Some very valid points. I think we can all agree that what Cakewalk is doing is far better than the Avid approach. I have used tethered systems in the past. The actual software resides off-site and you access it via an annual $20k annual licensing fee. Only the biggest companies can afford to use it.
 
I feel any DAW that goes down this road will only be of use to people that can write off the annual cost as a business expense. Maybe that's the crux of the problem. When you straddle the market of professional and amateur you get the constraints of both worlds to deal with. 
 
I wish I could help you guys sort it out. Good discussion.

I think another important point that's consistently overlooked is that the 50% off price is equivalent to the MSRP. Cakewalk has stated unambiguously there will be specials from time to time. People don't say "Well I'm not buying a Gretsch guitar" because when they introduce the guitar the company quotes the list price.
 
Also, companies are subject to market realities, and make adjustments. When Apple first dropped the price of Logic to $199, they said that updates would require buying the program again due to the low price. That's not how it turned out at all. 
 
The onus is on Cakewalk to produce updates that are so compelling people feel the price is justified. To me this is an extremely consumer-centric approach. 
 

The Grim
 
not exactly true (maybe a small thing i know, but still) 

Okay...instead of all software companies, MOST software companies (and NO software company that was birthed from a $500 million sale of Winamp to AOL ).

Anderton
Of course I understand not everyone has the same priorities, so those updates might not be worth $250 to them. I am speaking only for myself, and not as a hobbyist for whom $250 might seem excessive but as someone who depends on SONAR to make a living.

ampfixer
I feel any DAW that goes down this road will only be of use to people that can write off the annual cost as a business expense. Maybe that's the crux of the problem. When you straddle the market of professional and amateur you get the constraints of both worlds to deal with. 

I also think that is one of real questions. How Sonar Platinum should be perceived?
I have no problem to buy a sever for $4k, the same day I feel I need it. I have bought my last notebook in a hurry. After several months using it I have not configure its GTX card (one of its expensive parts) and I probably will never do. But all that AT WORK...
At the same time $200 to upgrade something in my home PC is much more complicated decision for me. And not because I have no money.


I have no experience with professional music studios. Outside music, $1000 per year for a software someone use every day AT WORK is nothing in general. One man, with one computer in one room cost 10 times  more per month.
 
For many years Sonar was a very attractive hobby package. With all things included, "bonuses", "extra", "actions", etc. And here the price difference $100-$250 is significant. No extra, not bonuses etc. also.
 
I mean if someone buy a PC for $2000, an audio interface for another $2000 and surface yet another $1000-$2000. Guitar for $1000-$3000, a piano for $3000-$15000-$50000. Does it matter how much primary intended software cost, when it is in range $100-$500?
 
If Sonar is in this segment, I am ready to take my previous worries back. Make it $1000 pro year and that will work.
 
But from all discussion, question about $100 or $300 interface, most sales are from MusicCreator / HomeStudio, etc. I conclude it make no sense to reference Adobe/Avid/Oracle/SAP/Apple/etc when speaking about Cakewalk prices.
Note that I do not mean features, bugs or quality. I personally use Open Office (while I have MS Office), MySQL (while sometimes have to access Oracle) and temporarily install consumer grade disks into RAIDs. And I had to deal with very expensive and extremely buggy commercial software... The problem is THE LABEL. "Other software" has managed to put itself into the place where the price no longer matter.

Anderton


Okay...instead of all software companies, MOST software companies (and NO software company that was birthed from a $500 million sale of Winamp to AOL ).

that's better, and you could change the charging 'more' bit as well, but hey . . . i know how you like facts, and you often jump in to correct people who you think are reporting things as fact when they are not, thought you might appreciate it. please don't go stating things as fact, including emphasis, when they are indeed not fact, but false (sound familiar'ish )
 

Anderton


(and NO software company that was birthed from a $500 million sale of Winamp to AOL ).

 
you always bring that up, but it's just an excuse, just like drag racer (a) always saying he has less backing than drag racer (b), it's not even relevant at the end of the day, it's just an excuse, as they say, 'when the flag drops, the bs stops'

"I think their marketing sucks and their excuse that 'we only have a small marketing team' sucks too."
 
Which DAWs have the best marketing then?

The Grim
that's better, and you could change the charging 'more' bit as well, but hey . . . i know how you like facts, and you often jump in to correct people who you think are reporting things as fact when they are not, thought you might appreciate it. please don't go stating things as fact, including emphasis, when they are indeed not fact, but false (sound familiar'ish )

 
The difference is I correct myself when something I've said is pointed out as incorrect...even in the case of a remarkably petty point where I'm sure most people understood what I was trying to communicate. I prefer to "jump in to correct people" who are trying to pass off idle speculation (or even a deliberate fabrication) as fact.
 

The Grim

Anderton
(and NO software company that was birthed from a $500 million sale of Winamp to AOL ).

 
you always bring that up

 
C'mon, a smiley indicates a humorous statement; obviously there is only ONE company that was birthed from a $500 million sale. And if you want to exchange stupidly petty points, I don't "always" bring that up. I'm sure you'll correct yourself, right?
 

but it's just an excuse, just like drag racer (a) always saying he has less backing than drag racer (b), it's not even relevant at the end of the day, it's just an excuse, as they say, 'when the flag drops, the bs stops'

There's a difference between an excuse and an explanation, and it's an explanation Justin Frankel himself has offered. Cockos has stated its goal is "to develop software sustainably while preventing profit rationale from forcing engineering compromises." Well, when you don't have to worry about making a profit to take care of messy details - like paying salaries, and paying for the servers, bandwidth, and maintenance that allow people to complain freely about the host's products while promoting another company's product - yes, that makes it easier to implement the kind of upgrade pricing you prefer.
 
And for the record, I have never dissed Frankel for this. He earned his money fair and square through dint of his own intelligence, not by screwing over other people or bundling toxic mortgages, and can do whatever he wants with what he earned. I like that he's chosen music to benefit from his largesse. However if he recognizes he is not working from a level playing field, and I am merely reporting that...don't shoot the messenger.

Anderton
....
SONAR has never had a strong presence in interface bundles because it's not cross-platform. The pairing of X3 LE and Live Lite for the TASCAM interfaces was a deal I helped facilitate because of my connections with Cakewalk, TASCAM, and Ableton but that kind of deal is an exception.

 
Cakewalk has had interface bundles going all the way back to pro audio 9. So what you stated wasn't exactly wrong but not exactly right either.

Yeah, so I'm late to the game. I just found out the HARD way that Cakewalk silently cancelled all upgrade paths for X3 users like me just 3 days ago.
Saw an email a while back about simplified pricing (seemed like a good thing by the sound of it), the email linked to a blog, which I didn't read because, well first I get too many emails but more importantly the email NEVER mentioned they where cancelling upgrades for previous versions and I wasn't ready just yet to upgrade (was rebuilding the studio setup at the time).
There had been upgrades for previous versions of my favorite DAW for as long as can remember.
No more.
Bad communication or bad marketing I do not know (probably a little bit of both) but I don't care, in the end I feel cheated.

Can someone please explain to me why my subscription has gone from 17 dollars a month to 50. I'm getting a bit upset at this. My version of Sonar Platinum was current till Feb apparently, I don't keep abreast of these things, because I thought my 17 dollars a month meant I didn't have too.
 
I've never paid 500 dollars for an upgrade, particularly to go from one version of sonar to only the next version.
 
Someone please explain this to me. 
 
Cheers Ben

BenMMusTech
Can someone please explain to me why my subscription has gone from 17 dollars a month to 50. I'm getting a bit upset at this. My version of Sonar Platinum was current till Feb apparently, I don't keep abreast of these things, because I thought my 17 dollars a month meant I didn't have too.
 
I've never paid 500 dollars for an upgrade, particularly to go from one version of sonar to only the next version.
 
Someone please explain this to me. 
 
Cheers Ben

Doesn't sound right Ben.  I would email or PM someone from Cakewalk.