I know a few folks in marketing that might argue with you on that point. 
2 Likes
That was the another use of the Shareware model, limiting features and paying to unlock the others. The support model I mentioned was also used with certain products, usually popular utilities if I remember correctly.
In its current form, the SaaS does not directly benefit the user. It’s not that it runs in the cloud and I can always access settings or music. It is not the case that I can activate or deactivate parts of the license per month. No backups are performed in the cloud. It’s just local software that checks during startup whether I’ve paid.
I still have to get used to the idea that if I have paid for 5 years and Audirvana no longer exists or I stop the license, I have nothing. I can always use Audirvana 2.0 or 3.5 on an old Mac mini.
It’s an emotion and I get it, but it plays into the decision for me. I really like paying for Audirvana. It is simply a lot of work for Damien and his team to continuously keep track of everything and to get rid of bugs. And there is potential for a very good audio player.
3 Likes
The risk I was referring to, is that this business model may make the customers of the product look for alternatives even if they like the product. And the developer may lose many of his customers, even if he has a good product.
It’s better for the developer to sell many licenses every two or three years, than few subscriptions every year.
The support model also still exists in Linux.
I’m trying various audiophile Linux distributions. Most of them are free, and you can support them with a donation if you like the product.
And one of the assumptions that I was alluding to is that the average consumer is of the same mindset as you. You may be correct, but it’s not a given that the majority of users, especially new users, will feel the same way given they subscribe to all types of services in the new model these days.
Different type of “support” model than that I was referring to. I was referring to the model where the customer gets updates for a fixed period and then has to renew the support by buying the latest version, or continuing to use the version they have unsupported. That’s different than voluntarily donating funds to a development effort as one is mandatory and the other is not.
It’s not a question of mind set. It’s a calculation that every one makes.
How much AS will cost for a 5 years subscription?
Ar the present pricing, the answer is €350.
Now everybody can calculate what alternative software he can buy with this budget, and decide if it’s worthy to subscribe.
And the fact that you are left with nothing if you stop your subscription is also a point that make people think twice before subscribing.
Like @Jacob , I keep my old computers and their software, and they remain useful to me.
This was the model that made Audirvana’s success.
Customers were happy with it, and they were buying new and improved versions of the software when they were released.
And this is precisely why I brought up the question. In the model I presented, the software doesn’t stop working at the end of the support period and you’re free to use it (unsupported) for as long as you like. No upgrades or patches, but it doesn’t disable itself at the end of the support period.
2 Likes
That’s what I was referring to as a good business model both for the customer and the developer.
Then please forgive my misunderstanding. With that, I assume you liked the model with a fixed period of support with the option to buy upgrades thereafter. It took a while, but I think I finally understand what you’re getting at.
1 Like
Agreed, and I’m of the same mind as you on this, at least for now. The yearly subscription fee is not too expensive for me and I’m very interested to see the direction of Audirvana and how it all plays out. Ultimately, I would like to see some cloud services integrated as I feel it would help justify the subscription model for more skeptical consumers and be a real value-add to the user experience.
1 Like
If services are provided, it changes everything. It’s completely normal to pay a subscription for a service that you get.
1 Like
Agreed, but I also understand what it takes to incorporate cloud services in a software platform and maintain customer confidence. There’s always concern about customer information privacy, and there are some additional regulatory hurdles to consider when moving in this direction (in certain countries / jurisdictions). It is a direction I’d like to see with Audirvana, but I fully understand that it might take a while to get there.
1 Like
What cloud services did you have in mind?
Of course, that goes without saying.
A couple that immediately come to mind:
- An independent service / database that provides additional artist / album / song information. This would be good for both local files with correct meta data and streaming services as an alternative source.
- A service / database for song lyrics. Again, this could work for both local files with correct meta data and streaming services.
Both could be on demand so they aren’t pulling resources unless the user wants to use them.
#1 was implemented in Studio using the Musicbrainz database API:
https://musicbrainz.org/doc/MusicBrainz_API
Even more information can be made available if Audirvana contracts to use Rovi/Allmusic.
#2 seems like something that would be easy to implement (there already exists a few databases of song lyrics) but likely involves ongoing costs (for commercial use).
I don’t know how the “on-demand” part would or could work: (1) These databases are accessed though an API and it could be setup so that a user can set a flag to stop Studio from pulling in this information, (2) it would be a nightmare to monitor individual users’ usage so likely it would only be feasible to make these databases available by spreading the cost over all users.
Perhaps the best way to integrate these databases is for Audirvana to get data dumps and house it on their server. Since this is all new to Audirvana, they will have to work their way through this maze over the next several months.
When you mentioned cloud services, I had assumed you meant something more along the lines of making storage space available in the cloud for users to store their music.
This is also what I was thinking about. For cloud storage, people pay subscriptions because it’s useful.
1 Like