Suscription model voting
Ok, you pushed me to it. This is the closest thing I will do to a petition on this site. Ben may set one up on his.
I’ve got 3 polls. Descriptions of the subscription models for the first one are below:
Subscription Model 1
Keep things exactly the way they are.
Subscription Model 2
Keep things the way they are but get rid of penalties for old versions. Come and go from subscription as you please.
Subscription Model 3
Split subscription into:
- reseller support annual contract ~$800/yr, with some discount for quantity
- new versions purchased separately, cost depends on how many versions you have skipped
- access to customer portal until you stop buying new versions
- service packs are free
- web forum free
Subscription Model 4
Split subscription into:
- reseller support per incident or hourly
- new versions purchased separately, cost depends on how many versions you have skipped
- access to customer portal until you stop buying new versions
- service packs are free
- web forum free
Subscription Model 5
Split subscription into:
- reseller support either per incident or annual contract
- new versions on an 18 month cycle
- purchased separately, cost depends on how many versions you have skipped, ranging from $700 – $3000 max
- access to customer portal until you stop buying new versions
- service packs are free
- web forum free
Subscription Model 6
- reseller support either per incident or annual contract
- annual contract for new versions, delivered in incremental releases that add specific functionality rather than massive service packs that affect the whole software
Subscription Model 7
- SW direct support annual or per incident
- new versions purchased separately, cost depends on how many versions you have skipped
I’d go with option 4, but allow the reseller to tap into the competitive nature of our fine country by allowing the to set up support packages.
I’d also bring the cost of upgrading to new version down to add incentive to upgrading to new versions. I’ll always be a customer as long as I can upgrade. access to customer portal as long as your current, free service packs, free forums.
One other thing I would add, is to put the whole upgrade and renewal online. make it easy.
****
The real upshot of all of this is that once you divorce the support from the service packs, anybody can do support. Resellers are gonna hate this, because I don’t have to put up with sucky support anymore, I can just pay any expert to answer my questions. This will be particularly important for niche applications such as surfacing, plastics, sheet metal, API, etc. I personally could go into business as a support service. I don’t need permission from anyone to sell phone support. I may have difficulty getting SW to back me up like a real reseller, but is that a problem?
Questions:
Suppose I get off the maintenance train at the next stop SWx 2009. Will I still be able to activate/deactivate my license for the purposes of porting it to my next new workstation? Currently I can view my current licenses on the SWx site, would someone off maintenance still be able to do that?
I likely missed your reasoning (in yesterday’s post) behind not allowing access to the customer portal after you stop buying the current version. I don’t use Vista for my OS but I’m allowed to visit Microsoft.com for answers. I do not have the current versions of Photoshop or Illustrator but can get support from Adobe.com. I think you should still be have access to the customer portal no matter what version of SWx you are on, how much can it cost them to allow everyone access?
Regarding service packs, they are not going to issue service packs for older versions, by virtue of this fact it will be necessary to stay current. Not to mention receiving a SWx.sldprt file from a newer version and not being able to open it.
I also appreciate all that you do for us fellow Solidworks users.
Dan
****
Yeah, some of this could have been planned better. To me the forum is most useful, and the portal is of secondary importance. What motivation does SW have to maintain a site if they aren’t making anything from it. You could easily argue this both ways, which is really why I’m here in the first place. I’m not trying to be a final pass. I’m just one guy. I understand the official wheels are grinding, unbelievably slowly, but at least they are moving. I think this is going to go somewhere, but I wouldn;t be naive enough to guess where.
Matt, right on. not a problem at all, imo. competition drives resellers (or you) to provide that much better service right? If I don’t like that guys service, I can go elsewhere. I think this could potentially open more revenue streams for resellers.
They could have consultants on staff or different levels of support for niche markets that could totally differentiate them from anyone else. The territories are so large now it wouldn’t even matter.
I also agree with DanO. I’m not on the latest version of Photoshop, but I will upgrade and I can get support whenever I need and pay for more if required.
The reason why I don’t like the pay as you go options is that each incident would require a PO and do you know how much time and effort a PO takes to initiate at a larger company?
****
When I had to deal with that sort of thing for ordering supplies with a short shelf life, I just got a big PO with a “not to exceed” value, and just chipped away at it over time. I know. Damn accountants. We’ll start on them after we’ve “fixed” all the lawyers.
There has been talk about a “Documentation” blog, similar to this one that didn’t “go anywhere”. How do you access that page? I have done searches and come up with results that don’t look related. How about SW making sure VAR’s tech support people can speak effective English? How about selling the SW coursebooks without requiring that you attend a class first?
-Tim
****
When it comes down to it, I’m not very good at managing a blog. I used to have a Documentation category, but it, along with other stuff I can’t explain, has gone away. (It turns out that for some not so great reason, I changed the “documentation” category to “SW Docs” – go figger.). If I had a Documentation category, these are the posts that would be in it. Read them in order here, ignore the numbers.
http://dezignstuff.com/blog/?p=61
http://dezignstuff.com/blog/?p=59
http://dezignstuff.com/blog/?p=58
http://dezignstuff.com/blog/?p=56
http://dezignstuff.com/blog/?p=57
http://dezignstuff.com/blog/?p=165
http://dezignstuff.com/blog/?p=162
http://dezignstuff.com/blog/?p=134
http://dezignstuff.com/blog/?p=113
Matt, I use In Series to link up articles. It’s quick and easy…no bells and whisles. http://remstate.com/projects/in-series/
Matt,
You forgot the ATT subscription model.
You get 10 hours of live/email support per year on subscription. If you don’t use those hours they roll over to next year as a discount on the renewal subscription at something like $50/hr. If the hours of support are for a bona fide bug then you also get credited with that many hours of support on the next years subscription for your trouble.
TOP
If I read this:
“Split subscription into: reseller support per incident or hourly”
it comes to my mind that there will be more fees to pay if more support is needed, and that raises the question: Why is this support needed?
No one should be allowed to make money on explaining the bugs of his own software product. The manufacturer should aim for reducing the support required by improving the product.
Also, think about companies, where users often do not have the control over budgets: How to get support when you cannot technically pay?
So, practically, a permanently accessible support is needed for the user, and an incentive to improve usability for the manufacturer. That means it would only be fair if either support for current versions is free or support contracts per version or annual were available.
I am still on SW2007. I am unwilling to pay for a new installment of bugs every year. Solidworks benefits from bugs, the more bugs the more the customer clings to the hope that a SP will solve it. I think that it is reasonable to allow users to go off subscription until they perceive that the upgrade has some value. The current approach of no backward compatibility feels like extortion.
Active users do not call for support. I bet that your VAR does not know more about surfacing than my VAR. Bug reports; forget it. they go right into the trash. It would be nice to not have to try three different methods to create a surface to find the one that works.
The forums and blogs provide better support than any VAR. They also generate a sense of community.