Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

hs3 licensing model

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • dcorsus
    replied
    Originally posted by mnsandler View Post
    here is what i understand about the new system

    .lf files are no longer needed fro hs3 plugins

    the system will allow you to charge an upgrade fee based on the major version component of the plugin version. ie going from 3.x.x.x to 4.x.x.x with your plugin vers.

    not sure how the trials are handled. I guess you could put in a timebomb if all else fails.
    that's my understanding from the recent webinar as well. If you want to charge for an upgrade, you let the HS folks know and they do the work behind the screens to check you own a hS2 license and charge upgrade versus full for an HS3 license.

    What I also understood is that if you keep the PI name identical, folks can automatically use (I guess register for free) the HS3 version of it.

    The webinar also discussed a "max user" type of license for those, like myself, who build PIs for multizone players. It was brought up but not concluded so if people have some recommendations, now is the time to email the HS3 team or post them here. I'm not planning on going that route.

    It was also brought up at the webinar that there is a third accesslevel, something between trial and forever trial (meaning it still works post 30 days) and left up to the PI author to enforce licensing or not. The action was for the HS3 team to come up with a "feedback" mechanism to let the PI know what the license status on the server is.

    Was hoping we could use a similar mechanism like HS3 betas, where as long as I make a new beta each 30 days, the period gets reset until I release what would be a first production version. Walked away from the Webinar concluding this was not possible, I might still email HS for that directly unless they can respond here ....

    Dirk

    Leave a comment:


  • mnsandler
    replied
    Originally posted by dcorsus View Post
    Rich, any updates?

    I'm wrestling my way through the final changes to have my Sonos PI work under HS3 (sans the HST implementation :-() and might actually do a first beta in a week or two.

    Do I need to use the same .lf file you guys made for me for HS2 or do I need to have a new one generated for HS3? If, what is the process?

    Assuming beta on HS3 and my PI will take months, does that mean that users will have to get a new licenses from HS for my PI every 30 days or is any new beta delivery somehow magically reset the trial license for a PI?

    The installer is new (to me), do we have an example file somewhere that we can tee of from?

    Thanks

    Dirk
    here is what i understand about the new system

    .lf files are no longer needed fro hs3 plugins

    the system will allow you to charge an upgrade fee based on the major version component of the plugin version. ie going from 3.x.x.x to 4.x.x.x with your plugin vers.

    not sure how the trials are handled. I guess you could put in a timebomb if all else fails.

    Leave a comment:


  • dcorsus
    replied
    Originally posted by rjh View Post
    We are adding more options, like upgrade fees. I will post more info shortly.

    Rich, any updates?

    I'm wrestling my way through the final changes to have my Sonos PI work under HS3 (sans the HST implementation :-() and might actually do a first beta in a week or two.

    Do I need to use the same .lf file you guys made for me for HS2 or do I need to have a new one generated for HS3? If, what is the process?

    Assuming beta on HS3 and my PI will take months, does that mean that users will have to get a new licenses from HS for my PI every 30 days or is any new beta delivery somehow magically reset the trial license for a PI?

    The installer is new (to me), do we have an example file somewhere that we can tee of from?

    Thanks

    Dirk

    Leave a comment:


  • tpchristian
    replied
    Is there any more information on this and what models will be supported?

    Leave a comment:


  • rjh
    replied
    We are adding more options, like upgrade fees. I will post more info shortly.

    Leave a comment:


  • mnsandler
    replied
    Originally posted by rjh View Post
    Right now, the answer is no to all of those questions. Currently, the licensing is the same as it was in HS2. But you are not the first to ask about this so I will discuss internally and see what options we can offer.
    Rich,
    any updates on options for licensing
    Last edited by mnsandler; March 8th, 2013, 10:23 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Automated
    replied
    If anything comes along similar to the way Office 365 and such are going, meaning that my software will time out out after said period purchased, then I will quit HS altogether! Upgrade fees, and such are ok, but whatever I have NOW that is licensed, needs to WORK in perpetuity until I am long gone...

    Leave a comment:


  • mloebl
    replied
    I personally dislike paying maint fees on software. However that being said, I don't mind paying occasional upgrade fees as well to help support authors. $35 plugin with $5 - 10 upgrade fees isn't too bad. Another option is a premium version where instead of $35 and incremental upgrades, I pay $60 and get free upgrades as well.


    -Mike

    Leave a comment:


  • rmasonjr
    replied
    Originally posted by Pete View Post
    I would agree with this methodology of licensing.

    I would ask though for compliance (this actually involves resources) of said maintenance fee though otherwise its not worth the time or effort to even consider it.

    Just a tangent and unrelated to the OP. A few years ago (2008) I implemented a Business Objects set up with multiple servers, multiple licensing and a service contract. This was a multmillon dollar service contract and purchase.

    That said BO had just been purchased by SAS. I watched painstakingly my service contract become nil because of some overseeing of same contracts from SAS.

    I got a bit PO'd with SAS as they remodeled and reshaped their service maintainance contracts with BO because I was getting less for more.
    Wow - I thought I was alone in my dealings with Business Objects/SAP Their licensing and support site are a complete nightmare. I have been fighting with them for months over a support contract they refuse to honor.

    As for the HS model, I'm not entirely opposed to a yearly software maintenance fee - depending on how its implemented.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pete
    replied
    I would agree with this methodology of licensing.

    I would ask though for compliance (this actually involves resources) of said maintenance fee though otherwise its not worth the time or effort to even consider it.

    Just a tangent and unrelated to the OP. A few years ago (2008) I implemented a Business Objects set up with multiple servers, multiple licensing and a service contract. This was a multmillon dollar service contract and purchase.

    That said BO had just been purchased by SAS. I watched painstakingly my service contract become nil because of some overseeing of same contracts from SAS.

    I got a bit PO'd with SAS as they remodeled and reshaped their service maintainance contracts with BO because I was getting less for more.

    Leave a comment:


  • reidfo
    replied
    I personally wouldn't mind seeing an annual maintenance fee (% of purchase price) added to HS if it covered major upgrades and break/fix support. I already pay for tech support just in case it's needed.

    Leave a comment:


  • wetlip
    replied
    i abhor maintenance fees on software, you buy a product. when you update to a newer version which costs a lot of time to invest you ask a upgrade fee. i know i have to pay for hs3 although i have hs2. but it is a major upgrade. There are plugin builders who donate the profit to a charity.

    Leave a comment:


  • mnsandler
    replied
    Thanks Rich

    I really need something with more granularity.

    The amount of time I spend adding device support to my insteon plugin warrants a periodic maintenance fee. It may not be popular with the users but I think they'll understand in the end.

    Leave a comment:


  • rjh
    replied
    Right now, the answer is no to all of those questions. Currently, the licensing is the same as it was in HS2. But you are not the first to ask about this so I will discuss internally and see what options we can offer.

    Leave a comment:


  • mnsandler
    replied
    Rich,
    any comments

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X