Brando
...old rope itches though.

Not for long, though, surely..

I don't want to keep the negativity rolling... but I wanted to clarify:
 
First, I don't feel "entitled" to anything.
 
As a PC user and proponent of custom PCs, the big news was just not as exciting as it could have been [to me].
I'm glad to see some nice updates in the plans/works.
I'm very pleased with Sonar Platinum... and will continue to be a Cakewalk customer/supporter (have been since Pro Audio 4).
I just had different hopes/desires for what the big news might have been.

I think this announcement will help me come back to Sonar. Cakewalk's big change came with the 'X' series. I had to ask WHY when that happened and I didn't like the response.
Feature-by-feature Cubase 8.5 is number one as far as I can tell right now and Cakewalk should do everything it can to catch up in a market where perception is important. That means cross-platform support. 
Personally I think that Apples are becoming far too consumer-oriented to stay the number 1 choice for music professionals, but that's just a guess right now.
I just hope Sonar Platinum will be as rock-solid as 8 is now.

 
You probably get a lot of mail like this- and it goes in the round file- but don't be too hasty!
 
 
My platinum rolling updates membership expired in November 2016.
With all due respect, this is just my opinion on why I did not opt to pay $199.
(whether correct or not) my analytical decision is based on the following perceptions of reality:
 

• as proposed, the software is  way too fee intensive for what you are really getting. 
• Why support a package that has shifted to become intentionally unsupported?
• Does the organization's target ROI yield have to become the consumers mistake as well?
• This Ware is largely perceived as functionally obsolete legacy products, based on a fatigued offering of versions offerings introduced in V 6.0  through V 8.5.
• Why would someone want to pay for the privilege of conflicted and complicated software that is primarily based on several generational layers of patch codes rewrites on remaining uncorrected patch codes-especially when the software is unsupported?
• Again,this is just my opinion on why I have not opted to pay the $199 for lifetime "benefits" .
•  While I'm not real interested in hearing the " company line", please tell us why all 2016 platinum owners with expired updates did not receive any $99 e-mail offers? We would all be interested in the story. 
• As Mark Twain once remarked," Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest.  
• re: Model closeouts:  " Why won't your organization take the business risk(s) that the fair market intended you to take from the beginning?

This is user forum. No one here can answer on your questions (and you probably understand that, so why are you asking?)
 
If you have payed for all versions before, $99 offer was one year ago. For the Lifetime (could be perceived as paying in advance for this year). If it was $199, you have skipped/waited too long initially with Platinum. If you do not see the value, why you want $99 offer now?
 
Some users have payed just to support the company they like, other because they like the product, probably someone because he/she was always doing so. Everyone can have own opinion and reason. And the value of $99/$199 is different across the world (for some people that is monthly salary, for other 1-4 dinners...).
 
Note that I personally (unfortunately) agree with all your technical statements... But they have promised to improve (confirming some mistakes! something I rarely see from companies). And that is a matter of trust/believe they can. Is that going to happened? When? How? We (users) do not know. And that is naive to expect someone from Cakewalk will come here and explain you everything in details.

azslow3
This is user forum. No one here can answer on your questions 

I don't know....you seemed to do a pretty good job of clarifying the situation Alexey! :)
 

cakewalk.com/Gibson-Announcement

lol