I upgraded from v12 Pro and now have v13.
Is there still a Pro version? If so what are the differnces with standard?
Not simultaneously, but if you do a config backup in 12 before installing 13, you're always free to revert back to 12 at any time.
Whether or not you buy 13, you can always go back to 12 and don't get locked into the new version.
There's no longer a Light version. You effectively have "13 Pro", but it's just called "13".
(People using Opus 12 Light can upgrade to Opus 13 as if they already owned Opus 12 Pro, so they aren't stuck.)
Ah, okay, so it's no longer updates for the life of the product? You will have to pay every year to get updates now?
I see you are talking about rolling out updates faster. I suppose that's nice, and there are a few features in Opus 13 that look useful like the remote copy stuff. I just don't like subscriptions.
My main concern is security updates. What happens if there is an issue with an older version of DOpus 13 but I don't have a subscription to get the latest one?
Bug fixes are less critical, but it still seems bad to be charging for them. I tend to think that the product you bought should work properly, and if not any required fixes should be free. But then again, I appreciate that Microsoft keep changing Windows, so it's a moving target for you guys now and some of the issues will be caused by things outside your control.
1 Like
But how is that different from before? You won't get any bugfixes and probably no security updates for DOpus 9 or 11 by now either. At some point you just to have to make a cut as a developer if you want to make a living out of your product. And as much as you can't expect "free product support" for version 9 now, you won't get that support for version 13 if your subscription ran out. I mean, like in the case of the very long support for version 12, most other developers just would have bumped the major version number a lot faster and charge for updates that way. You make it sound like the long free support for version 12 would be kind of "industry standard" but it actually was a huge, rare exception on the software market.
6 Likes
When will the lifetime subscription be announced?
Previously you had to renew at the next major release. Now every year.
There's no real difference in renewing besides that it's now once every year and in the past every 2? years. Yearly updates are $25 and I paid $50 for my v12 to v13 upgrade
If the yearly renewal is 33% of the previous system, then the finacial part is the same too.
The benefit is that I possible get a new feature next month, instead waiting until v14.
Fairly sure you shouldn't expect one. This would actually make the problem they tried to solve with the subscription in the first place, a much worse problem in the long run.
1 Like
I think there is a difference between security updates and feature updates. I would expect security updates for the lifetime of the product, and the lifetime of the product to be at least 5 years. Ideally more than 5. Security fixes are rare, or at least should be if the developer is competent.
As for industry standard, Microsoft offers 10 years on each version of Windows. Typically about a third to half of that includes feature updates, and the rest is just security fixes. Ubuntu is similar with LTS releases. If a security flaw was discovered in Opus 12, I'd expect it to get patched.
If you except OS providers (Windows, Ubuntu, ...), I don't really see many software vendors take commitment to release any security update for any period of time following purchase.
Even for Adobe which sells on a pure subscription model, I could not find anything on their site stating that any security issue will be solved and/or provided to users.
I could also add that security issues requiring a DOpus update have been quite low in number in the past. Apart a couple of third party librairies (zip/rar), I can't recall other security related updates in the past.
This is not a warranty that this will not be the case in the future though.
My point is just that IMHO comitting to provide security updates is not really an industry standard.
1 Like
Well, yes... and no. There is, of course, a difference between security updates, bugfixes and feature updates. I would tend to agree that security updates should be delivered longer and even for versions out of support (no matter if the support ended because of a new major release or a canceled subscription) if reasonable. We'll see how GPSoft handles this, if such a situation will ever occur.
However, the situation is completely different with bugfixes and especially feature updates. I mean, operating systems and software, where the primary use case is commercial use from huge companies (MS, Adobe and so on...), aside, you will barely find any software which would meet your expectations here. And as for the "product lifetime"... the company who develops these tools mainly decides that lifetime. If they release a new major version at any point, it usually means "end of lifetime" for the version you previously bought. It's not really any different here, except you already know in advance when your support ends. And no, usually such companies don't backport bugfixes (for free) either, especially not if they use more of a rolling release cycle. In 90% of the commercial software I regularly use I already, at some point, "paid" for a bugfix, because it was just included with the next major version. That's just fairly common if the "next version" already is near the finish line to get released.
I'm trying to think of other commercial software I use that is no free and not subscription, but aside from Windows I don't think there is any. I just avoid it, because the value proposition is usually poor, and subscriptions are a big red flag.
Edit: There is one, BurnAware. I use the free version because I don't need any of the paid features, but if I did then at least they offer two options: 1 year of updates for $40, or lifetime updates for $90. I'd take the latter option, if I was as confident of them sticking around as I was with GP Software.
The problem with subscriptions is two-fold. As well as increasing the cost in ways that cannot be predicted (there is nothing to stop them doubling the subscription price in the future, after you are locked in due to file formats and workflows, Adobe is terrible for that), it also means you are usually forced to be forever beta testing their software.
The standard operating procedure these days is to slowly push out updates and wait to see if you get loads of crash reports or complaints. Microsoft fired most of its testing department and moved to that model.
I'm not suggesting that GP Software would take that route, they seem like good guys and I think this is just to ensure a steady income from DOpus, but I think I'd at least want to see a Long Term Support version that only updates every few years, to a version that is at least six months old and well tested. But really, what I want is something like 12, where I don't have to deal with any major changes for 7 years. It's not even about the cost.
But "lifetime subscriptions" actually bring back the issue - or make it even stronger - that GPSoft tried to solve with the subscription. If you sell lifetime-licenses, there is no regular cash flow. You make money once and that's it. For a company who actually active develops and maintains its software as a business, this rarely makes sense. It's a nice way to get some marketing and it's quite useable for single programmers to sell their software, but it's nothing most companies would consider as a long term business plan. Good work deserves good payment. And if you continue your good work, you should get fairly paid for that.
And there would be nothing to stop them from increasing the price tag on a perpetual license, either. This isn't really a con to the update-subscription they are using.
Well, if you don't want changes, just use a version you tested and that you are happy with, don't renew the subscription and you are fine. In that case the subscription changes they have done don't even really concern you. But expecting these guys to work for 7 years mostly for the money they have earned in the initial release window just doesn't feel right. And actually, it didn't with version 12 either.
3 Likes
It's more about ensuring people don't have to wait 5+ years to start using changes that are already finished.
On our side of things, it's also much better to get feedback on a handful of changes when they're still new and we can focus on them.
At the moment, with 13 just released, we're getting feedback for an enormous number of changes at once, some of which were done so long ago we are no longer familiar with the details ourselves without looking them up. If someone reports a bug in the new version that doesn't have an obvious explanation, we have to consider thousands and thousands of code changes to work out what might have caused it, instead of it being narrowed down to just the recent ones.
Just reading all the feedback is taking up a lot of time at the moment, let alone acting on it. The feedback is great, don't get me wrong, but we could respond to things much quicker if it was spread out over lots of smaller releases instead of a big one, and if it was only a few days/weeks since we wrote the changes rather than years in some cases.
So moving away from huge releases should improve quality as well as speed of delivering new features.
Under the old system there were still feature updates that changed things, quite significantly at times. There has never been a LTS type version of Opus, and I don't think it's what many Opus users would want.
After each major release, many of the early updates would be like mini new versions. But then, after a while, our focus would move to the next major version and the features for the current version would become smaller and start to dry up as we were holding back the bigger changes for the next major release.
Now we'll keep doing those "mini new version" releases without holding anything back for a future version, since there's no reason to.
Random examples:
-
Dark mode has been finished for over a year.
-
The example FAYT scripts I wrote to test that functionality when it had just been written are dated 2021.
-
The changes to file copying a lot of people asked for were finished about five years ago.
If we were already using the new model, people could have been using those features for years already.
The new model doesn't change that either way.
Old and new: You keep the software you've paid for if you decide not to buy any further updates.
Old and new: Prices could increase.
We could have jacked up the price of Opus 12, or the cost to upgrade to 13, instead of keeping it the same number it has been for years (i.e. a price decrease, factoring in inflation). We didn't.
The new model also gives you more predictable and transparent pricing, since you no longer have to guess when the next major release will be -- which varied wildly between versions -- to understand how much you're getting for your money.
I understand the fears about any kind of change like this, as well as reactions to the word "subscription" (because of Adobe's awful, abusive business model, as well as the recent trend of small do-nothing phone apps or even single-task websites that demand you pay $30+ a year for something that looks like it took a weekend to write and has no ongoing work put into it, with functionality that would barely even be a bulletpoint on Opus's feature list; or companies that put out a new "major" version every year and demand loads of money, but the change list is literally 5 items and you wonder what you're paying for). But I think we've proven that we are not here to fleece anyone; we're here to make a great product and grow the userbase rather than take advantage of the existing users.
And if that ever changes, you'll always be free to keep the version you own and stop paying us money, as it should be.
11 Likes
Happily paid, and I think it's very fair pricing. As another user said "This piece of software is very nice so I almost live in it, and rarely see desktop." And it's been that way for a long time - 6 years on Amiga and over 20 on Windows. Keep up the great work!
3 Likes
We are working for a customer who aims for a big bang release for their landscape. The project is a giant entangled mess wherever your look. Despite the combined expertise of hundreds of experienced developers & consultants, there are so many unknowns, overcooked and undercooked details... Thousands of employees will get a system which they haven't seen but will overnight change everything they've done before. I already get headaches just thinking about post-go-live support. Different scale but same problems. Yeah, releasing in smaller cycles, getting early feedback and reacting on the spot makes much more sense to me. After meditating on your decision and reading opinions, I for one fully support your decision. imitates Gimli: You have my axe!
4 Likes
Is there an end time to enjoy the upgrade price from 12 Pro to 13? I’m thinking to get a new PC in the next 6 months so I don’t want to upgrade to 13 until then.
1 Like
Thanks Leo, that is reassuring. I suppose the only outstanding question is about security fixes. In the rare instances when they are needed, can you commit to not charging for them?
That would depend on so many factors (type of issue, how old the versions are, etc.) that it’s impossible to answer generally.
We do occasionally put out updates for older versions after a new one is out, but it’s rare that it is even needed.
3 Likes
I came to thank you for the free upgrade, I bought it more or less 3 months before the beta was announced.
The support and program are amazing, and the community is on par too. I don't know what you believe, but I affectionately and personally wish that Jesus bless your lives and your work, we need more people like this 
5 Likes