Affinity V2.0

[Bad_Wolf]

Hi All,

I do not know if Serif is considering a subscription model or not. What I know is that I paid in 2016 and could upgrade for 6 years now for free. That is also a model which is not workable and profitable. To be open and honest, I was highly concerned about the way Serif was not receiving income enough to continue development. I don't want to see Serif going bancrupt because I use the Affinity software heavily. These are my main application, on which most other things are based. So do you understand now, my financial concerns? Every company or business must have a steady flow of income, otherwise it is over.

Subscription seems very sensitive inside the Affinity community. So, I doubt very much that Serif will consider it or actually apply it. But you never know because it is their business. Therefore, this discussion is completely academic.

But what is your idea about paying for major releases and minor releases? Is that more acceptable for you?

Chris

[CM0]

4 minutes ago, Bad_Wolf said:

But what is your idea about paying for major releases and minor releases? Is that more acceptable for you?

 

I absolutely agree that the current model is not sustainable.  It is essentially free software.

Just charge for the feature update releases.  For those who already have purchased, just allow upgrades with a significant discount.

[Bad_Wolf]

@CMO,

Completely agree with you and I am sure many users will be the same.

Chris

 

[ceocan]

They could make the purchase of V2 a perpetual license with a 12 month long free update period and after that you can get a 12 month update extension for $5,00. If you don't extent the update period but want to get a 12 month update period later on, it would also cost $5,00. If this means the software will get more features/tools and quicker updates I would be up for this.

[debraspicher]

38 minutes ago, ceocan said:

They could make the purchase of V2 a perpetual license with a 12 month long free update period and after that you can get a 12 month update extension for $5,00. If you don't extent the update period but want to get a 12 month update period later on, it would also cost $5,00. If this means the software will get more features/tools and quicker updates I would be up for this.

I actually think this is fair if they are released like DLC packs. The next perpetual major version update would include all the previous "packs" so to speak.

A random 12mo drop off after purchase date is less manageable from development POV.

[CM0]

Yes, $5 is a no brainer.  I wouldn't hesitate to pay at least $5 for all feature updates.

[debraspicher]

55 minutes ago, Bad_Wolf said:

Hi All,

I do not know if Serif is considering a subscription model or not. What I know is that I paid in 2016 and could upgrade for 6 years now for free. That is also a model which is not workable and profitable. To be open and honest, I was highly concerned about the way Serif was not receiving income enough to continue development. I don't want to see Serif going bancrupt because I use the Affinity software heavily. These are my main application, on which most other things are based. So do you understand now, my financial concerns? Every company or business must have a steady flow of income, otherwise it is over.

Subscription seems very sensitive inside the Affinity community. So, I doubt very much that Serif will consider it or actually apply it. But you never know because it is their business. Therefore, this discussion is completely academic.

But what is your idea about paying for major releases and minor releases? Is that more acceptable for you?

Chris

Yes, as sad as this is to admit, it isn't sustainable as it is.

Subscription models aren't "inherently" evil per say, but there is the greed temptation like another user stated where there is less incentive to innovate. Without hefty competition, companies like Adobe don't have as much incentive to really modernize their product line. Software as a service isn't appealing to begin with so to convince people to fork over money, it has to meet a certain threshold.

Serif is basically competing against this business model across the board. Adobe can release updates to keep people dependent on their ecosystem and be no worse off because they're still being paid.

There's this really unrealistic expectation by some to receive major updates free of charge and on a highly regular basis "because". We're spoiled by on-demand/online-only software and so it has really polluted the perceived value of a single piece of software from my point of view. Obviously, there will always be the type that must "have the best of the best" who will gladly pay into the flagship model. This is fine, but people use software for many different reasons. For perpetual license to continue to exist, it likely relies on the goodwill of a loyal client-base.

Not that long ago we were buying software from a DVD section in a retail shop or online. Online delivery of apps wasn't the norm. Now, it's pretty much expected. So, the other side of this... companies like Serif not only is competing with flagship products like Adobe. They're also competing with the smaller entrepreneur who no longer has to be picked up by a big box shop or a retailer. Their product or software can be made available very quickly. This is good for the consumer, actually, but this means that Serif has to continue to develop not one piece of software at a faster pace, but a whole suite with the extra overhead of being a major name. The expectations are also different (edit)

Not saying they haven't gotten it wrong. I just think the digital landscape has made the business aspect far more complex and they're likely also competing with mobile apps as well, such as Procreate. The illustrator/designer ecosystem has become very fractured. They almost have no choice but to try to compete with Adobe on a more direct level in order to sustain because they risk falling too far into the amateur subcategory and there are many more options at that level than most realize...


I think a subscription model can be "innovated" so that it's not so painful for the user. I'm fine with subbing but I need to be guaranteed to OWN what I paid into and perpetual license should still exist in other instances.

Clip Studio tried to do something down the middle and it is not going well because basically, the user is renting features prior to major updates and it's sort of a mess because there's never a guarantee with them when they will change between major versions. Also their model is confusing.

[ronnyb]

There are plenty of software monopolists like Adoblow and Autodesk who offer subscription services, if thats what you want, subscribe with them. One of the main reasons Affinity has a huge following is PRECISELY bc of the business model / no subscriptions. Serif has been around for 20+ years, so they know their business. People just need to be patient and let things naturally mature instead of expecting 1.x release software to be at 15.X levels. Affinity suite is making huge leaps and bounds in both performance and stability. I'm sure everyone will be blown away when they release 2.0. It's always calm before the storm.....

[ceocan]

44 minutes ago, debraspicher said:

I actually think is fair if they are released like DLC packs. The next perpetual major version update would include all the previous "packs" so to speak.

A random 12mo drop off after purchase date I doubt is less manageable from development POV.

If there are "DLC packs" there needs to be an incentive for the developers to bring features/tools people need. Let's say you buy V2 and V2.1 is a "DLC pack". You like the new features/tools and buy it for $5,00. When V2.2 comes around you also buy it for $5,00. In total you'll spend $10,00 on "DLC packs". It could be the case that V2.1 doesn't offer any substantial or needed upgrade for you. In that case you should be able to skip V2.1 and get from V2.0 to V2.2 later on for $5,00.

Though I must say the best case would be no subscription at all. Just a perpetual license for the whole of V2.

[debraspicher]

12 minutes ago, ceocan said:

If there are "DLC packs" there needs to be an incentive for the developers to bring features/tools people need. Let's say you buy V2 and V2.1 is a "DLC pack". You like the new features/tools and buy it for $5,00. When V2.2 comes around you also buy it for $5,00. In total you'll spend $10,00 on "DLC packs". It could be the case that V2.1 doesn't offer any substantial or needed upgrade for you. In that case you should be able to skip V2.1 and get from V2.0 to V2.2 later on for $5,00.

Though I must say the best case would be no subscription at all. Just a perpetual license for the whole of V2.

The major release would require upgrade fee, otherwise the user would be receiving that for free with $5's given here and there which wouldn't make sense. I'm also fine with paying a higher fee for the current model if 2.0 is solid. If productivity is higher, money is made faster, which warrants the jump in price. The main thing is I want to own the software. That last part is critical.

[Luis Simon]

6 hours ago, Bad_Wolf said:

Hi all,

Almost every body complains here about subscription and to some extend, they are correct when paying expensive fees each month like Adobe and co.

However, when paying an affordable monthly fee for a usefull program like Affinity, it is a better guarantee for the future of your favorite application. Is that not what we all want, a secure future for our preferred Affinity range?

What is an affordable monthy subscription fee? Everything below 10 euros a month.

We can be passionate, motivated and creative but in the end, there must come food on the table not?

Because I have to depend on Affinity very much, I prefer to pay a montly subscription fee. It should be a disaster for me if Affinity range should be deprecated for any reason.

Maybe Serif van serve both kinds. Users who make a one time payment for a major release which only receive bug fixes. The other users paying a monthly subscription which receive in return new features. I think this is a fair model not? For me it became a little frustrating that I am using excellent software so long for only the initial purchase. I know what is necessary to keep a company ticking and the present payment scheme worries me.

But it is not up to me, to tell Serif what to do. I like to work with Designer and Publisher, and wish to do that for a very long time from now.

Despite the Affinity applications have their shortcomings, I always accomplish my projects within the deadline and to the satisfaction of my customers.

The Affinity team produces excellent software with a very limited team count. Lets support them and be patient.

Chris

 

hi bro I saw your previous message you don't have to apologize I am not offended, and since you are from the African continent you understand my perspective maybe a subscription like adobe for a person from a privileged country the monthly fee is nothing but for me it is life is food that I stop buying for my family I think a subscription model is viable as long as it fits the need that is worldwide not just thinking of designers from rich countries.

Now there are affordable subscription models such as canva.com that costs $85 per year and can be used with 5 people, currently with some colleagues designers between all of us we pay the year to have the benefit of the image bank and paid texts.  Obviously I do not want to compare since they are two different programs but perhaps a similar charging model may be viable for developing countries, I understand that the serif model is derisory for the number of years it has been updated for free.

 

[CM0]

34 minutes ago, debraspicher said:

The major release would require upgrade fee, otherwise the user would be receiving that for free with $5's given here and there which wouldn't make sense. I'm also fine with paying a higher fee for the current model if 2.0 is solid. If productivity is higher, money is made faster, which warrants the jump in price. The main thing is I want to own the software. That last part is critical.

The point is even with a 2.0 fee, they can't go another 7 or 8 years without a fee and be strongly competitive.  It would be better to charge something for every feature update rather than nothing.

[Old Bruce]

If I understand the initialism correctly DLC (Download Content (?)) I wonder how that would work? I have Version 2.0 and the new tools and functions are ready in DLC 2.1. How do the required routines, or code, get into the application? Is the Application going to have to be able to run separate .exec files on demand? What about menus. Perhaps I am missing a lot but I doubt it could be that simple. 

[Old Bruce]

4 minutes ago, CM0 said:

It would be better to charge something for every feature update rather than nothing.

Cannot do that with the Mac App Store, not sure about the Microsoft version of it.

[CM0]

10 minutes ago, Old Bruce said:

Cannot do that with the Mac App Store, not sure about the Microsoft version of it.

I don't use an app store.  Just download it.  The app stores would have to use in-app purchase as the only mechanism for paid feature upgrades.

[Bad_Wolf]

@Luis Simon,

Maybe you are not realising, but you made a very big contribution here! I hope many people with limited resources read your reply. When financial resources are running low, it is indeed a good plan to share with other people in the same field.

So sharing with other colleagues will divide the cost and give you the advantage of using the full license at a lower cost. Were people work together, they get stronger than ever and the sky becomes the limit. In Botswana I have a saying "Black and white working together, they are stronger than ever".

Like you already will expect, I agree with your subscription idea. The subscription model should be affordable for everyone. This is the strong point of the Affinity range, it is affordable for everybody. Adobe is also far out of my reach and in my opinion "over-priced". But even with limited resources, people go a long way with Affinity.

If it is fine for you, can I sent you a private message? If you do not want, just ignore this question please.

Chris

[Bad_Wolf]

@Bakai,

Regretfully, I do not understand your reply. I do not make wonderful maps, so I do not know what you mean.

About DrawPlus you are correct, almost every year there was a paid major upgrade. But with the Affinity range it is very different. In my case, I paid a discounted price in 2016 and since then I didn't pay anything anymore for upgrades who contained new features and bug fixes.

For bug fixes, it is normal that they are free. However, for upgrades which contain new features, should not come for free. Throughout all those years, I could not understand how that business model could be profitable and sustained Serif development.

This discussion is completely academic because only Serif will make the final decision. We as users do not have any influence on whatever model Serif choose. But based on my long term Serif customer experience, the model Serif choose will be affordable for everyone but I can be wrong. I am also not the type to tell other people what they would do. I am as much in the dark about the pricing model as anybody else. I can also hope that v2.0 will be affordable for everybody. There is not more I can do.

Kind Regards,

Chris

 

[Bad_Wolf]

@Bakai,

Thank you for your reply, now I understand.

You are correct, I am the same Bad_Wolf from the old forums. And you are correct, I draw maps but not in DrawPlus but in Cartographer. But as my memory serves me well, I never published them publicly. I used DrawPlus to draw some objects for the maps but not the map itself.

I will check the old forum to find out what I posted there.

Thank you for the nice title, I do appreciate that.

Kind Regards,

Chris

 

[DesignerUSA]

On 9/17/2022 at 7:59 AM, Patrick Connor said:

Bad news: Not this month, sorry.

 

So it's coming in October?

[Arte]

1 hour ago, DesignerUSA said:

So it's coming in October?

Over here we have an imaginary holiday with an unknown date called "sint-juttemis", so we'd say "Between now and sint-juttemis" as release date, i.e. between now and never. Maybe that is is better indication of the upcoming release date for you? 😁

The closest things to "sint-juttemis" would be Saint Glinlin  according to Wikipedia.

[913]

Is there any hope of shape builder in designer v2

[Patrick Connor]

1 minute ago, 913 said:

Is there any hope of shape builder in designer v2

We are not commenting on specific features, but suffice to say this is one of those right up there in terms of features we wish to add over those in V1

[Bad_Wolf]

@Patrick Connor,

Great to hear that V2 is coming. Whenever it will be, I will update for sure. Looking forward to the release date of V2!

Thank you Serif team for your efforts and work to bring us the best Affinity ever! Keep up the good work.

Chris

 

[913]

I don't think  ، shape builder is much necessary , but one thing which I think is necessary is making export industry standards. 

What it means :

It means that Make the affinity designer export files , such as EPS(main file ) capable of holding groups , layers , text    , and Specific color profile ( cmyk , rgb )

So the graphic designers may work in the industry by providing the powerful files to their clients , And clients may not face any problem opening these file in other vector software , 

When affinity make this possible for designer  , then every graphic designer will move forward toward affinity softwares ,

I am not talking g about the svg , pdf , ai files , I am talking about the EPS file. , Which is nowadays Industry standard software all our the world . Every one demanding EPS .Every stock website demanding EPS ,. So 

I think , making EPS industry stands should be first and main goal of affinity team ,. 

 

 

 

[cookepuss]

I think that if we're to consider licensing and cost issue, Pilgway's 3DCoat is probably a good model to use going forward. They're different sorts of apps, but it certainly fits that proposed DLC/maintenance model proposed a page or two back.

In the past, Pilgway would do what Serif does and give countless updates to 3DCoat until the next major version came out. That wasn't sustainable since there would be a number of years separating full point releases. Pilgway was probably doling out 50+ updates in that time. It surely had to be hurting their bottom line.

Currently, Pilgway offers several different licensing models: Subscription, Rent to Own, Annual, & Permanent. For the sake of this thread, I'll go with the permanent.

Right now, the buy in for a full permanent license is around $379, which is a lot but it is a different sort of app as I said.

Instead of being issued a serial number, you're given two ways to activate. The first is the ability to log in to an activation server. The second, and most desirable, is a separate license file that enables you to self-activate and work offline; The only time it might connect, if that's what you want, would be to check for updates.

The license file contains some basic information: your name, your license type, your encoded license data, and your maintenance term. That part is key. When you buy a fresh permanent license, you're granted 12 months of "free" updates.

When those 12 months are over, 3DCoat will continue to function, but you won't be eligible for new updates. To renew your maintenance, you don't pay the full $379 again. No. Instead, you pay an additional $45 if you're within 24 months of your maintenance end date to gain and additional 12 months of updates (and a fresh license file to reflect your new maintenance cutoff date.)

If you're beyond 24 months of your maintenance ending, that number increases to $90 and gets capped there. If you do pay for 12 months more maintenance at that point, the clock starts again and your next maintenance renewal cost will only be $45.

In all cases, the app will be yours to keep and use forever. You'll only be frozen at the last version available within your most recent maintence window.

I would say, increase the base price of Affinity's apps to $75. It's still a steal at that price and still lower than the $99 (inferior) Photoshop Elements. Increase that base price to $75, offer 12 months of maintenance as part of the cost, and sell an additional 12 months at $25. $40-$50 if you're 24+ months outside your 12 months past your maintenance window.

Still cheap. Still quite a steal. For those of you/us who use Affinity's apps daily, asking $25 for every 12 months of support is perfectly reasonable. So is $40-$50 for somebody who is only likley to "renew" every 24+ months.

This method isn't too hard for end users to understand, as long as it's outlined clearly in writing. It also allows Serif to (hopefully) improve their revenue stream over the old/current tactic of offering free updates until the next full point release.

I would TOTALLY be down for that price increase for new users and $25 12 month maintenance. And if you think about it, that means that Serif would be getting $75 from us over those 3 years instead of asking for it 3 years from now. Spreading out the cost surely prevents money droughts for them during that 3 year period and allows cash strapped users to spread that $75 out. For some end users, there's a huge difference between $75 and $25.

Just an idea, adding to that post from a few pages back.

Either way, as long as Serif keeps on offering perpetual licenses, I will HAPPILY keep on paying them. The alternative is buying into the Adobe subscription ecosystem, where nothing is guaranteed other than them taking your money, or going with their super stripped down Elements apps, which require plugins and script packs to fix the mess that Adobe has made. (OSS like Gimp, Krita, and Inkscape are good in a pinch, but nowhere near the same level of what Serif offers.)

Edited September 21, 2022 by cookepuss