Ben Rubinstein 27/8/01 9:58 am [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>on 24/8/01 5:09 pm, Heather Williams at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Curry Kenworthy 24/8/01 9:56 am [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> ...
>>> (By the way, I saw that for the Standard Edition, you have to buy updates
>>> individually for one year, then you have a choice to pay for yearly
>>> license--but I didn't ever find the cost of the individual updates. Is
there
>>> any information about that?)
>> ...
>> Just so everyone gets this clear: the Standard single user license
>> unlocks one edition of Revolution, currently 1.0. This license will not
>> unlock any future updates, but is not time limited in any way. You can
>> carry on using that version of Revolution for as long as you can run it
>> on your computer. To receive continuous updates at no further cost you
>> need to purchase a Professional license, which is valid for one year, but
>> will unlock all updates released during that year. If you are a Standard
>> license holder, and you want features appearing in a later update, you
>> need to purchase that update as another Standard license.
>
>Heather,
>
>I think this is clear, with one exception that I'll mention in a minute...
>but I also think it represents a change in policy, certainly in what I
>believe most people would have understood as the policy. I also think this
>new policy is somewhat confused.
Hmm. We haven't changed our pricing policy since the release of
Revolution 1.0, when we introduced the $349 price point. So it must be
misunderstanding. Let's get it straightened out.
>
>* I think it is change in policy, or the previous policy was misleading,
>because what I think everyone understands as an 'update' is a differential
>price for owners of an existing version to get a new version. What you
>imply here is that there are no update prices at all; a person who owns
>version 1.0 will subsequently be able to choose to buy a license for 1.1 at
>the same price as someone who has never previously bought a license. There
>is no update price. I don't think that is what anyone reading the pricing
>page would have expected - certainly both Curry and I read it as implying
>that there would be such a thing as an update price, and asked (on- and
>off-list) what that price would be.
Ok, I can see that it is confusing, maybe a better way of naming things
would help.
>
>* I think this policy is - leaving aside the merits or otherwise - confused,
>because according to the pricing page, after the first year one can
>subscribe to updates for a price per year less than the price of a full
>standard license. If your policy is as stated above, why would customers
>buy another full price license (which will entitle them to no further
>updates) rather than buying a subscription for less money which will
>presumably entitle them to this update and others to follow?
Well, they wouldn't. Let me see if I can explain the thinking behind it
in a way that makes sense. Revolution is really based on a subscription
model. The original idea is that people purchase a license which entitles
them to a year of free updates, then subsequently get to renew that
license at a much lower price for a further year...and so on. Now that
first license is quite expensive, $995, well beyond what most "hobbyist"
or part-time users would want to pay. So we decided to introduce a lower
price point for first time users, who could get started with Revolution,
learn to appreciate it, perhaps make some money with the cheaper license.
If it goes well they want to purchase further licenses to take advantage
of new features. Over time this is going to mount up. If they stay with
us for a year, by that time they are likely to have purchased several
Standard licenses, and really deserve to have the same renewal options as
a Pro user has after a year. Especially as they've soldiered through all
that time without the first class technical support a Pro user has
received. If they don't like Revolution, don't continue to update...well,
they've only spent $349, not $995.
>
>* I have one query about your message above.
>
>> the Standard single user license... is not time limited in any way. You can
>> carry on using that version of Revolution for as long as you can run it
>> on your computer.
>> ... a Professional license ... is valid for one year, but will unlock all
>> updates released during that year.
>
>As written, this would suggest that whereas a Standard license will allow
>users to run the unlocked edition as long as they have a compatible
>computer, a Professional license will not - it will actually expire after a
>year. Is that really what you meant? Or is it only the subscription which
>expires after a year, leaving users able to run the last edition they
>unlocked for as long as they have a compatible computer?
Sorry, wasn't as clear as I should have been there. The Professional
license does not of course time out, it will continue to work with the
last version available during the year of subscription, it just won't
update anymore after a year.
>
>Please note that I have not in this message addressed the merits of this
>(new) policy; this is not because I don't have opinions about it, but I
>wanted to concentrate first on clarifying the situation. FWIW, I think it's
>flawed - but it is your business (which won't stop your customers and
>potential customers, including me, whinging^H^H^H^H giving you their
>opinions). All I'd say at this stage is that I hope that RunRev will be as
>open to feedback on this issue as it is on technical matters.
We always listen to all our users, and take on board as much as is
practicable.
I hope this at least clarifies the position.
Regards,
Heather
>
> Ben Rubinstein | Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cognitive Applications Ltd | Phone: +44 (0)1273-821600
> http://www.cogapp.com | Fax : +44 (0)1273-728866
>
Heather Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.runrev.com/>
Runtime Revolution Ltd, formerly Cross Worlds Computing,
Tel: +44 (0)131 7184333. Fax: +44 (0)1639 830 707.
Please quote all previous correspondance when replying to email.
