Not without searching through the whole post - but I can guarantee your theory isn’t referenced anywhere.
Just read what you’ve quoted from Eric.
He says that last upgrade you received is the last version you owned.
If that’s not clear enough for you then I don’t know how else to explain it. Suggest you contact Topaz support direct if you want a clarification.
2 Likes
Paul, in Eric’s example, he only takes it a short time…just past the initial 1 year (included) upgrade license. In every instance I can find, he refers back to "your last owned version).
I’m not looking to quibble or argue, I’d just like something conclusive.
andy…but in Eric’s example, the last upgrade was within the 1 year of the original purchase. Not conclusive, IMO.
When you pay $50 you own that version. Eric says you can keep using the latest version you own. If that’s not enough for you please raise a support request and get Topaz to give you a definitive answer - this is just a user to user forum.
1 Like
I appreciate your input, Paul. Yes, I’ll reach out to Topaz.
The question here is about the meaning of “owned”.
There’s no question about it - when you pay for an upgrade (and a year’s worth of updates) you own it. Are you seriously suggesting that after you’ve paid for something Topaz would take it away from you?
Just looking for clarity, Paul.
What is being proposed is the same for all software purchased nothing new. …UNLESS IT IS A SUBSCRIPTION TYPE OR LICENSED TO ONE MACHINE…e.g. I have software owned since the 80’s…every year or two I might upgrade to a new version. I own the new version purchased as long as it will run on whatever machine it was installed. In the event that it is licensed to one machine only (which is rare but some do) and a new machine is purchased, the software company may have to be contacted to reactivate the software. Topaz doesn’t have that kind of restriction.
1 Like
You’re right that it would make no sense. I’m sure I’m just over thinking it. I’ve upgraded various software hundreds of times, but this is the first time I recall purchasing a ‘year of upgrades’ which sounded like a subscription. Combined with “you can keep using your purchased version as long as you want regardless of upgrade status” made is appear to me that it meant the “original” purchased version.
As I’ve said, I have no quarrel with paying for upgrades. I’ll edit my original post, as I don’t want to appear to be bashing Topaz.
That isn’t how I read it. Let’s simplify things by assuming that you buy version x.n on January 1st of 2020.
You will get all the releases until December 31st 2020. Stop paying, and the only thing that changes is that you no longer get new releases. Your last was x.n+5. This will continue to work.
On January 1st 2025 you again pay for one year of updates. You can now download version x.n+22.
It works the same way as your old version x.n+5, but presumably with fewer bugs and maybe more functionality. During the year, it upgrades to version x.n+30. If you don’t pay, you just don’t get any new updates, but what you do have continues to work.
This is signficantly better than a subscription model.
However, I would much prefer something that didn’t require me to pay for fixes to bugs.
I would prefer a model where you pay for new functionality. So when a major release occurs (new functionality), expect to pay something like 75% of the price a new customer would - you get a discount as an existing customer, but once you have the new version, you get all bug fixes - maybe not forever, but 5 years might be reasonable.
What you do for the people that you promised free updates forever to is a different question, and needs to be addressed.
I suspect this model was not adopted because there is no expectation of significant new functionality for most of the products. Still, 50% of the price simply to receive bug fixes is a bit too steep.
You do not finance new development with support contracts (which these effectively are). You get your reward for new products/functionality from their selling/upgrade price.
1 Like
I really don’t think it matters. If Eric’s or Topaz’s word amounted to a hill of beans, this thread would not exist.
Time will tell…but I hardly think that Topaz would be looking to charge for “bug fixes” without new or improved functionality. By the time August rolls around, existing program versions hopefully will be running smoothly as expected. In almost every program, requests have been made for refinement or additional functions that they do not now include. IMHO, I don’t think they’ll be added to any program revisions we see coming through in the interim but they might be considered as improvements in an upgrade.
1 Like
There are many companies that offer a lifetime license which covers all future versions, and it often costs 2-3x the price of a singe-version license. That was the way I went into the Topaz Labs products - the products were on the expensive side, but it was ok because I was buying a lifetime license. If that model wasn’t working for Topaz any longer, quietly removing the “free updates for life” verbiage (one of their primary marketing lines for years) and sending this out months later is not the way to go about it.
They could have created two licensing models for NEW CUSTOMERS - a single-version license where you get the current version plus a free upgrade if a new version comes out within say 30 days, and a lifetime license that costs 2-3x that of the single version license. That is the way every other perpetual license model I have seen works. This way, Topaz gets more income, and the customers get the type of licensing model they want. Current customers who are eager to support the company can even buy one of those licenses if they feel like it.
I realize it’s “buyer beware” and shame on me for not reading all of the fine print. I should have noticed that Topaz wasn’t including free upgrades for life on these products like they have on every other product they have released in the past. But that doesn’t mean that I’m OK with them pulling what feels like a bait-and-switch by tacking “AI” onto the end of their products. I feel like I have already purchased a lifetime license, and they have lots of work to do before they can even hope to get any more of my money.
4 Likes
I don’t mind paying for major upgrades but I do mind paying to fix ongoing issues that never seem to get fixed. Studio 2 has been stripping the Camera manufactures info from the jpg since it’s initial release. This forces me to search the RAW files to get this info when needed. I’m not sure how much longer I want to continue this ride.
4 Likes
They should be running smoothly from day one, when they are released!
Small fixes OK, but this is insane.
Every couple of days I receive a new update of an other Gig plus.
That implicates that when your year is over your left with a buggy app, or are there separate updates coming without the new features after that year? (that means they need two kind of updates every time, one with the fixes and one with the latest features). I doubt that will happen.
2 Likes
Indeed, there have already been two updates to Mask AI (maybe even 3?) since our first exchange, so bravo. But the latest update is still as crashy as ever. Essentially unusable. Sometimes it works, sometimes it crashes. Just totally unacceptable. So in 12 months if it’s still crashy, what’s the upgrade policy? I’m guessing it won’t matter because your customers will abandon ship.
1 Like
You need to qualify that with the actual issues you have experienced as many are NOT experiencing any problems with Mask AI v1.2.2, myself included.
1 Like
I have a specific layer that crashes Mask AI every time during Compute Mask with AI selected. GPU on or off still crashes. Don’t know why that layer fails but others work, as it’s a simple image in a relatively small file where Mask AI works on other layers. Wasted a lot of time trying everything I could think of before resorting to other methods. I’m not too keen on Mask AI at the moment. I will probably contact support about this image, but right now I don’t have the patience to deal with it. Maybe tomorrow 
2 Likes
If you read Eric’s reply carefully, he leaves the door wide open to change the licensing plan for other products - “we didn’t think the number or scope of upgrades we have planned for that one merited a paid upgrade plan”. So when they think there are doing enough major upgrades to one of the products that is not in the current list of 4, they will rename it, give you an upgrade, and start charging you for it too.
2 Likes
