I am pondering getting a couple more licenses so I had a look at the different versions.

 

First thing that strikes me is the ONLY place that lists the correct features is the user contributed wiki. Even the official sales website forgets to tell you that the cache drive is a Pro version only. Thats no trivial point.

 

This is likely because it was a new feature added later and then only to the Plus version....perhaps Active directory is the same? This concerns me alot. Are Plus users doomed to not get any cool new features just because they know they wont need more than 6 disks?

 

I think it's all about marketing.

 

Give the people the free version to give them a taste.

 

Give the Plus version to give them more room but without the cool features.

 

Give them the Pro version for the complete version. All of the bells & whistles. Makes people want to pay for the Pro version over the Plus.

 

More money for Tom. Can't blame him for that. The Pro version is pretty cheap (Cost Wise) for what it does.

 

Of course just my opinion.

 

Phil 

Your right obviously but my point is that Plus would do me for my new boxes now perfectly... but if new features only make it to the pro version that kinda sucks since what  I would be doing is essentially "buy the Pro version just in case something is added later".

 

If thats the case then the Plus version seems of very little use for anyone wanting to get into unRAID for the long haul. The free version is no real use other than for testing if your box boots. You cant actually test unRAID beyond the basics with it.....which leaves only the pro version as the only viable option.

 

Not a complaint just an observation that it might be simpler to just have a free version with all the features and only 3 drives and a pro version with no limits and make it nice and simple for the end users.

Nas I do agree with what you are saying. I just posted what I said above because I figured that that was the reason for Tom's pricing. I can definitely see both sides...

Yes theres no right and wrong here other than whatever Tom chooses is obviously by defintion right.

 

I have some thoughts about how I think it could be made simpler for users to understand and still make Tom the sam amount of money but I dont see it happening.

Lime Technology does have an upgrade plan.

The incremental cost is a small amount above what a pro key would have cost in the first place.

 

I never even noticed that. Obviously that changes things a bit with there being an upgrade path.

 

Tom definitely worth explaining to people on the sales page that Plus is not just Pro minus AD and 10 disks

I am pondering getting a couple more licenses so I had a look at the different versions.

 

First thing that strikes me is the ONLY place that lists the correct features is the user contributed wiki. Even the official sales website forgets to tell you that the cache drive is a Pro version only. Thats no trivial point.

 

This is likely because it was a new feature added later and then only to the Plus version....perhaps Active directory is the same? This concerns me alot. Are Plus users doomed to not get any cool new features just because they know they wont need more than 6 disks?

 

 

I got stung by the cache drive - slightly dissapointed I can't use it in my plus reg. But I'll be going 'pro' eventually so swings and roundabouts.

 

I don't have an issue with the staggered license model especially as theres a transparent upgrade path between them all. In fact it's quite a smart model.

 

An overall concern I have is the general business model. Whilst it's nice for us users to only pay (in theory) once for a pro key and then have perpetual upgrades. It's not so hot as a revenue stream for Tom. I'm sure he's taken this into account though.

 

The cynic in me does say it might explain the lack of involvement at times as Tom spending time upgrading and adding features off his own back or at the behest of the baying forum masses ultimately doesn't generate a direct return for him in terms of revenue (of course more features and a better product attracts more *new* users but the reasonably large existing userbase won't be giving tom a further penny as a direct result).

 

All very pessimistic and with no real grounds to think like that of course. But thats me all over

The cynic in me does say it might explain the lack of involvement at times as Tom spending time upgrading and adding features off his own back or at the behest of the baying forum masses ultimately doesn't generate a direct return for him in terms of revenue (of course more features and a better product attracts more *new* users but the reasonably large existing userbase won't be giving tom a further penny as a direct result).

 

All very pessimistic and with no real grounds to think like that of course. But thats me all over

 

This part right here is my general thought pattern also.  Almost all software that i know of requires a small fee for upgrades; even from version to version.  I would not mind paying a small upgrade fee to from from version 4.3 --> 4.4 --> 4.5 and so on.  Don't ask me what the upgrade price should be but if reasonable i would not mind paying it.

 

When version 5 comes out and is stable i would be very surprised if there was not some kind of upgrade price.  I know i would be willing to pay a little upgrade fee. If most everything is in it that we (the community) are looking for then i see no reason not to charge for an upgrade to version 5.

Almost all software that i know of requires a small fee for upgrades; even from version to version.

 

Really?  I can't think of a single piece of software with upgrade fees.  Maybe some major production software, like upgrading Photoshop CS3 to CS4, but not any 'utility' software, which I consider unRAID to be.

 

In unRAID's case, I also wouldn't mind paying a small fee ($5-$10) for an upgrade, but I think it should only be for a major upgrade, such as version 4 to version 5.  Then all the 5.* minor upgrades should be free.  I personally wouldn't pay for an upgrade if there weren't some sort of significant new feature or improvement, otherwise, why would I bother?  There has to be something pretty nifty added to get me to consider messing with an already stable server...

I tend to agree. A small upgrade fee on major versions and abolish the Plus version . Make the differences between free, plus and pro disk count only. I think most people would move from Plus to Pro because they need more disk or buy Pro because one day they think they will need more disks.

 

I suspect virtually no one buys Pro because it has AD auth. I would say people buy pro for the cache drive but you would be going some to even know that was a pro only feature as a new user.

 

 

So to summarize, abandon all these different version names and simply have licensing that changes the disk count. Elegant and easy for users to understand.

I tend to agree. A small upgrade fee on major versions and abolish the Plus version . Make the differences between free, plus and pro disk count only. I think most people would move from Plus to Pro because they need more disk or buy Pro because one day they think they will need more disks.

 

I suspect virtually no one buys Pro because it has AD auth. I would say people buy pro for the cache drive but you would be going some to even know that was a pro only feature as a new user.

 

 

So to summarize, abandon all these different version names and simply have licensing that changes the disk count. Elegant and easy for users to understand.

 

I think i remember talk to Tom at one point and he was planning on moving all the version to having the cache drive, but he was going to leave the AD support in the Pro version only.

 

Rajahal

On that Mac side of software almost all software i buy has upgrade fees to go from version 1 --> 2 --> 3 etc.  Some, depending on the significance of the upgrade will charge for an upgrade from 1.0 --> 1.5.  The price depends on the software but in general the price is around $10.

On that Mac side of software almost all software i buy has upgrade fees to go from version 1 --> 2 --> 3 etc.  Some, depending on the significance of the upgrade will charge for an upgrade from 1.0 --> 1.5.  The price depends on the software but in general the price is around $10.

 

Given that model, what motivates you to purchase the upgrade?  New features, less buggy, or just out of principle (supporting the people who created the software)? 

 

I think that is something that LimeTech needs to consider when evaluating this business model.  I'm sure many people follow my same mentality: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.  Therefore, if your unRAID server already works perfectly, a few new bells and whistles most likely won't convince me to upgrade.

On that Mac side of software almost all software i buy has upgrade fees to go from version 1 --> 2 --> 3 etc.  Some, depending on the significance of the upgrade will charge for an upgrade from 1.0 --> 1.5.  The price depends on the software but in general the price is around $10.

 

Given that model, what motivates you to purchase the upgrade?  New features, less buggy, or just out of principle (supporting the people who created the software)? 

 

I think that is something that LimeTech needs to consider when evaluating this business model.  I'm sure many people follow my same mentality: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.  Therefore, if your unRAID server already works perfectly, a few new bells and whistles most likely won't convince me to upgrade.

 

It is mostly the the new features that make you want to buy the new version.  Most of the 1.x etc updates are free and mostly contain bug fixes and minor improvements.  The 1 --> 2 upgrades usually contain many new features and sometimes a complete redesign of the interface to make it prettier and more usable.

The one problem with pay to upgrade models is that usually support is dropped for older versions. That fine on free to upgrade but with poay for uograde what your saying is "your product will not be supported for ever". Limetech has no long term support ploicy in place this now, its more of an honor system but these things need considered.

 

Also free upgrades sell software easier.

This is all wild speculation and commentary from me as ultimately I have no idea at all how Tom runs his business.

 

From outside looking in I would suggest that unraid has, perhaps, become much more popular than anticipated. This has obviously increased the amount of work for Tom and may have also blown the original 'make a few extra dollars' business model out of the water. As there are now a large mass of users sitting who have paid money who on the current model won't be paying any more in the future.

 

I too would be more than happy to pay for a major version release (i.e 4 -> 5) with incremental updates in that tree free under the provision :

 

- It was reasonably priced

- There was still the seamless upgrade path

- There was active development and important new features or functionality to justify the price (the current talk of a new interface, plugin framework etc for 5 would be something that does justify)

- There was much more communication of timelines and features upcoming in the next release(s)

- The minor revisions of a major release were often and timely in response to bugs, problems and minor improvement to functionality.

 

This would mean much more work for Tom / Limetech but would result in more revenue assuming enough of the userbase share the same thoughts.

 

Again wild speculation and idle discussion. I apologise somewhat for taking the thread off its original course, however it might be a natural evolution of the original topic! It might also be useful to Limtech to be aware that the existing userbase is willng to pay $ in exchange for major feature bumps if enough people chime in on this topic.

 

I also apologise to Tom if I've caused any offence!