Important Version 6 Upgrade Information

[codacoda]

Anyway to start a $30 upgrade complaint thread? Then we could leave this thread for people who just want to discuss the BETA issues! Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this thread supposed to be about the beta, things that work, things that don't, so that we can get to a release?

I understand that some people have issues with the $30, but enough already, I'm having to scan through way too many bitch posts to get to salient comments about the release.

Just my 3000 cents.

[Opus4]

This thread was specifically opened to cover the license upgrade.

To...

Originally Posted by codacoda

... get to salient comments about the release.

See the rest of the beta forum and this topic: SageTV Version 6.0 Public Beta is Available. There are several sticky threads & lots of other topics.

- Andy

[codacoda]

Andy,

Too funny, I did what I was bitching about. I meant to post to the OTHER thread, where there are way too many posts about the upgrade fee that should be posted to this thread.

My mistake.

BTW: Cudos to all for this release.

[Mark SS]

I'd be suprised if Sage hadn't considered it already but I would certainly be happy for them to adopt the annual maintenance fee approach. At purchase you could be offered the option to pay maybe $20 to receive updates for a year. Maybe charge slightly more, $25 perhaps, for maintenace in subsequent years.

Users know where they stand, Sage have an annual revenue stream to help them plan growth.

[teknubic]

Originally Posted by Mark SS

I'd be suprised if Sage hadn't considered it already but I would certainly be happy for them to adopt the annual maintenance fee approach. At purchase you could be offered the option to pay maybe $20 to receive updates for a year. Maybe charge slightly more, $25 perhaps, for maintenace in subsequent years.

Users know where they stand, Sage have an annual revenue stream to help them plan growth.

That's the very reason why I didn't get TiVo or my CableCo's DVR.

[DynamoBen]

I really think it would be worthwhile for the management to draft a formal letter to its current customers that addresses many of these concerns. I would consider this change a major shift in policy and I would assume, and hope, that they considered many of these issues prior to the announcement.

Much of this discussion would stop if we knew what the reason for enacting the policy, what the future will hold, and the road map for the software. While I'm all for secrecy I think its a good time to lift the curtain or give a glimpse into Sage's future for its paying customers.

Also we have always considered ourselves as part of the Sage family. A letter of this type would make us, the customers, feel included in Sage's future. At the end of the day we all want is whats best for Sage sometimes that means we just want to know the why behind a decision.

[Opus4]

(numbers were added to the quote, below)

Originally Posted by DynamoBen

Much of this discussion would stop if we knew 1) what the reason for enacting the policy, 2) what the future will hold, and 3) the road map for the software.

Um... 1) to provide revenue for a business, as most business strive to achieve, that plans to continue future development work, which isn't cost-free to produce, 2) more product improvements, and 3) SageTV's policy for a long time has been not to spell out what the future features will be.

I don't mean for that to sound overly flippant, but I figured that those things should be kind of obvious.

Other than that, the current policy is already spelled out in the first post of this thread.

- Andy

[banmj]

I paid $70 for Sagetv in 12/05. I will pay $30 for the upgrade. That's $100 for software that is available for $80 for someone to buy today. I love Sage and will get the upgrade, but that doesnt sound right to me.

[gplasky]

Originally Posted by banmj

I paid $70 for Sagetv in 12/05. I will pay $30 for the upgrade. That's $100 for software that is available for $80 for someone to buy today. I love Sage and will get the upgrade, but that doesnt sound right to me.

Guess you should of bought it a year ago. Or think of the person who bought Sage the day before ver 5 came out. And don't forget there's software of this type that's for free too. What's a person to do?? Life just isn't fair.

Gerry

[bkmurphy]

The real problem here is that many of us bought licenses (I bought mine in April 2006) for what ultimately became v5 though we now don't have v5 licenses. When I bought a license in April 2006 , I did at the same time I installed v4.1.xx beta (and eventually there was a 4.1.xx RC later that month), only to have that v4.1.xx beta renamed as v5 a couple weeks later - near the end of April. I think the issue here is that if those of us who bought earlier this year had known this upgrade policy AND that v5 was around the corner (instead of another point upgrade to v4.1), we would have simply waited a couple weeks for the official release of v5 to buy our licenses and we would now have a free upgrade. It seems we are now being penalized for buying while v4.1.xx (now v5) was still in beta.

[DynamoBen]

Originally Posted by Opus4

(numbers were added to the quote, below)
Um... 1) to provide revenue for a business, as most business strive to achieve, that plans to continue future development work, which isn't cost-free to produce, 2) more product improvements, and 3) SageTV's policy for a long time has been not to spell out what the future features will be.

I don't mean for that to sound overly flippant, but I figured that those things should be kind of obvious.

Other than that, the current policy is already spelled out in the first post of this thread.

- Andy

Opus, you're missing a key point. Why is it the company, this late in the game, charging for upgrades when they had not previously? I understand the revenue aspect I owned my own business. Sage has taken such a staunch view in the past on not charging for upgrades, now that’s changed. Considering that there are more users than ever before and now there is an OEM product this change seems odd. That being said, it was somewhat expected and a letter would be a courtesy thing.

Also, I know sage doesn't give out features and that’s to protect them from competition. However, we want to know how long it will be before there will be another major release; a year, 2 years, 2 weeks and if any of the things we are hoping for will be in those releases. Some here are asking about how SageTV is going to handle major releases and what the frequency is expected to be.

I've dealt with subscription based software before. The software I worked with cost $4000.00 per major release. That is a major investment it was common practice to let our customers know whether something they had requested was being worked on for the next release. In addition, we would let them know when releases were going to occur in the future, so no one was caught buying the software and 2 weeks later paying for an upgrade. When customers are paying for updates, this sort of feedback is somewhat required. On the other hand we did offer free or one-time fee software; we never offered any insight into development or timeline for updates. It was what it was.

I’m not trying to be difficult I’m just expressing a point of view that needs to be considered. I enjoy SageTV, and continue to support the company and will end up purchasing an upgrade. The difference now is I expect more from the company now that I’m investing regularly.

[blade]

Originally Posted by banmj

I paid $70 for Sagetv in 12/05. I will pay $30 for the upgrade. That's $100 for software that is available for $80 for someone to buy today. I love Sage and will get the upgrade, but that doesnt sound right to me.

Yes and you have already gotten 11 months of use out of the software and can continue to use it if you don't desire the new features. I fail to see how it is any different than any other software. For example someone who purchased windows 95, upgrade to 98, upgrade to ME and those that purchased only the ME copy.

[blade]

Originally Posted by DynamoBen

Opus, you're missing a key point. Why is it the company, this late in the game, charging for upgrades when they had not previously?

Late in the game? The PVR market is still in the growth stage. It's actually very early in the game for Sage.

Considering that there are more users than ever before and now there is an OEM product this change seems odd.

How does having more users than ever before benefit Sage if they don't charge for upgrades? If anything it is more cost to the company due to increased technical support requests, bug submissions, etc...

Charging for upgrades after the user base has reached a substantial size makes a lot more business sense than charging when the base is small.

I've dealt with subscription based software before. The software I worked with cost $4000.00 per major release. That is a major investment it was common practice to let our customers know whether something they had requested was being worked on for the next release. In addition, we would let them know when releases were going to occur in the future, so no one was caught buying the software and 2 weeks later paying for an upgrade.

You said it yourself $4000 is a major investment. Do you really think a user paying $80 for software should get the same personal attention and catering to that a $4000 purchase should? Comparing the two purchases seems a little ridiculous to me.

[rickgillyon]

Originally Posted by banmj

I paid $70 for Sagetv in 12/05. I will pay $30 for the upgrade. That's $100 for software that is available for $80 for someone to buy today. I love Sage and will get the upgrade, but that doesnt sound right to me.

You don't think 10-11 months use is worth $20?

[DynamoBen]

Sigh...Its not about price it is about a business model change, expectations, and the future. Obviously some are not following my point conceptually.

[jominor]

Originally Posted by DynamoBen

Opus, you're missing a key point. Why is it the company, this late in the game, charging for upgrades when they had not previously? I understand the revenue aspect I owned my own business. Sage has taken such a staunch view in the past on not charging for upgrades, now that’s changed. Considering that there are more users than ever before and now there is an OEM product this change seems odd. That being said, it was somewhat expected and a letter would be a courtesy thing.

.

Very few companies do this. Damn, but there are some cheap people in this group. Do you guys comprehend that these guys need to make a living?

Is that understandable? Did they sign a contract with anyone saying that they get free software forever?!?!?

Pay the $30 or don't, but stop bitching for God's sake! Each and every last of you whiners would be raising hell if you got a 2% raise next year, but are complaining about a nominal charge that took hundreds of man hours and tens of thousands of dollars to write.

If you don't like it, DON'T BUY IT! NO ONE IS FORCING YOUR TO PURCHASE ANYTHING!!!

[DynamoBen]

jominor, if you don't like this thread THEN QUIT READING IT! I don't appreciate the name calling. Read and understand my posts before the personal attacks! I may not agree with your point of view but I have a right like anyone else to voice my concerns.

[jominor]

Originally Posted by DynamoBen

Sigh...Its not about price it is about a business model change, expectations, and the future. Obviously some are not following my point conceptually.

No, your point is obvious, it just has no merit. If you don't like their policy, vote with your feet and wallet.

You guys want all this stuff, free upgrades, yet all these features(firewire, cd, etc...). You cannot have both gentlemen.

[DynamoBen]

Originally Posted by jominor

No, your point is obvious, it just has no merit. If you don't like their policy, vote with your feet and wallet.

You guys want all this stuff, free upgrades, yet all these features(firewire, cd, etc...). You cannot have both gentlemen.

Ahhh I see, you determine for the group whether a point of view has merit. I wished I had known that sooner I would not have wasted my time.

[Opus4]

Actually, 'merit' was a word I stuck in there to replace the original language that I felt wasn't needed on the forum, per rule #1. That goes for any side of any argument, not just this one. 'Merit' probably wasn't what he had in mind, but it was nicer.

- Andy