A Radical Suggestion - Charge for Next Major PI Update

[Sean]

I'd like to make a somewhat radical suggestion - there should be an update cost for the next major PI version.

I think that PI is a great value, and the user community has benefited from a long list of great (and free!) enhancements over the last few years. As the community grows, I sense that PI will need further resources for user support. Also, with major platform changes coming (Windows 8, Mac OS Mountain Lion) I think that there will be an increasing technical workload in terms of underlying platform development. I'm sure that we all want PI to remain economically healthy for the long term.

So, how about a modest update charge for the next "big" version? How would you feel about that? Juan, have you considered such a move and would it be difficult to implement and administer?

Food for thought,

Sean

[sleshin]

I agree. The modest cost of software pales in comparison to what we all pay for our scopes, mounts, computers, etc. PI is a bargain to begin with and considering all the benefits we all get by having the developers active and available on the forums, the continuing development and improvement in the program all provided free, I think paying for the next major upgrade is appropriate. So, I hardily support Sean's suggestion.

Steve

[cfranks]

+1

Charles

[Geoff]

The other possibility is to take some variation on the Maxim model:
Subscriptions: MaxIm DL is regularly updated to add new features, new equipment control capabilities, and new supported hardware. You receive all updates, major and minor, for a period of one year from the date of purchase. If you wish to extend your updates, you can purchase a subscription. Please note that you are not required to purchase a subscription to continue using the software.
I would be certainly support some such an arrangement. 

I'm largely motivated by self interest; it would be a shame to see such a great product go bust because of lack of funds.
Geoff

[Philippe B.]

I think it is not a good idea for several reasons :


- use a stupid version and update game like maximDL is complicated to process (need a new licence system so lot of work for PI team, then no new function during this time) and I don't like maxim rules.
Also, if we have a standard version vs a pro version, like programming capacities in the pro version, why programers who help PI development with their new scripts or modules should have to pay more ?


- PI has a success in its price and free updates. PI user community is not very important and there is some work to try to have new users. ''Lifetime'' is also a nice sound for many users who have choosen to go to PI. Also reasonnable pricing tends to limit ''cracking'' software even if protection is robust.


- But I agree life time free update could be a dream. In this case only, maybe I would suggest a very major version update charge like PI 2.0 if PI team needs money and if 2.0 is radically different version.


- just before I made my training in France last month, I wanted users have a licence of PI and not demo. Association has negociate a small discount for members and finally PI gots 57 new users. Without this, maybe only 5 new users only would have bought PI (training with 25 peoples shows something like 20 users,since several months or years and only 5 newest users. So 52 new licences didn't come to the training but will have free access to the video and PDF of my conference)


- a wonderfull program like PI is for me THE BEST program ! Butnits low price and free lifetime update force me to promote it in my association or trainings. If PI becomes ''more commercial'', interest will be lower.


So, sorry, I don't find this is finally a good idea.

[bitli]

I agree that the licensing scheme should remain simple and very cost effective. However I would be more than willing to pay again for a PI license (I have it since version 1.0) IF the documentation is ever reasonably completed.

The price has to remain low because the amount of effort to understand the program is huge (I am not speaking of the fact that the subject is not  easy and requires effort, I am speaking of all the time we loose looking searching the forum for a reasonably fresh documentation on a process we do not use daily).

Understandably people who just bought PI with a promise a life update would not be too happy to pay for a new version right now.

May be an alternative would be for volunteer to sponsor the documentation effort? Would there be some people ready to pay, say, about a cost of license, to pay for (some) documentation of a process ?  On the one hand I have better use of my money.  On the other hand if I saved a buck every time I sacred because I had to digg for documentation, I would have a fair amount to use for sponsoring ....

Just an idea
-- bitli

[Harry page]

Hi

I think It has been said that free upgrades will be for all the ver1 releases and then perhapses a upgrade cost on the release of a version 2  8) I am sure there

would be a reduced fee for recent purchases of ver1 

I do not think this would be unreasonable as much as I am sure Juan will do without food he has to buy some wine now and again  I have had huge

 value for my money and would happily pay for a new version when it is released 

Kind regards

Harry

[georg.viehoever]

Well, it is quite unusual for customers to complain about the low price of a product, isn't it? If anything, that only proves the high value you get for the money...

You are right: it is important that a product produces enough money to feed the development team - otherwise both the product and the developer die sooner or later  . But the sales or support costs are not the only way to achieve this goal. Just Google for Facebook, and you have already use two examples. So far, Juan apparently bets on growing the customer base, and apparently it still produces enough money for the daily necessities like wine and hardware. Let's leave the decision on the business model to him.

The idea of giving documention instead of money is great. Native speakers of this world - unite! Be warned however that it is not easy to meet Juan's quality standards. I wonder what he thinks about this idea.

Contributing modules is another way to give back what PI gives us. Some of us already did this.

Georg

[dayers]

Another consideration is the value to the user of this excellent forum. In my opinion the SMF forum software is head and shoulders over most forum software. It far outweighs the need for more documentation, although docs should continue to be a high priority with the developers. And where else can one find the quality of documentation that we do have?

I spent a year or so trying to learn, if you excuse the expression, PhotoShop, and was appalled by the cost of their  "continuing education", i.e., books, magazines and seminars. Who needs that? Then I discovered PI and have never looked back. I've already forgotten most of what I "learned" about PS artcraft and find that once using most of the PI tools, I remember enough to continue up the learning curve the next time I use that tool.

Bottom line: I will willingly pay any reasonable price to keep PI vital and growing. I already owe a debt to the PI development team for helping this octogenarian astrophotographer claw his way up the learning curve. Thanks to you all!


Dave

[Juan Conejero]

Hi there,

I appreciate your concern about PixInsight. I understand why you suggest that we charge for new versions. Besides the fact that doing so would be a violation of our update policies (see FAQ 2.13), and besides the fact that I don't like that "business model" at all, it would be a mistake.

I agree with most of what Philippe says. As Georg has said, "Juan apparently bets on growing the customer base". That's true since the beginning, and so far it's working well. Right now we have about 1600 commercial PixInsight users after 4.5 years since we released the first commercial version. That's nearly one license per day, and it is a great result IMO. I'm pretty sure we still have a very large potential market.

Everything looks very different when you are where I am. It's a lonely place where I have to see, hear and read lots of things. Many of them are very nice (as this thread), some of them are completely wrong, and some are extremely unfair. In the latter two cases I always have to stay quiet. It's my job, after all Based on what I observe by hearing, reading and closing my mouth, PixInsight is mostly seen as an expensive software package. At 171 EUR we are just at the limit of what is acceptable. Raising the price or asking to pay for new versions would be devastating for us. We have commercial competitors that would be very happy if we make that mistake. We also have open-source competitors (especially in a few months) which would be seen as a more viable alternative. This is the crude reality.

The other possibility is to take some variation on the Maxim model

That model is incompatible with my philosophy of business. If I ever have to do that, I'll probably prefer dropping the entire thing.

it would be a shame to see such a great product go bust because of lack of funds

That will depend on the astrophotography community. If a significant fraction of them understand and support what we do, PixInsight will be a long-lived project. If they don't support us, then we'll go silently and elegantly as soon as I detect that we are no longer relevant. I'm not here to be rich; I'm here to contribute. I enjoy working on PixInsight more than ever, I enjoy it like a child most of the time, but we need to sell licenses to keep the project alive. This is true in a twofold sense: to keep the project economically viable, and to let us feel that we are making something valuable.

Actually, more important than selling licenses is respect. This has been and still is the hardest part. PixInsight is much more than a software application. It is a way of understanding image processing and astrophotography, and in most cases a very different way, compared to customary practices. After years of work, it seems we are starting to be understood and acknowledged, but many people still thinks that we are a "cheap (although complex) replacement for ...". This is what hurts us the most. PixInsight is not "cheap" and is not "a replacement for ...", but a completely "different way of ...". We have to do a lot of work to change this perception.

Again, thank you all for your concern about PixInsight, but don't worry: PixInsight is more powerful and active than ever, and we are more than ever excited about the new great tools and projects we are working on.

[Juan Conejero]

Dave,

I already owe a debt to the PI development team for helping this octogenarian astrophotographer claw his way up the learning curve. Thanks to you all!

It is a privilege to have you as a user. Knowing that we have earned your support helps us feel that everything makes sense

[erikgu]

Hi !
Todays way of getting mony is to sell licenses. Each of us can help doing that . Presentations and references to PI in other forums could recruite new users. I will, hopefully together with a more expirenced user present PI for members of the local astro group.  The members in this group has far more expirence in astro imaging and image processing than me so it can be difficult to get them to change to PI. They are user of other tools lik Maxim and Photoshop. I have used Photoshop but not Maxim. I would probably get questions that compares Maxim/PI that i can not answer.

So, what would have been nice is to have  "documentation" that compares some of the processing tools and PI.  Does this exist, if not could it be made ?

Erik G

[Josh Lake]

I think one way we could help in general is to talk to our astrophotography peers about PI and all it's done for us. Quite apart from anything on this forum, I've taken to being a 'Pixinsight Evangelist' (if you will) on sites like Reddit.com's astronomy section. When I see fellow amateur astrophotgraphers post images that I *know* would be benefited by PI, I engage them, ask to process their data, and painstakingly document my processing of their data as it usually turns out to be much better result.

I've also urged Bob Moore at NEIAC to incorporate more PI presentations and I may be doing one for the conference next year.

I say all this not to blow my horn but to encourage all of us to spread the wealth. Juan is all about keeping this project pure and noble, and he's doing a good job. PI has revolutionized the entire processing world for me and I simply want to pass it on and pay it forward.

[Lex]

Hi all,

I, like the most of us ( astrophotographers ) quiet often buy magazines like S&T or others.. I do not know; but I think that there was newer any sort of PI commercial publicity?? Wouldn't it be a nice oportunity to spread the PI "virus" ( I call it like that because for me PI is something that I have in me and it will be difficult to drop it  )
by this way and perhaps organize a donation where every user could give what he wants to support this magical Software that we all love so much; uhh did I just say that I love PI; yes I did 

This would be an option not to rise the price but to contribute in a common way to let more potential user know about PI and its benefits!

Perhaps even write an article and sponsor it by this way?

What do you think about guys?

For me it is simply normal that THE NUMERO UNO astro processing soft needs to proudly show that it exists; there is really NO NEED to hide!!!!

[chris.bailey]

The annual subscription model does not seem to guarantee true product development. With purchase and subscriptions I have spent >$1,000US on MaximDL which, apart from updated camera support, a little (half successful) Windows7 tweaking and a few bug-fixes, has seen little true development in several years. In my workflow it is now relegated to Camera Control and even that is soon to be dropped.

I cannot bear to add up how much I spent on 10 years of Photoshop upgrades which added little real funtionality for photographers, several licencing headaches and as I moved over to MAC no cross platform arrangement. $79 on Aperture and I have not touched PS since.