Avid: A question about "bug fixes" after my plan runs out

[H-man]

Originally Posted by Drew Mazurek

Sadly, you will not get anything new from Avid once you're "off plan".

And sadly Drew, this is why when my plan ran out at 12.5.2 I will never give Avid another dollar. Been using PT since 2000 and love it, but man, when it comes to a matter of business ethics you don't screw over your customers.

Just take a look at Avid's stock price and it's clear as day that this is a sinking ship. Hopefully, they find a buyer that will bring PT back to where it should be. Remember the good old Digidesign days? lol

And to the OP, you are 100% right!

[moshuajusic]

Originally Posted by philgrab

I don't know of any software company that will provide fixes for subscription software off the plan.

This was more a thing of the past when you could pick up bug fixes until the next release of non-subscription software.

The nature of the op's question leads me to believe he has a "perpetual license." In which case, I don't know of any software company that charges for bug fixes. Obviously if he's on a purely subscription plan, he won't get bug fixes when it runs out; he won't even be able to use it at that point.

Let's use candid language instead of Avid's jargon. If you *RENT* a license, then you use it and get bug fixes as long as you're renting. If you *OWN* a license, you should get bug fixes for free. That's how all software companies I know of work, except for Avid now, who's setting a cynical precedent.

I've said this before, it's worth reiterating. 12.6 had some serious bugs, like MIDI latency, that made it unusable for some people. What if their "upgrade plan" expired back in October and they didn't renew? They'd be stuck with 12.5.2, which was released in June. So effectively, they were sold a year's worth of "upgrades" but only got 8 months. I.e., Avid should provide license *OWNERS* free bug fixes for the latest version available during the "upgrade plan."

[zedhed]

Originally Posted by JFreak

Avid's interpretation of the SaaS business model is SUBSCRIPTION where you always get the latest version (as long as you subscribe).

I think it entirely reasonable to expect a paid for product to work as it should (subscription or not). Therefore IMHO bug fixes should be free.

This argument is considerably strengthened when we're talking about bugs that are 'introduced' in a new release that hitherto worked fine. Otherwise the consumer is actually paying for the software to be broken which makes no sense at all.

On the other hand if consumers are fully aware of the way a company operates in this regard and are stupid enough to financially support that company, then don't expect any change in their behavior....after all, we're dealing with capitalism here not morality.

[JCBigler]

For Avid, stable bug free software WOULD be a new feature. Unfortunately, they put that new feature on the back burner while they introduce the most frequently requested feature by users: cloud collaboration.

[yoerik roevens]

since Avid does`t fix bugs anyways, isn't this whole discussion a bit irrelevant?

[leftalive]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but how on earth are Avid (or anyone, really) suppose to be able to introduce new features over time, but also supply dot releases with only bug fixes for those of us who choose not to stay current with a subscription? After even just a few years time, they'd have so many differing versions of what is suppose to be the same software that they'd be pulling their hair out trying to keep track of it all. Every new update of PT would essentially have to split off into it's own timeline, in order to provide future updates without new features.

Doesn't seem very reasonable to me, but I'm no coder.

Believe me, I'm no more happy about the bugs and quirks in PT than anyone else is (especially the problems with ADC and Elastic Audio), but the experience of working with it isn't perceptibly worse than it ever has been in the roughly 13 years I've been using it, and after crunching the numbers, the difference in money spent pre/post sub model is about the same (for me).

I feel like the general sense of entitlement on the DUC has increased pretty dramatically, since the switch to a subscription model. It's as if we all expect them to suddenly be a different company, just because we're paying monthly/yearly, instead of updating at our leisure.

I wonder if it isn't the sting of having to cut a check more often that's to blame for this. Even if the check is technically smaller...

Or maybe I'm just wrong.

[zedhed]

Originally Posted by leftalive

Maybe I'm missing something here, but how on earth are Avid (or anyone, really) suppose to be able to introduce new features over time, but also supply dot releases with only bug fixes for those of us who choose not to stay current with a subscription?

Not really the consumers problem. I'm sure there would be a way to do it but it might cost the company more to do it, which should give them more incentive to get it right in the beginning.

[TCM]

For me personally I need a stable release! That would be my first priority.
To lock customers in who hope to get a stable release eventually, and not delivering it, will ultimately be the doom of Avid, I fear.

I probably will extent my subscription for one more year. And see what they will do. If they are not able to release a solid version.....

[TAMBOR]

Originally Posted by leftalive

Maybe I'm missing something here, but how on earth are Avid (or anyone, really) suppose to be able to introduce new features over time, but also supply dot releases with only bug fixes for those of us who choose not to stay current with a subscription? After even just a few years time, they'd have so many differing versions of what is suppose to be the same software that they'd be pulling their hair out trying to keep track of it all. Every new update of PT would essentially have to split off into it's own timeline, in order to provide future updates without new features.

Doesn't seem very reasonable to me, but I'm no coder.

There are at least two ways I can think of:

1) Lock/Unlock features in licensing, like they do with Vanilla/HD

2) Add new features as modules, almost like plugins, leaving the base code unrevised

Neither of those is rocket science, and Avid must know it. So where does that take you with resect to the morality of Management?

Avid uses the new features (which most people don't really want at the cost of stability) as the excuse to keep you in plan, while they make little serious effort to fix core design issues.

[Extreme Mixing]

The whole direction of this thread is pointless. It's not going to happen. Software design is a journey, not a destination. There will probably never be a perfect version. I'm almost 20 years in and haven't seen one yet.

Steve