tranceandy Posted July 23, 2009 Author Share Posted July 23, 2009 [quote name='Luke' date='23 July 2009 - 05:18 PM' timestamp='1248365885' post='1831707'] I apologize in advance as I do not have time to read seven pages of replies. [quote name='Luke' date='23 July 2009 - 05:18 PM' timestamp='1248365885' post='1831707'] Having a lifetime license, I feel insulted that in order to use this service I have to give up my lifetime license and convert it into a "standard license". I feel that this tactic is shameful, and dishonorable. On the other hand I do understand it takes resources to run a server for this, and there are costs involved. That is why I feel that if you need to exclude lifetime/perpetual license holders (which perpetual do pay support fees too), then you should exclude all license holders and establish a low monthly fee to the service. As you pointed out, this is a debate of apples and oranges. It's a separate optional service for IP.Board, thus it should be treated as such. They are not asking you to give up your lifetime licence and are working out how they can offer this service to those with Lifetime/Perpetual licence holders aswell as Standard licence holders Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 [quote name='Andy D' date='23 July 2009 - 05:20 PM' timestamp='1248366042' post='1831708'] They are not asking you to give up your lifetime licence and are working out how they can offer this service to those with Lifetime/Perpetual licence holders aswell as Standard licence holders All I've read so far is the first couple pages and the announcement. And the announcement says that they can "convert" our license to a standard license in order to use the service. I find that unacceptable. Also, don't perpetual customers pay $60 per year for support, or something like that? Just what is the difference between that and $25 every six months? Why the need to exclude perpetual license holders if they pay the same support fee (in fact, more)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nimdock Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 Luke, really, read the thread... :P Charles just said they are trying to work something out and to have some patience... Let's wait and see. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strike X Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 I am worried about false reports. hmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 [quote name='Nimdock' date='23 July 2009 - 05:29 PM' timestamp='1248366544' post='1831714'] Luke, really, read the thread... :P Charles just said they are trying to work something out and to have some patience... Let's wait and see. :) Ok. I just wanted to make sure the horse was dead :P. I just want them to be fair about this... if this is really considered something separate, then they need to charge for it separately. If it's purely for costs, I'm sure a low yearly fee would suffice. That's how I feel about it :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtariAge Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 [quote name='Luke' date='23 July 2009 - 11:30 AM' timestamp='1248366655' post='1831718']I just want them to be fair about this... if this is really considered something separate, then they need to charge for it separately. If it's purely for costs, I'm sure a low yearly fee would suffice. That's how I feel about it :) No offense to you, but I hope they do not charge for those of us already paying $25 every six months. I most likely would not use the service then (and I'm guessing many other regular license holders would not either). This would greatly impact the service's usefulness, since it depends on admin/moderator submitted reports from as many forums as possible. ..Al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparc Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 Why not charge like $10 every six months for the service for all active license holders? Then waive the fee for those people using the new Standard License system. In the future if you have more services, you can than increase the price of the service and bundle in more services. But still waive the fee for those with the new Standard licenses who are paying for renewal. just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Management Charles Posted July 23, 2009 Management Share Posted July 23, 2009 [quote name='sparc' date='23 July 2009 - 12:45 PM' timestamp='1248367530' post='1831726'] Why not charge like $10 every six months for the service for all active license holders? Then waive the fee for those people using the new Standard License system. In the future if you have more services, you can than increase the price of the service and bundle in more services. But still waive the fee for those with the new Standard licenses. just a thought. We are exploring options as I said earlier in this topic. One thing we do NOT want to do is keep increasing the prices as we add more services. That's not what we are after :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 [quote name='AtariAge' date='23 July 2009 - 05:33 PM' timestamp='1248366815' post='1831719'] No offense to you, but I hope they do not charge for those of us already paying $25 every six months. I most likely would not use the service then (and I'm guessing many other regular license holders would not either). This would greatly impact the service's usefulness, since it depends on admin/moderator submitted reports from as many forums as possible. ..Al You have to understand something - you pay $25 every 6 months for support. If that is extended to this service, then by that logic the perpetual license should also get the service because they pay $30 per year, regardless of who pays what. They are extending that $25 to the service, so they should extend the $30 to it as well (I thought it was $60, sorry don't have a perp lic.) As they said this is about covering costs. If that's true, then what's wrong with giving it to lifetime license holders for free? And by the same token if they don't want to do that, they should charge for it separately for everyone, not just perpetual or lifetime license holders. You can't force us out of our licenses, and you can't make special clauses excluding specific license holders from the service. A license holder is a license holder, regardless of what the arrangement is. Be fair about it across the board. Another argument I make is this: Why is this service needed? What was the need to create such a service? The answer is the methods for preventing spam bots from registering on the site are becoming ineffective. Every day bots are getting better and better at breaking through CAPATCHA barriers. If a service is the only thing to prevent spam, I see it as a replacement of a feature that is already under the terms of my license. Again, I understand there are costs involved with running a server and that there must be a ton of people with perpetual licenses and lifetime licenses. Since this seems to be an extension of the support contract, just like access to the resource site, perpetual customers are already paying something for it. If you can't bare to have lifetime license holders to get it free, find another solution outside the support contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfie Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 [quote name='Luke' date='23 July 2009 - 12:23 PM' timestamp='1248366221' post='1831711'] Also, don't perpetual customers pay $60 per year for support, or something like that? It's $30/year on the Perp license, and $25/6 months ($50/year basically) for the standard license. [quote name='sparc' date='23 July 2009 - 12:45 PM' timestamp='1248367530' post='1831726'] Why not charge like $10 every six months for the service for all active license holders? Then waive the fee for those people using the new Standard License system. I was thinking a yearly fee, so that it not only falls in line with Perp anniversary dates, but also so IPS isn't busy handling $10 charges twice a year when they could handle $20 once a year. Also, could do $30 for those who don't buy a "Add-On Services" package early in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarun Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 If a perpetual customer is paying their $30/year fee for support, are an +Active Customer and this new spam service is included in that pay fee since it's optional to pay, I'd think that would make the perpetual users happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 This is the way I see it: You should have known full well you were going to piss a lot of people off by telling them that lifetime/perp license holders could not use this service, and that they could one-way convert their licenses to a standard license to use this service. Especially given the nature of the service: A way to stop spam, something that should be a stock feature available to everyone. I'm sure you talked about it for a while, but I can't believe it didn't cross someone's mind before posting the announcement. If you have retracted the statement and are working on it further, an ajustment to the annoucement needs to be made. As I've said before, a license holder is a license holder. You can't discriminate one from the other, regardless of what the arrangement was. If you are extending the support fee for this, you should do it for the other licenses as well, regardless of who pays what. I also know that by giving it to the standard license holders, you are not increasing your revenue by any margin to cover the costs of the server required for this service. This leads me to believe that it is not about cost, but a way to get people to convert their licenses. If you still wish to honor them, honor them. If this is about cost, charge for it. And if you do, charge everyone, not just perp and lifetime license holders. How ever you want to do it, I'm sure no one would complain. $10 per year provides an access key for every form license, $5 per year per access key, etc... what ever it is, I'm sure no one would mind. But if you want to have everyone use it, it has to be dirt cheap. You want everyone to use it, but excluding lifetime/perp license holders does not do that. It just pisses them off, and they refuse to use the service. Be fair accross the board. That's all I ask. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Management Charles Posted July 23, 2009 Management Share Posted July 23, 2009 Luke: you really need to read the whole topic :) http://forums.invisionpower.com/topic/288805-introducing-spam-monitoring-service/page__view__findpost__p__1831586 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bfarber Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 [quote name='Luke' date='23 July 2009 - 01:09 PM' timestamp='1248368951' post='1831754'] This is the way I see it: You should have known full well you were going to piss a lot of people off by telling them that lifetime/perp license holders could not use this service, and that they could one-way convert their licenses to a standard license to use this service. Especially given the nature of the service: A way to stop spam, something that should be a stock feature available to everyone. I'm sure you talked about it for a while, but I can't believe it didn't cross someone's mind before posting the announcement. If you have retracted the statement and are working on it further, an ajustment to the annoucement needs to be made. As I've said before, a license holder is a license holder. You can't discriminate one from the other, regardless of what the arrangement was. If you are extending the support fee for this, you should do it for the other licenses as well, regardless of who pays what. I also know that by giving it to the standard license holders, you are not increasing your revenue by any margin to cover the costs of the server required for this service. This leads me to believe that it is not about cost, but a way to get people to convert their licenses. If you still wish to honor them, honor them. If this is about cost, charge for it. And if you do, charge everyone, not just perp and lifetime license holders. How ever you want to do it, I'm sure no one would complain. $10 per year provides an access key for every form license, $5 per year per access key, etc... what ever it is, I'm sure no one would mind. But if you want to have everyone use it, it has to be dirt cheap. You want everyone to use it, but excluding lifetime/perp license holders does not do that. It just pisses them off, and they refuse to use the service. Be fair accross the board. That's all I ask. A license holder is a license holder, yes. And we're being fair across the board. If you hold a license to run IPB, you can run IPB. If your license entitles you to download updates or obtain technical support, we still honor that, and will continue to honor that. However, for perpetual and lifetime license holders, that is all that your license entitles you to. I am really not sure why this seems so upsetting to everyone. :unsure: You purchased a product that included a license. That license said "you can continue to obtain updates and technical support". That is all that your license granted you. And we are honoring that. The standard license, on the other hand, has a different structure. The fees associated with the standard license cover updates, support, and future services and products IPS may make available. Basically what I'm hearing in this thread is that IPS as a company should not be allowed to offer anything special to standard license holders ever, so long as they don't also give that to (basically) all license holders. I'm just not understanding how, as a customer, you could make that assertion? :unsure: Let's say Microsoft decided today that they're going to bundle a new service with Windows 7. That service will do something neat that users have requested (maybe a built in anti-virus for instance, and it runs as a service, pulling definitions from Microsoft's servers daily). They are going to let users on Windows 7 use this service for free, but only for Windows 7 users - not for Vista or XP users. You must be using Windows 7 to make use of this new service. Is there honestly a problem with that? Why should Microsoft not be allowed to offer new services to those users without also giving that service away for free to other customers as well? And if there isn't a problem with that, how is it any different than what we are doing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparc Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 [quote name='bfarber' date='23 July 2009 - 12:25 PM' timestamp='1248369919' post='1831776']Basically what I'm hearing in this thread is that IPS as a company should not be allowed to offer anything special to standard license holders ever, so long as they don't also give that to (basically) all license holders. I'm just not understanding how, as a customer, you could make that assertion? :unsure: if you re-read the thread there are a number of people including myself who WANT to be charged extra for those "future services" including the spam system. Our only request is that we not have to terminate our rights as perpetual/lifetime licenseholders. But as Charles stated. IPS is looking at solutions. So, we'll see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bfarber Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 I can't comment on that aspect of it. I know Charles said on previous pages we're looking at options. Perhaps something will surface that will be satisfying to perpetual and lifetime license holders to cover that. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Management Charles Posted July 23, 2009 Management Share Posted July 23, 2009 Calm yourselves :lol: We are working on options ... just give us a few days :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamer Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 [quote name='.Wolfie' date='22 July 2009 - 10:23 PM' timestamp='1248297823' post='1831055'] I don't like that. Yes I'm a little biased since I have a Lifetime license, but I think that the Lifetime license shouldn't be excluded because the terms of it are the same as a standard license except that it's "forever" instead of limited to 6 month windows. With Perpetual, the license holder should be allowed to get it when they are in +Active status (ie, paid $30/year). I know that IPS wants to convert those into standard licenses, but I think that's a bit shameful to try to reword or reclassify things just to do it. I fully agreee... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 bfarber: The way I see it is the standard license $25 fee is for support and upgrades, nothing else. If you bend it to "future services" then by that token you should do it to the perpetual license since they pay $30 per year for support. And if you give it to them, lifetime license holders should get it free. The closest thing I have to compare to this service is the resource site: Without an active support contract, you cannot access it. Standard license holders pay $25 every six months, perpetual license holders pay $30 per year, and lifetime license holders pay nothing. But they get access to the same "service". And technically I would consider the resource site a "service" the same as the spam monitor. I ask for every license holder to get it, or for none of them to get it and have a yearly fee. That would be fair to everyone. And it's much simpler to charge no one, or charge everyone. And as far as who is paying what for their license, in order to be fair you can't look at that. Regardless of what the initial agreement was, a license is a license. I have an active support contract, I get access to the resource site "service". The spam monitor should be treated the same for all, or different for all. It's as simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pisaldi Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 [quote name='bfarber' date='23 July 2009 - 07:25 PM' timestamp='1248369919' post='1831776'] However, for perpetual and lifetime license holders, that is all that your license entitles you to. I am really not sure why this seems so upsetting to everyone. :unsure: You purchased a product that included a license. That license said "you can continue to obtain updates and technical support". That is all that your license granted you. And we are honoring that. The standard license, on the other hand, has a different structure. The fees associated with the standard license cover updates, support, and future services and products IPS may make available. I think that's not true at all... When Perpetual licenses were offered you said there were identically to standard ones and the only difference was in the price of the yearly support... That's the reason it was justified to pay the amount it costed to have it... because paying every year the support you should have 6 years of support standard license ($120/$20=6 years)... But, in my opinion the problem is that if IPS creates a service which cost money you can logically make to pay it... but such as you do with IP.Blog, IP.Gallery and IP.Downloads and as you will do with IP.CCS... But don't create differences... do you feel is too low the $30 fee for support so increase to $40 or $50 and give the service to those who have support... but don't create the difference... please!!! I think we are not second division customers... [quote name='Charles' date='23 July 2009 - 07:36 PM' timestamp='1248370602' post='1831790'] Calm yourselves :lol: We are working on options ... just give us a few days :) NICE !!! :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtariAge Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 Just curious, how much did those Lifetime and Perpetual licenses cost when they were available? ..Al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoderX Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 The resource site is available to lifetime license holders without any fee and it's considered a service isn't it? I don't really see how this service is any different. I wonder what other "services" you guys have planned for the future that won't apply to lifetime/perpetual license holders. meh.. it was good while it lasted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pisaldi Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 [quote name='AtariAge' date='23 July 2009 - 08:12 PM' timestamp='1248372733' post='1831829'] Just curious, how much did those Lifetime and Perpetual licenses cost when they were available? ..Al --> New Order --> 10/07/04 --> $69.95 --> Upgrade to Perpetual License --> 10/24/06 --> $115.05 This is what paid when upgrading from standard.. And this is what paid buying directly Perpetual --> Invision Power Board Perpetual License --> 09/27/06 --> $185.00 I don't know lifetime... Regards from Barcelona Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 [quote name='AtariAge' date='23 July 2009 - 07:12 PM' timestamp='1248372733' post='1831829'] Just curious, how much did those Lifetime and Perpetual licenses cost when they were available? ..Al I think it was around $150 when yearly licenses were about $60. I know I paid $200 or more for my lifetime license when it was available. I don't recall the exact amount. But as I said before, it's not about what you paid for the license, or how much you pay to renew it. A license is a license, and should be considered equal. They should be giving it to all license holders, or make it separate service. I'm not against paying something to help with the costs of running this service (as it seems to be their concern), I just don't appreciate their initial tactic. They're talking about it, so we'll wait. But I expect nothing less than equal treatment for every license holder. What ever is/was paid for a license should not be put into the equation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pisaldi Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 [quote name='Luke' date='23 July 2009 - 08:18 PM' timestamp='1248373131' post='1831837'] I think it was around $150 when yearly licenses were about $60. I know I paid $200 or more for my lifetime license when it was available. I don't recall the exact amount. If you want to know how much did you pay, you must go your "Client Area" to "Your Invoices" and there you will find a history of ALL they invoice you've paid to IPS... And that's very useful for remember things... :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.