Selling software, where have all the business-models gone?

[Bob Olhsson]

Selling software, where have all the business-models gone?

As much as people want a return to the '90s (or the '60s!) this is a pretty sobering explanation of where today's audio software developers are coming from.

[zedhed]

I hate the subscription model....but it looks like it's here to stay.

Having said that, I'm prepared to pay in any way, for good solid and reliable software that I need. I say need because it used to be what I 'want'.

Sadly Avid hasn't provided such software under their subscription model IMHO, so no matter what model they use they won't be getting any more of my money until they get their act together.

[JFreak]

Maybe I start to come old, but I'd rather pay upfront for what I need to use. If subscription is the only way to use software, it makes me think hard whether I really need it or not.

Software is very much different than hardware. I have no problem renting a VENUE for a weekend's gig if I need that, because it makes zero sense to buy such a thing that is not being used most of the year. Software analogy of that would be a free 14/30 day trial that I could use once a year -- not subscription model.

[The Byre]

We have a ban on paying monthly payments for something that is not a constant supply, such as electricity, telephones or on-line server space.

Software is not a constant supply, but a licensed product. Subscription based software is tantamount to credit and we have a ban on credit obligations of all sorts, unless required for tax minimisation purposes, in which case, they must be balanced by a cash deposit.

If you are a huge company, whose income is guaranteed over a period of years, such as a giant film corporation or a major broadcaster, leasing equipment is OK, I suppose.

But a small operator must nearly always live with a 'lumpy' income stream, so the small studio that lives from project to project has to keep their regular payments down to the absolute bare minimum, if they are to survive.

[musicman691]

Originally Posted by JFreak

Maybe I start to come old, but I'd rather pay upfront for what I need to use. If subscription is the only way to use software, it makes me think hard whether I really need it or not.

Software is very much different than hardware. I have no problem renting a VENUE for a weekend's gig if I need that, because it makes zero sense to buy such a thing that is not being used most of the year. Software analogy of that would be a free 14/30 day trial that I could use once a year -- not subscription model.

You're not becoming old just realistic. I look long and hard at s/w and spend a lot of time with demos to see if it's worth it. And there are several developers with liberal demo policies that allow more than a single demo period. With a subscription I'd be too tempted to buy something on the spur of the moment; having to upfront the cash I have to be sure I really want the stuff. Also leaves less clutter on my computer. Subscription is why I capped my Photoshop machine at the version right before they went subscription only.

There are only four things I go subscription for: Drum magazine, Modern Drummer, Recording magazine and Sky& Telescope.

[Bob Olhsson]

I think the bright side is that it puts a lot more pressure on developers because their customers can much more easily jump ship.

I suspect part of why it isn't that big a deal for me is that I come from the era when no recording engineer or musician could possibly afford to own a recording studio. Record Plant was a combination of second hand mikes and outboard gear that were used with leased consoles and tape machines. The same was true of most studios.

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by musicman691

Subscription is why I capped my Photoshop machine at the version right before they went subscription only.

I'm glad someone said it and I didn't have to make the point but with that said, my PS is at CS4 and it still works wonderfully with Sierra