Well, I hate Adobe's model, which is totally gross. But a model where you keep whatever you've upgraded to if you quit, and that averages out to $100/yr would be what I end up paying anyway for upgrades. That's what, $8/mo? Sheesh I'd pay that. The upside for Cake, I guess, would be they could roll out features as they finish them and not having to wait a year to shove out a full version.
 

The issue I have is not the cost per month vs buying straight out etc.  It's that I will *never* buy into something that basically refuses to work if I stop my monthly (or whatever) payments.  Not. Gonna. Happen.
 
 

cityrat
The issue I have is not the cost per month vs buying straight out etc.  It's that I will *never* buy into something that basically refuses to work if I stop my monthly (or whatever) payments.  Not. Gonna. Happen.
 
 

Well said! +1000

cityrat
The issue I have is not the cost per month vs buying straight out etc.  It's that I will *never* buy into something that basically refuses to work if I stop my monthly (or whatever) payments.  Not. Gonna. Happen.

 
So, don't buy Audition. Last time I looked, I haven't had to deposit any more dimes in the meter to run Sonar.

Ibanezer
I don't understand who benefits from this change, almost sounds like new users only.

 
Well, the one benefit I can say for Adobe's model is you don't have to wait for updates or new features. When I was on Creative Cloud for a brief period of time, at least I knew everyone in the company was running the exact same version of the software.
 

I like to look at my box and discs up on the shelf personally.

 
That's something you'll have to take up with stores. It seems like there's less of a willingness to spend shelf space on boxes containing discs.

subscription does not mean need to be always connected.  That is more of a pay-per-use type of service. And with such a service an always connection is reflective of what is paid for: a single use, a week, a month, a year.
 
We already have a subscription model:  A version subscription. For most of sonar's life it has been a around a 12 month subscription.
 
I favor a once a year payment for 12 months of support for updates/upgrades, regardless of when during the year the subscription is purchased. Like a magazine subscription.
 
This would reduce the need to create new versions every fall.
 
It would even income for CW.
 
It would reduce the insane speculation.
 
It would reduce the need for special prices,...
 
Everybody benefits.
 

There were like 30 other questions on the survey...why you jumping to conclusions about one question? I already answered this in the other 10 threads about this topic but I'll say it again: we like to know more about our customers and how they use and purchase our software. We could certainly pretend like subscription doesn't exist and bury our heads in the sand OR we could truly try to understand how TODAY'S market place works. I get it that subscription is a dirty word for some but it's a reality and we like to know how people are using software. Call us crazy but we think data like this is useful. As for SONAR adopting the Adobe model, highly doubtful. What I can say though, personally, is that they are certain aspects of Creative Cloud that I enjoy. I am sure you could learn a lot from studying their model (both pros and cons). We use Creative Cloud here and enjoy it. But that doesn't mean we are going to go the route of Adobe. So deep breath and relax. It was just a survey. And thanks to all who took it. We appreciate the feedback and will use it to make better products and help improve the SONAR experience for all customers. 

dke

Andrew Rossa [Cakewalk]
Oh boy. There were like 35 other questions on the survey. Who wants to talk about rollbacks? :)

Seriously though, I don't think it's such a bad thing to try and understand how users purchase software these days. The more information we have, the better we can service our customers. So all these questions had a purpose...to try and understand our customers better. I've been at Cakewalk for 12+ years and one thing has always remained true... we are very customer focused. So please keep that in mind as you speculate on how SONAR will evolve. 

My position is even though I answered the previous questions with no uncertainty that I would not support a subscription model, to answer $9.99/mo or 99.99/yr would imply, push comes to shove I would accept a subscription model.  An answer of "None of the Above" or skip, would have been a valid answer in keeping with my feelings on the matter and to me should have been an obvious choice. 
 
There is nothing wrong with trying to understand how users purchase software these days, and I had no problem with the questions other than when a question omits an important choice in the context of the questions, to me it is leading the user to answer in a desired way rather than actual feelings on the matter.
 
I'm not speculating on how Sonar evolves, I'm just stating my feelings on the matter.
 
Dan

So if I ask you: There's a product you are ready buy and it costs $99, would you rather pay for it up front or a little more over time, you would just say 'skip question'. Because I assume if it's a product you are interested in then you'd just buy it for $99. I don't believe subscription was part of the equation unless it's a subscription product. In that case, it's still a valid question if you want to buy it. Maybe the question could have been restated to clarify that but the assumption is this is a product you want to buy.

YouDontHasToCallMeJohnson
subscription does not mean need to be always connected.  That is more of a pay-per-use type of service. And with such a service an always connection is reflective of what is paid for: a single use, a week, a month, a year.
 
We already have a subscription model:  A version subscription. For most of sonar's life it has been a around a 12 month subscription.
 
I favor a once a year payment for 12 months of support for updates/upgrades, regardless of when during the year the subscription is purchased. Like a magazine subscription.
 
This would reduce the need to create new versions every fall.
 
It would even income for CW.
 
It would reduce the insane speculation.
 
It would reduce the need for special prices,...
 
Everybody benefits.
 

Although i have stopped panicking over this,  i disagree with much of this. A version is not a subscription.  SImply buying something is not the same as subscribing.  ig i buy one magazine, that does not make me a subscriber.  in fact, if i buy 12 issues, i am not listed as a subscriber.  Subscription is commitment.
 
Your claim that it would even income for cakewalk assumes that enough people would buy into it to offset the number of people who such a model would mean an automatic exodus from Cakewalk. 
 
The idea that everybody benefits is also false.  Some may benefit.  I don't like Adobe's model but i do benefit.  in my  case i use enough multiple products to increase the value. For others it is not a win situation at all. And i guarantee if the adobe model was in place  at the very least anyone who stops paying definitely loses since they would be Sonar-less under that model.

scook
This would mean the shares are not publicly traded. The company still has shareholders.

 And yet still irrelevant to the purpose of the survey, which is to understand how customers use and buy software. If you were in charge of trying to understand your customers, and you forgot to ask about subscription, that would seem like a glaring hole, right? If you look at the survey there are all sorts of questions about usage and buying behavior that help paint a picture. The goal here is to understand your needs and build better products that you will love. Nothing to do with shareholders. A happy customer is good for everyone and that's what we've always been focused on.