I'm one-step away from buying Sonar Platinum ... I read that I have one year of free rolling updates and after one year I can renew the rolling updates for another year; from the FAQ:
...
I’m addicted, how do I get more updates and support for SONAR?
Simply buy it again. An additional 12 months will be added to your account.
...
 
But what happens for the bug/fixes ?  Can I still receive the fixes ?
 
If I bought a software with a defect (that can be introduced in the last rolling update) I would like to have it fixed without "buying it again"
 
 
 

No, and if support is an important criteria i would  read these  forums carefully  before committing to Sonar.  

Sonar X3 had 5 bug fix updates in a year and then a new product came out. Sonar Platinum is now a constantly evolving product with rolling updates. After a year, a product is usually replaced by a newer product. The year membership is not a subscription, it's pretty much the same model as before with X1, X2 and X3 but now the name doesn't change.

vorxio
If I bought a software with a defect (that can be introduced in the last rolling update) I would like to have it fixed without "buying it again"

You are not "buying it a again." You would be purchasing continuing support and updates. The software is practically guaranteed to have defects at the end of your membership. Development is an ongoing process. Depending on the severity of the defect, it would be up to Cakewalk to decide if the defect was severe enough to provide the fix to past members. It is really no different than if you purchased any software today that does not offer free updates for life (which is the majority of software).

This is certainly not an issue unique to Cakewalk, but it is not a concern that should be dismissed out of hand.
 
The concept that "the software is practically guaranteed to have defects" is almost certainly an accurate observation, but it raises a major issue in commercial law. The OP is expressing, as an issue of fairness, ideas which can be expressed in law as warranty, and unconscionability or breach of a contract. The general assumption is that a product that is purchased or a service that is contracted, will perform as stated. While the contract can include disclaimers that seek to provide the supplier immunity for his failures, there are definitely limits to what they can actually shield. 
 
Failures to provide perfect software are almost universal, but it would be a mistake to assume that the industry as a whole is above the law in this area, and it would be as unfortunate if, by accepting defects universally, we were to essentially give up our right to hold them accountable. If the assumption becomes "software is never expected to work as advertised," then it is a small step to a finding that, no implied warranty exists, or no express warranty can be enforced since it flies in the face of accepted reality i. e. that the reasonable buyer should know as a matter of custom that it will be defective.
 
As a practical matter one would probably need to prove that defects vitiate the essence of the bargain, making the product unusable for its intended use in order to get satisfaction. The cost of any litigation would prevent any but the most litigious and well-healed consumer (or class?) from enforcing repair or replacement or refund for off the shelf software, but the OP's observation that he would be asked to "buy the software again," to get it repaired is not, in effect, incorrect, although clouded by a business model that does not offer repairs separate from new features.
 
 

What you really want is the SONAR Platinum Lifetime Update version. However, I think it is no longer for sale. At least I can't find it anywhere.
 
If you purchase Platinum now I suspect (with absolutely NO INSIDE KNOWLEDGE) the Lifetime Update plan may be offered within a year. A larger number of Platinum owners climbed aboard that train last year and are for the most part very pleased with that description.

scottfa
No, and if support is an important criteria i would  read these  forums carefully  before committing to Sonar.  

This forum is an excellent peer to peer help resource.
 
If you are patient and describe your problem in detail I want to say nearly all problems can be solved by many of the users here. I've seen it time and time again and in my own little way I've helped a few too.

slartabartfast
This is certainly not an issue unique to Cakewalk, but it is not a concern that should be dismissed out of hand.
 
The concept that "the software is practically guaranteed to have defects" is almost certainly an accurate observation, but it raises a major issue in commercial law.

 
The End User License Agreement for all software pretty much lets software companies off the hook. Part of the "fuzziness" comes from trying to define how much a bug impacts the usefulness of the software. It's obvious SONAR is very capable of making commercially successful music in a variety of genres. Some people consider any bug a showstopper, others consider no bug a showstopper if there's a workaround, others weigh one program's flaws against another to try and determine what's best for them, and others will never encounter particular bugs because they don't encounter those bugs in their workflow. As far as they know, the software is bug-free.
 
SONAR is a little different because of the rolling updates. There are three main types of bugs:
 

• Ones that exist in the current version of the software, which a consumer can anticipate and therefore judge whether or not it matters. 
• Bugs that come as a result of new features.
• Bugs caused by interactions with something else (e.g., a poorly-written plug-in, a Windows update) which Cakewalk cannot anticipate.

 
The reality is that the majority of software requires payment past a certain point if you expect ongoing development and bug fixes. Avid is very upfront about their subscription program being necessary if you expect to have bug fixes. Most (not all) stop fixing bugs for a version after a new version is released, so you basically have to do an upgrade.
 
Bear in mind that with the rolling updates, whatever you have will continue to work, and if a previous update was more to your liking, you can continue to work with that. Noel has said that if there was indeed a bug of monumental proportions (e.g., a change in Windows that makes any version prior the very latest unusable), it would be made available.
 
The ultimate question is not which software has a greater or lesser number of bugs, it's which software is best matched to your intended usage. 
 
As to support, it depends on what you mean by "support." This is a term that's thrown around very loosely. To me, support means having a problem with software that is not revealed by an internet search, in an FAQ, or in the case of SONAR, cannot be resolved by the forum. I have seen instances where people have complained of not receiving support from Cakewalk for something that's explained in the documentation or solved in under 5 minutes using Google. I personally feel these kinds of queries deserve to go to the end of any support queue. 
 
I use a lot of programs and have found that the internet and forums are the best ways to resolve issues quickly. I still have open tickets with non-Cakewalk programs regarding issues that do not lend themselves to simple solutions; the support people acknowledge the issue but don't know how to solve it.

As a former member of the American Society for Quality, I can't get behind a design philosophy that says defects are inevitable. It breeds complacency. Points 2 and 3 of Craig's list can be mitigated by the developer. Point 1 is an embarrassment. If you make something that has a defect through successive revisions, you need to get your house in order. Why? Because that defect will become harder to fix as everything around it changes and more features are added.
 
Don't disagree with Craig's comments but I do have a different view. 

There is also "Bugs" where a thing worked in Xn but is broken in Platinum.