Without knowing the current state of Topaz’s finances I have no idea what a realistic upgrade price is.
I thought Erik’s original post was suitably contrite. He admitted their old upgrade model was a mistake on their part and that they had to change it to be a viable company in the future.
I have purchased all of their products (apart from the new video one as I have no need for it) and am an early adopter of all the other AI offerings. So I’m affected as much as anyone.
But I stand by my previous point - if the choice is between paying for the upgrades or having nothing then I’d rather pay for the upgrades.
Firstly, sorry if I have missed or not properly appreciated the many other posts but here is my initial view of this change.
Many software business models have adopted and/or started with the half price yearly upgrades compared to the full price for new customers. Such as QImage has endured though sadly Photodex has fallen after a very long period of trading!
Mention has been made of having a special pricing structure that covers those current purchasers (such as myself?) who have all three key products (Denoise, Gigapixel & Sharpen) that maybe there should be a “Granfathered”/early adopter subset of customers…that would IMO engender a much more encouraged & encouraging user experience. As afteral a company’s best sales asset is its current customers and alienating “us” by bringing in changes that come across as ‘breaking the social contract’ with “us” will as many posts here and on DP Review show cause upset & disgruntlement!
Whatever you do IMO you must rapidly improved the installers (this is now a bit of a dogs dinner) plus make available all previous versions downloadable as Offline Installers ~ as you say we the customers own what we have bought!
If you are intent to change the business model the way you describe ~ surely rather than the online ‘phone home’ registration, make it a reg key based system! This would give confidence that should there ever in future be an issue in regard to the registration servers we, the customers will be able to keep using the the software we bought
What I’ve been reading so far almost made me feel sick… sure, it wasn’t the best of ideas to promise free updates forever to begin with, but pretending that a business (be it Topaz or any other) can run without generating income and make some profit is either naive or arrogant.
Those who really like/need Topaz’ products AND ask for free or almost free updates should ask themselves what happens if Topaz goes out of business because of that business model. By the way, a software developer does cost the same (salary, insurances, etc.) whether he/she is working on new features or on bug fixes. Therefore asking for free bug fixes and agreeing to pay for new features (that may not be purchased) doesn’t make sense either.
I thought about that for my earlier response, but then realized that this is, once again, playing into the “Osborne Effect”. Once they start telegraphing details of their development plans most shoppers will wait indefinitely for something they really want to be produced before they pay up, rather than giving them “at risk of getting nothing” money every year for development funding on the front end.
Perhaps they should have tried converting their Legacy Customer Base into shareholders to solve their funding problem. It sounds like many of us would have been willing to support them to keep the dream alive if they had just bothered to ask before alienating us.
It’s an interesting coincidence that just a few days ago I started thinking about their company strength as it related to their inability to produce product updates to fix their issues.
The same pricing policy as QuarkXPress now has. You have the last purchased version forever. Which is a fairer offer than blackmail from Adobe (Don’t pay? Don’t use!) But! Quark announced this fairly ahead. Topaz has violated the terms of service. I consider the upgrade price of such one-sided software very high! Could you at least clarify whether it will be possible to download and install the purchased (outdated) license at any time (lifetime)? How will you deal with software bugs / malfunctions - will patches only be included in the update?
I actually paid the $99 rip only to have a product that didn’t register and as a result wouldn’t work. Getting my money returned was a challenge and I finally had to DEMAND a refund. I didn’t buy the product to piddle around with faulty software (Remask AI), I bought it because I needed it NOW! Never again, Topaz. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me!
While the theory for this change in business model is understandable, its application is being handled in a clumsy, unfair manner and is a textbook example of bad faith. Topaz Labs (TL), having decided that their model is unsustainable, has decided to change the rules in the middle of the game, thereby penalizing everyone in perpetuity.
Free upgrades tended to cause people to give TL the benefit of the doubt when products, particularly and almost exclusively the AI brands, were brought to market with rough edges more akin to a beta release. We assumed that the glitches would be fixed going forward, and sometimes we were rewarded. Even when an update fixed an issue while simultaneously adding others, we felt in time these bugs would be quashed. Now we face the real possibility that our license will expire before the software has been made bug-free, or, failing that, has been made—at a minimum—to produce consistently usable output.
As of today, consistently usable output is a bar that most of your products have failed to reach. TL is expecting a lot of its customers in asking them to pay more for software that is less than polished.
TL should have followed the example set by other, more reputable companies such as Malwarebytes. When MBAM ended their lifetime licencing, they made clear that, past a certain date, their generally excellent flagship software would be sold on a yearly-licensed basis. Those who purchased MBAM prior to that date were grandfathered in and retained lifetime license status. The promise of free upgrades forever was honored and no cries of bait and switch! were heard.
MBAM retained the goodwill of its customer base; TL may not be so lucky.
I own almost all of your products and have been an advocate among my associates for years. Just the other day we were discussing that they are not cheap, but I pointed out that, once purchased, you own them for life. That is no longer true and makes your products one of the most expensive on the market. Quite frankly, I can get along without a lot of the programs and will choose not to upgrade. I would rather pay a $10 a month subscription like PS/LR than be hammered multiple times with upgrade charges. To be honest, as a long-time advocate of Topaz, I feel betrayed.
I do understand that it makes complete business sense for you, you can’t keep giving things away for free … even though when I purchased the software originally it did say free upgrades for life.
I have various products and it seems that they are now spread across two bundles The Utility Bundle and The Creator Bundle. Does that mean I have to pay $99.99 per year for each bundle or $99.99 for everything if I want to upgrade ?
I guess it depends on how you interpret that statement. The other products are Studio, JPEG to RAW AI and Adjust AI and they are under the old policy as Eric stated.
The Video Enhance AI product, the only other product, clearly states its upgrade policy.
I think you need to distinguish between feature releases and bug fix/maintenance releases (usually minor revs). …and perhaps support prior major releases with bug fixes for some limited amount of time (aka end of life).
Otherwise I am not completely opposed to paying for upgrades.
I can understand the rational behind this decision as you feel it fair to align with other software developers who also charge for upgrades. Nevertheless, one of the purchasing decision factors that I am sure many were influenced by was the promise of free upgrades, especially when considering the ongoing costs we already absorb for the likes of Photoshop etc. 49.99 per annum for upgrades to a less functional software (compared to Photoshop, Lighroom etc.) does seem rather out of alignment! There are alternative business models that can be applied, take the multi functional Davinci Resolve pro software (or the free version for that matter), once purchased, for what I consider to be a very reasonable price, upgrades are free. The company have committed to such and do not seem to have any intent to waiver. Now with the release of the Topaz video enhance AI (which in all honesty still has much development to be undertaken) that requires other software such as Davinci to be used in conjunction (to get the best out of it), an extra 49.99 per annum on top of the retail price of 299 seems a bitter pill to have to swallow. Even more so when you consider that video enhance AI will cost the same as Davinci Resolve and without even 1/10 of the functionality. “Fair”?
Yes that correct it does … and these 4 products are split across the two bundles three are in one bundle and one is in the other. So I am assuming that $99.99 is for all even though they are split across two bundles. I just wanted some clarification.
Please read the statement in the first post in the thread as Video Enhancement AI isn’t included in this statement but its update policy is clearly stated on the website. Also it does NOT claim to have or even aspire to the same functionality as DaVinci Resolve.
and alienating “us” by bringing in changes that come across as ‘breaking the social contract’ with “us” will as many posts here and on DP Review show cause upset & disgruntlement!