]

mettelus

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
 
[...] While we are selling lifetime updates the annual option is not available (for platinum). [...]

The wording of this comment is ambiguous. After the life time update period expires, will the annual update option be re-instantiated, or will the monthly payment be the only option left?

There are no plans to exclusively have monthly payments for platinum. Not sure how you inferred that.

Because people read into anything what they want to? Myself included. But I will man up when proved wrong. And I have.

Anderton
That's just human nature.

zacto

Anderton

lfm
History so far has shown very little, if anything at all, of what is top voted on Features & Ideas forum is ever implemented.
 
So why have lifetime updates of something that is never going to implement things that you want down the line.

 
Please remember the multitude of forum requests along the lines of "I don't want new features, I want stability, I want faster operation, and I want fixes." Regardless, while Cakewalk has been taking care of those requests from people, they've also delivered many requested features:
 

• Softube Console 1 support - requested
• Upsampling - requested
• New themes - requested
• Theme editor - requested
• All of the future enhancements like plug-in load balancing, ripple editing, and comping enhancements - requested
• Update to TH3 - requested
• More track color choices - requested
• Melodyne tempo detection - not requested specifically, but the functionality was
• Smart Solo - requested functionality
• Speed improvements and optimizations - requested
• Patch points - requested
• Synth recording - requested 
• Relative video path - requested
• Drum Replacer - requested
• Better mastering tools - requested
• Use same solo and muting on drum maps as instrument tracks - requested
• MIDI engine changes to avoid stuck notes - requested
• Customizable control bar - requested
• The many, many fixes that were based on user requests - requested

 
...as well as features like Mix Recall which may not have specifically been requested, but have ended up being very popular. So I think history has shown that Cakewalk listens to its users. However, I think it also shows that users give less credit when Cakewalk implements what is asked for by a majority of users in multiple places if it doesn't align with their personal priorities. That's just human nature.
 
Also, please remember that there was a backlog of fixes that needed to be made. IIRC the Features and Ideas forum is less than two years old. As just one example, it took over a year to do the Drum Replacer. I don't think Cakewalk introduced Features and Ideas as a way for people to benchmark "See?!? It's been several months and Cakewalk hasn't implemented what I asked for!!" but to collect and then prioritize ideas for future roadmaps, which are becoming more relevant now as backlogs of long-standing fixes and enhancements are being targeted and in the process of being dispatched.
 
People still harp on things like "Well EVERYONE wants better notation! Therefore Cakewalk isn't listening!" First, not everyone (by a long shot) wants better notation, and the user surveys - which are statistically far more valid than cursory analysis of forum posts - bear that out. But second, and much more importantly, Cakewalk is always open to solutions for better notation capabilities. Just because they haven't found something suitable yet doesn't mean that they've stopped looking. Remember, it was said unequivocally in these forums that there would never be any fixes to staff view and that it was a dead issue to Cakewalk. Obviously the first was not true and I can tell you that the second one is not true either. But the company is going to wait until any staff view improvements can be done right, not cause the price to balloon, and cause minimal disruption to the rest of the program and its stability...which is not trivial. Maybe it's doable, maybe not. We'll see. Just because Cakewalk wants to do something doesn't mean they're comfortable with promising, or even hinting, that they will or can.
 
If it's any consolation I'm pushing for improved notation handling so SONAR can earn its rightful place as the DAW of choice in educational institutions. But I don't say they're not listening to me. They're listening. They just haven't found the right solution. I understand.
 

So since I'm not signed up for life - my wallet is closed - screaming a statement of discontent.

 
If Cakewalk's priorities are not in alignment with yours, there are many other options. I say that not in the spirit of "if you don't like it, leave." The only reason I'm using SONAR was because the programs I'd used prior to it were not in alignment with my priorities. I didn't scream a "statement of discontent" in their forums, I switched to SONAR because it was the tool that matched my priorities most closely, and then got on with making music. There are still plenty of people using the programs I used, which is fine with me...and I'm sure with them 
 
Finding the tool that matches my priorities most closely is MY responsibility. It is not Cakewalk's responsibility to create a tool that matches MY priorities. It is their responsibility to strike a balance that will satisfy, and hopefully delight, the majority of SONAR users.
 
The day SONAR doesn't match my priorities more closely than something else, I'll switch from SONAR as easily as I switched to SONAR. 
 
Life is too short not to do whatever it takes for you to be creative, so that you can exercise that creativity. 

Very well said, thanks Craig!

I would like for someone (from Cakewalk or anyone else who is knowledgeable about this issue) to address my question. To reiterate, I upgraded to Platinum from X3 in Feb 2016 using the monthly payment option. I agreed to make 12 monthly payments after which I would own a perpetual license for Platinum including all rolling updates through that 12 month period. However after only five payments I received an email stating that my subscription would expire Aug 3 and that I would need to renew for another 12 months to continue receiving updates. The email says I would own the perpetual license to what I have already received if I choose not to renew by then, but since this was not the original TOS as I understand it (which would require 12 payments before I receive a perpetual license), I'd like to have that clarified specifically.

Further, I'd like to know why I'm being required to renew (or purchase lifetime updates) my subscription in order to continue receiving updates after only five months when the TOS was clearly (to my understanding) for a twelve month period. It seems like I'm now being offered only the choice to end my subscription early or extend it for longer than I originally agreed. 

rmfegley
I would like for someone (from Cakewalk or anyone else who is knowledgeable about this issue) to address my question. 

 
I alerted Cakewalk to this. On the surface,  it seems like it may be Cleverbridge not being clever.
 

Hey, thanks for your help. I'd add that the lifetime updates option is attractive, but I'm still weighing whether it's right for me.

Not a cleverbridge thing. In fact, I'll take the blame for this one personally. We have a system which reminds people that their membership is about to expire. Unfortunately it doesn't have the "intelligence" to know whether it's a yearly or monthly membership, so when it sees your end date just a few days away, it lets you know. I addressed this just this morning. You might receive one or two more of these because you're already "on the list," but you won't see any more after that, and since you're on monthly, feel free to just ignore the message completely (unless of course you would like to switch). You're not required to buy Lifetime Updates unless you want to, and if you would like to stay on monthly, no further action is required. You'll still be fully unlocked after your 12th consecutive payment. 

Awesome, thanks so much for letting me know.  

Brian Walton

lfm

Anderton
It seems to me that paying $50 - $100 annually for, say, 10 years ($500 - $1,000) is less expensive than updating Platinum for 10 years ($199).

 
But you don't have the most powerful statement towards a vendor - your annual payment saying you are happy with how things are.
 
If it happends to 10 000 users not renewing - vendor start asking themselves, what did we do wrong?
There is potential risk a vendor never do that - if all is lifetime updates anyway.
 
ImageLine was about 6 years after Sonar with 64-bit version - was this due to their lifetime policy?
 
I'm not saying that is Cakewalk policy - probably people I trust more than many others with my money.
But unless there is something of need for my own use - I do not open wallet - and that is a statement lost, if signing up for life.
 
I hope Mac version turns out really well in all venues of audio industry. Probably very smart move.
 

You are completely overlooking the need for any software company to gain new users, not just old ones.  ImageLine waiting 6 years for 64bit just shows they were not cutting edge trying to get new users.
 
Sonar has a long history of rolling out things either before or at the same time as others.  They still plan on monthly updates, so they are clearly focused on remaining relevant.  ImageLine did not have that same model.  And sonar offering lifetime updates is clearly a move to get new users and new users are going to be looking for solid/tested and cutting edge.  

 Image Line is simple. Buy the software, get free lifetime updates.  No cutoff date either.  Image Line has never had problems getting new users, BTW.
 

vmw
 
Statistics bloody statistics - if I recall correctly all the surveys have been by voluntary participation - therefore can I assume not every user responded. Of those who respond are they weekend warriors or professionals where music is there major source of income?

 
That's not really relevant, because a large enough sample provides a cross-section that's representative of SONAR users. 
 

Now I could go on listing a range of questions where the answers could show a particular bias in the results; but that is not important. What is important is how the the questions are asked and how many multiple choice answers there are to select from in response to a neutral question.

 
There's not much opportunity for "leading answers" when the answers are simply numbers from 1 to 5. For example, with the question "How important is EUCON compatibility to you?" you could choose on a scale ranging from "not important at all" to "crucially important." 

A question like "would you recommend Sonar?" - you might like Sonar but there is no caveat like "keep in mind it has low grade notation".

 
There is the opportunity to add caveats because there's a comments section. People can say "I would recommend SONAR to anyone except those whose notation needs go beyond basics."
 

Surveys can be notoriously off the mark - just look at election polls around the world and see how many get it wrong.

 
Statistics is a science, which is why surveys give a margin of error. The further results fall outside the margin of error, the greater the odds of them being accurate. For example, if a survey indicates 80% of the respondents say "yes" and 20% say "no" with a margin of error of 5%, it's pretty safe to assume the "yes" faction is in the majority. There would be no certainty if it was 52% to 48% with a margin of error of 5%.
 
If you look at (for example) the results of Gallup's polls for presidential elections, the ones that ended up "wrong" were almost invariably within the margin of error and therefore, Gallup knew upfront the results had no guarantee of accuracy. Surveys can also be very accurate - especially when they address the same subject over a period of years, which tends to "smooth out" statistical anomalies.