Bumping again because another poster has it wrong. 

Because I think its important Susan. The reason I made the thread. 
 
Because the new threads are coming very quickly it gets pushed to another page and some don't notice it. I think it should be seen. 

Thanks John!

Have you guys been following the NAMM news today? "Subscription" is no longer a bad word. Everyone's doing it now. Avid, Slate. Waves has been doing subscriptions (both update plans and plugin rentals) for years. Subscription is the new black!

Thanks Earwax. Thats helpful. 

Earwax
My only concern is with the payment plan portion of Cakewalk's model. I think, without a doubt, it is absolutely the worst way to purchase Sonar. Financially, it makes no sense to me that anyone would do it. But, there you go!

 
It is if you set out to purchase it. If you say "I am going to pay for 12 months and buy this product," from day one then it is a waste of money. However it is a good model if you aren't sure. That is really what you get. You can rent it if you aren't sure how much you'll like it or how long you'll use it, but then if you end up renting it long enough, you get to keep it. So you don't feel like it was just money down the drain.
 
It is also ok for people who are bad at managing money. Some people don't do savings well. Like my home insurance is due one a year. The full amount it technically due at the beginning (as it is a yearly contract). However, they'll let me pay monthly... as long as I also pay a $3 "convenience fee" per payment. Clearly that is financially suboptimal, however clearly some people like it because they keep offering it. People can't plan ahead and save up, so they'd rather pay more. Not a good idea, but there you go.
 
You'd end up about the same if you paid it up front on a credit card that you then didn't pay down or rented it from CW, 20%ish.
 
Me? I'm a buy it kind of guy. However in my case, that is arguably stupid. I only play with Sonar as a hobby and like many hobbies, I'll neglect it sometimes. It would probably make more sense to only rent it when I need it, so long as I rent it for 9 months or less a year, I save over buying it up front. But, I like the buy option (insist on it in fact) so that is how the Sycraft do.

I understand the pay all now, or pay monthly = same difference. I think most do.
 
What i do not yet understand is if the 'New Sonar' updates to the software end at one year... or like previous versions will go through continuous free updates, bug fixes added features, etc. until another major version is offered - for example, Sonar8 went from 8.0 through 8.5, then X series - X3 went through a,b,c,d, and e, before Sonar Platinum was offered.
These free updates and bug fixes were spread over more than one year, were they not?
 
These free updates continued right up until an 'all new' version of Sonar was offered, did they not?
How does this compare now with the new system?  I think this is where some clarity would be helpful for some of us.
 
For example, will under the hood improvements and bug fixes end for the 'new' Sonar owners at the end of a year, without paying more money?  Or will these kinds of updates continue until the next major overhaul and new product offering (EG. New Sonar 2.0)?
Cheers,
 
 

Sycraft

Earwax
My only concern is with the payment plan portion of Cakewalk's model. I think, without a doubt, it is absolutely the worst way to purchase Sonar. Financially, it makes no sense to me that anyone would do it. But, there you go!

 
It is if you set out to purchase it. If you say "I am going to pay for 12 months and buy this product," from day one then it is a waste of money.

I agree with you completely.
 

Sycraft

Earwax

 
However it is a good model if you aren't sure. That is really what you get. You can rent it if you aren't sure how much you'll like it or how long you'll use it, but then if you end up renting it long enough, you get to keep it. So you don't feel like it was just money down the drain.

 
This is what the soon-to-be-released free Demo is for. Though, according to Noel Borthwick in another thread, the Demo most likely won’t include third party content, you will still be able to get a feel for the program’s core operation. If you are an upgrading user, you already have a fully functioning version of Sonar that you can use to get “real” work done. So, I see little need for a current user to pay anything to test out the new version. If you absolutely have to test out EVERY piece of content in the bundle, one month (paid) should be the maximum necessary.
 
If you are a new user, the model makes even less sense. The cost goes from $15 - $20 a month to $40 - $50 a month. That’s a lot of money to test out software. Again, that’s what the free Demo is for. But, if you have the uncontrollable urge to test EVERY piece of content in the bundle, one paid month should more than cover it.
But, then again, I would guess that most of the third party content providers have their own free Demo versions of their software that a potential user can try. Why pay?
 

Sycraft

Earwax

 
It is also ok for people who are bad at managing money. Some people don't do savings well. Like my home insurance is due one a year. The full amount it technically due at the beginning (as it is a yearly contract). However, they'll let me pay monthly... as long as I also pay a $3 "convenience fee" per payment. Clearly that is financially suboptimal, however clearly some people like it because they keep offering it. People can't plan ahead and save up, so they'd rather pay more. Not a good idea, but there you go.

Totally disagree with your first sentence. Completely agree with your last sentence. It has been demonstrated repeatedly that the people most likely to get into trouble with ANY kind of installment plan are those who are bad at managing money. If someone is that bad at managing his/her money, maybe a much less costly (or free) software alternative should be considered.
 

Sycraft

Earwax

You'd end up about the same if you paid it up front on a credit card that you then didn't pay down or rented it from CW, 20%ish.

If you pay for Sonar with a credit card, a loan from your credit union, a loan from your 401(k), a loan from your grandmother, etc., you will never lose full use of your software. None of those institutions will take away your software if you miss payments. Well, your grandmother might…. Seriously, with institutional financing of your software, it can’t be deactivated, even if you miss the first three payments, for whatever reason (legitimate or otherwise). I’m sure this would not be the case with Cakewalk/Gibson. You will obviously get flak from the institution, but things can be worked out with them. In the interim, your software is safe.
 
Even if your financing rate is 25% per annum, you end up paying very little more than you would pay with Cake’s plan.
 
I would say over 90% of people pay for items over time because they can’t afford to, or simply don’t want to, pay the full price up front. I see the number of people who truly want to “rent” Sonar to be so small as to be inconsequential. Renting Sonar is not quite the same as renting, say, a backhoe.
 
I just can’t see how Cakewalk’s installment plan is good for the user. If you want to “try it out”, get the software Demos for free. If you can’t afford the upfront price, finance it. If your credit (or family good will) is so bad that you can’t get a loan, and you have no other access to funds…..well…you have much bigger problems than trying to figure out how to buy Sonar.

QuadCore
What i do not yet understand is if the 'New Sonar' updates to the software end at one year... or like previous versions will go through continuous free updates, bug fixes added features, etc. until another major version is offered - for example, Sonar8 went from 8.0 through 8.5, then X series - X3 went through a,b,c,d, and e, before Sonar Platinum was offered.
These free updates and bug fixes were spread over more than one year, were they not?...These free updates continued right up until an 'all new' version of Sonar was offered, did they not?

 
With previous versions of SONAR, you got updates for about six months or less. Now you get them for up to a year. So the new model delivers fixes for longer.
 

How does this compare now with the new system?  I think this is where some clarity would be helpful for some of us.

 
Cakewalk did not release bug fixes for programs that are no longer for sale. If you do not continue your membership you "freeze" the program at that point. However, as Noel has stated, if some serious bug was discovered it would be made available. That's one of the advantages of the new installer, it's not hard to do that sort of thing.

Regardless of the name given to it, I like the idea/concept of it.  Enough so that I've bought in to see how it plays out.
 
One thing I do NOT like is C3.  There was enough reported about not being to specify install locations, that I went manual for the whole thing.  C3 "sees" the Sonar install, but of the subitems.
 
What would be nice would be for Cakewalk to rid their products of dependency on "C:". 
 
I managed to keep my 8.1x64 system partition to a nice, lean 39G used until I came back to Sonar.  Between X3P and S2015 that has climbed to 49G - with as much as possible directed to alternate drives.
 
And it's really not just about performance.  It's about managing backup/recovery.  It's silly to spend time and resources backing up stuff you have installation media for, IN MY OPINION.
 
The OS is a different story.
 
So PLEASE, never make C3 mandatory UNLESS these artificial installation constraints are removed.

 I think this FAQ explains the new membeship the best.

http://www.cakewalk.com/Products/SONAR/Membership

I suggest reading every word of the FAQ. I see now what's going on. There won't be any more big annual releases for a new version. Instead there will be periodic updates, fixes, new features added, etc. So in other words many loyal customers will be paying the yearly fees, likely every single year because they'll want to keep current. I doubt many will stop the payments for long, because then you'd be missing out on the new features, fixes and tech support. I think when I've paid a year, I'll keep a close eye on updates, new features, and fixes and use that to decide when I'll pay another year.

I like this aspect of the new system a lot: there won't be the legitimate excuse anymore for, "oh sorry we can't fix X3, because we're already working on X4 and can't devote our resources anymore to X3". Sonar Platinum is really X4 Producer. I don't expect we'll hear talk of X5 or X6, instead we'll get gradual new features added periodically.

After understanding this new system I do like it better. It has several advantages. Another one being getting the new features gradually will make it easier to get used to changes as opposed to the shock some of us have gone through with a drastically different version. I hope this will also make the bug fixes better, instead of having to wait for a new version to get a bug fix.

 

John

People have a very negative view of subscriptions based on the Adobe model.  

 
I don't, why do you say that?
 
My Adobe Photography Plan works absolutely perfectly for me. So I guess I'm not "people"?
 
I don't understand your double standards John - you seem so keen to stomp all over anyone who mistakenly believes the new SONAR business model is a 'subscription', yet you are happy to use a blanket statement like the one I've quoted above that is deliberately (by using the word 'negative') giving the impression that the Adobe system is in in some inferior. They are different - surely that's all one need say?
 
You need to give people credit for having a bit of intelligence. If somebody wants to call the Cakewalk model a 'subscription' or not, the fact is that the model will work exactly the same way - whatever you call it. The Cakewalk literature is absolutely clear about the two available purchase options, and the restrictions and benefits that are afforded by both. If anything, should anyone actually perceive the monthly payment scheme to be a 'rental' model, I'd like to think that they'd get a pleasant surprise after handing over 12 consecutive monthly instalments when they got to keep the software.
 
I spent a lot of time doing my research before deciding on whether or not to start my Photography Plan with Adobe. And I like to think I have the intelligence to sit down and work out what offers me the right balance of the features I want against the price I'm prepared to pay.
 
The feature set I had with the software from Adobe I already owned outright - Photoshop Elements & Lightroom 5 - was nowhere near as sophisticated as what I'd get from subscribing to their Photography Plan, which includes continual updates and upgrades going forward to Lightroom and to Photoshop CC. I'll cut a long story short, but I worked out that over a two year period, in which time I'd normally expect to upgrade to a new version of Lightroom and to skip-upgrade two or three versions of Elements, it was going cost me about the same as subscribing to the Photography plan for those two years*.
 
So for me, getting the added features of Photoshop, plus guaranteed upgrades to Lightroom actually means I get better value over those two years, albeit of course, with the full knowledge that Photoshop will stop working if I decide to stop my annual subscription. But, assuming the prices of the software one can still purchase outright (Lightroom and Elements) remain roughly equivalent to the Photography Plan subscription price, the same calculations will hold in two years time, so continuing on my subscription then will make sense then too.
 
Plus, as I mentioned elsewhere, and with the caveat that there is a subscription reduction for previous owners of Photoshop CS versions signing up to a subscription plan, there is no equivalent upfront fee in the Adobe model whereby you have to purchase the software. As I've never owned a full version of Photoshop CS, if Adobe followed the Cakewalk model, I would have had to shell out the $800ish in my first year.
 
And that in a nutshell is the difference between the two models. With Cakewalk, you end up owning the software, but you do actually have to pay for it somewhere along the line; with Adobe, you don't end up with the software, but you're not expected to pay for it at any point.
 
For me, the Adobe Photography Plan works absolutely perfect. I can see nothing negative about it whatsoever when I consider my other options. If you just go on the last retail price for Photoshop CS6 ($800) and for Lightroom 5 ($150), then I reckon that my continually getting the latest version of both for $14.34 per month is pretty reasonable.
 
 
 
* (Edit to add) it works out at about the equivalent of $12.50 per month if I upgrade Lightroom once and Elements once during that 2 year period, against $14.34 per month for the Photography Plan.