Yes, I think it was mentioned before that we would evaluate these kinds of scenarios on a case by case basis. But with continuous development, the goal is to reduce these kinds of issues.

Seth Kellogg [Cakewalk
What is your particular concern?

Andrew Rossa [Cakewalk
We try to keep up the best we can but it's possible we miss a post. What was your question?

Thank you, Seth and Andrew for responding.  I do mean this with all due respect.  Beepster is on the right track with my concern regarding the monthly payment option (see below).  In the event, for instance, membership is interrupted for lack of a monthly payment (maybe a lack of funds), the most important functionality of SONAR (save, save as, etc.) would be lost and so would new work for that missed period.  Even if the member would later continue payment (a month or so later), the 12-month calendar restarts.  This is when the prior investment would be lost.  Now, since many users have been waiting for fixes and feature improvement, like ACT, for instance, and such fixes never come then the value of that investment (over time) has become greatly diminished (despite any new features).  In this scenario a member is obligated to continue monthly payments in hope of such fix(es) being released or otherwise, lose hope and cut losses.    As clearly stated in my post referenced, we have been waiting for further development and have been putting our trust in the Bakers for quite a long time.  I am one of those user who will be upgrading in hopes of legacy features will be further developed (and fixed); which, I would prefer over new features.
 
If I may take this opportunity to suggest/request, how about, say, after three months of payments, no matter what happens to a membership there after, that member is guaranteed SONAR Artist to keep with full functionality.  That way the membership, although temporary, is not a complete loss and SONAR (Artist) remains fully functional.  I am taking this from a Professional or Platinum membership.
 
Kind regards,
 
Living Room Rocker

Beepster
I'm thinking maybe this...
 
http://forum.cakewalk.com/FindPost/3153847
 
but I'm not really following the reasoning based on the context because in that thread I pretty much described the best way for a skeptic to "protect" themselves. The month to month thing just is what it is and that's what it is... (an extra option). I don't see how it potentially "screws" anyone more than the old model...
Meh... what do I know. I'm just a Beep.

 
I guess you missed my point all together then, Beep.  Actually, your "best way," as I mentioned in a reply, opens up the possible scenario I described.

...wicked
Well, the repost of your concern didn't contain an actual question, and in this quote above you also fail to reiterate it. So, I suggest you remember the importance of staying on point and providing all the information needed to avoid the knuckling of you head, so to speak. (actually that's a reminder to look up the etymology of the word "knucklehead" for myself)
 
The rest of it...well the Bakers should be commended for handling this particular uproar. They all carried themselves with great decorum and tons of info. Though I have to admit I wish I was a fly on the wall at Cake HQ sometimes. :-)

Please reread my post and Beepster's link.  I was staying on point and that is why I didn't go off subject.  My request in this particular thread was to define "troll" and "knucklehead".  So I am confident I am not knuckling myself.  Just explaining myself in response to the OP and other post as concisely as I can.  Hence, I was vague on the (mentioned) point but explicit in my expression.


Kind regards,
 
Living Room Rocker

See... that's still weird. This new model does not introduce any NEW problems that would somehow create the scenario you describe. It actually helps minimize such issues in many ways and in the case of new bugs Andrew just confirmed they'd figure it out on a case by case basis if it is preventing you from working with what you own (within reason).
 
In the old model you bought it and were stuck with it. It almost sounds like you want a guarantee that OLD bugs will be fixed if you go month to month and if not it should be free? Discounted?
 
IDK, man. The Bakers can only do what they can with stuff and they're doing a pretty decent job of it lately and I'm assuming it'll only get better with this new system. It's still just a piece of software (and a MASSIVE one) that is inevitable going to have some quirks that'll annoy one person or another. You gotta do a cost/benefit analysis at that point (which was kind of a huge part of what my thread was about). Is Sonar doing what I need it to? What I want it to? If not do I trust that eventually it WILL? Is it worth it to me to pay up front? Pay monthly? Squat on my current version and wait things out?
 
The new system gives more nuance to all this as opposed to you're either in or your out and there is no penalty for opting out temporarily as you wait for your fixes or feature requests.
 
Seriously no disrespect, LRR. I just don't see how the NEW model puts you in a worse position than the old model. If anything it puts you in a much more powerful position as a consumer... which is why I personally like it.
 
Power to the people, yo!
 
*fistpump*

Living Room Rocker

Seth Kellogg [Cakewalk
What is your particular concern?

Andrew Rossa [Cakewalk
We try to keep up the best we can but it's possible we miss a post. What was your question?

Thank you, Seth and Andrew for responding.  I do mean this with all due respect.  Beepster is on the right track with my concern regarding the monthly payment option (see below).  In the event, for instance, membership is interrupted for lack of a monthly payment (maybe a lack of funds), the most important functionality of SONAR (save, save as, etc.) would be lost and so would new work for that missed period.  Even if the member would later continue payment (a month or so later), the 12-month calendar restarts.  This is when the prior investment would be lost.  Now, since many users have been waiting for fixes and feature improvement, like ACT, for instance, and such fixes never come then the value of that investment (over time) has become greatly diminished (despite any new features).  In this scenario a member is obligated to continue monthly payments in hope of such fix(es) being released or otherwise, lose hope and cut losses.    As clearly stated in my post referenced, we have been waiting for further development and have been putting our trust in the Bakers for quite a long time.  I am one of those user who will be upgrading in hopes of legacy features will be further developed (and fixed); which, I would prefer over new features.
 
If I may take this opportunity to suggest/request, how about, say, after three months of payments, no matter what happens to a membership there after, that member is guaranteed SONAR Artist to keep with full functionality.  That way the membership, although temporary, is not a complete loss and SONAR (Artist) remains fully functional.  I am taking this from a Professional or Platinum membership.
 
Kind regards,
 
Living Room Rocker
 

This probably hasn't been addressed directly before, because it is not in the plans. For example, if I stopped paying my car loan after 3 months, I wouldn't get to keep a lower version of the same model, that I'm not on the hook to pay for. If an Artist user subscribed for 3 months, he's paid $30, while a Platinum user would have paid $150. In this instance it's not really fair to the Platinum member as they paid 133% more for the same software. 
 
If someone is commercially using the software, in a mission critical setting, the tools should be built into the price they are charging customers. The user knows that SONAR will go into demo mode. The imperative is on them to secure their customers data. I would make sure stems, mixes, raw tracks, and maybe even OMF's were saved before I let my subscription lapse. If the customer wanted something else later, I'd charge them enough for another month of access.

Seth Kellogg [Cakewalk]
 
This probably hasn't been addressed directly before, because it is not in the plans. For example, if I stopped paying my car loan after 3 months, I wouldn't get to keep a lower version of the same model, that I'm not on the hook to pay for. If an Artist user subscribed for 3 months, he's paid $30, while a Platinum user would have paid $150. In this instance it's not really fair to the Platinum member as they paid 133% more for the same software. 
 
If someone is commercially using the software, in a mission critical setting, the tools should be built into the price they are charging customers. The user knows that SONAR will go into demo mode. The imperative is on them to secure their customers data. I would make sure stems, mixes, raw tracks, and maybe even OMF's were saved before I let my subscription lapse. If the customer wanted something else later, I'd charge them enough for another month of access.

In a commercial setting, this makes good sense, Seth. I don't have commercial clients these days, but when I did, if I had lost projects because I didn't renew my license I would expect reactions ranging from a lawsuit to a punch in the nose.
 
Right now, though, my question is where do I buy Sonar? I want to buy direct, but when I go to shop.cakewalk.com I don't see an option to make the purchase or download the control center or anything. 
 
 

I think I'm starting to see where my confusion is. The whole point of my thread was to illustrate how the new model cannot be worse than the old model unless you REALLY go out of your way to MAKE it worse.
 
I think LRR is expecting it to be BETTER than the old model (which it is IMO) except how HE thinks it should be better. That's a big difference. I was merely addressing the specific concerns of those who thought they were being forced to pay in advance for unreleased features. Not digging down into all the infinite scenarios of the month to month users.
 
I personally would not go month to month in any scenario other than to maybe do a month trial to see if the current version was baked to my liking before going all in on a year's membership.

Larry Jones

Seth Kellogg [Cakewalk]
 
This probably hasn't been addressed directly before, because it is not in the plans. For example, if I stopped paying my car loan after 3 months, I wouldn't get to keep a lower version of the same model, that I'm not on the hook to pay for. If an Artist user subscribed for 3 months, he's paid $30, while a Platinum user would have paid $150. In this instance it's not really fair to the Platinum member as they paid 133% more for the same software. 
 
If someone is commercially using the software, in a mission critical setting, the tools should be built into the price they are charging customers. The user knows that SONAR will go into demo mode. The imperative is on them to secure their customers data. I would make sure stems, mixes, raw tracks, and maybe even OMF's were saved before I let my subscription lapse. If the customer wanted something else later, I'd charge them enough for another month of access.

In a commercial setting, this makes good sense, Seth. I don't have commercial clients these days, but when I did, if I had lost projects because I didn't renew my license I would expect reactions ranging from a lawsuit to a punch in the nose.
 
Right now, though, my question is where do I buy Sonar? I want to buy direct, but when I go to shop.cakewalk.com I don't see an option to make the purchase or download the control center or anything. 
 
 

It will be available soon my friend...very soon. 

Seth Kellogg [Cakewalk
If an Artist user subscribed for 3 months, he's paid $30, while a Platinum user would have paid $150. In this instance it's not really fair to the Platinum member as they paid 133% more for the same software.

Have I misunderstood something here? They are 'not' the same software so why would you say this?

Godling

Seth Kellogg [Cakewalk
If an Artist user subscribed for 3 months, he's paid $30, while a Platinum user would have paid $150. In this instance it's not really fair to the Platinum member as they paid 133% more for the same software.

Have I misunderstood something here? They are 'not' the same software so why would you say this?

Because in his example/model any member would get Artist if they lapsed after 3mo, or that is what I took away from it.

Seth Kellogg [Cakewalk

Living Room Rocker
If I may take this opportunity to suggest/request, how about, say, after three months of payments, no matter what happens to a membership there after, that member is guaranteed SONAR Artist to keep with full functionality.  That way the membership, although temporary, is not a complete loss and SONAR (Artist) remains fully functional.  I am taking this from a Professional or Platinum membership.

This probably hasn't been addressed directly before, because it is not in the plans. For example, if I stopped paying my car loan after 3 months, I wouldn't get to keep a lower version of the same model, that I'm not on the hook to pay for. If an Artist user subscribed for 3 months, he's paid $30, while a Platinum user would have paid $150. In this instance it's not really fair to the Platinum member as they paid 133% more for the same software. 
 
If someone is commercially using the software, in a mission critical setting, the tools should be built into the price they are charging customers. The user knows that SONAR will go into demo mode. The imperative is on them to secure their customers data. I would make sure stems, mixes, raw tracks, and maybe even OMF's were saved before I let my subscription lapse. If the customer wanted something else later, I'd charge them enough for another month of access.

Thanks, Seth.  Nonetheless, we are not talking "loan" here, but membership.  Further, in the 3-month example, the Platinum member would have already enjoyed SONAR in that time.  As for the Artist member, I don't know of a comparable consolation.  But that is just what I am referring to, a consolation as opposed to a loss (even for the Platinum member in this scenario).
 
To your other point, I work with musician starting out and/or starving, if you will.  These musicians do not have income from paying customers as a studio or engineer might from clients.  I've been trying to convenience people like this to buy and use SONAR.  Not just for their own benefit, recording on their own, but for mine so that once they need my help it will be easier for me to step in and not have to convert or transfer the recordings.  Now that there is a perceivable means to obtain SONAR at an affordable price, this is making it a bit of a hurdle in the pitch.  I know that musicians, like many I work with, don't have the funds to throw at new ideas particularly when it is not directly connected to writing and/or playing music for them.
 
I really hope you understand where I am coming from and consider these potential users.
 
Kind regards,
 
Living Room Rocker
 
P.S. On another note, I am disappointed in my fellow members on this forum.  These attacks on me are unwarranted and should be individually addressed by the monitors, as expected.  Okay, I got that off my chest.