4 ms·

Pricing is unclear. It has a fixed price and later talks about subscription. How much is the subscription. Also at what is the frameworks strategie on locking

Pricing is unclear. It has a fixed price and later talks about subscription. How much is the subscription. Also at what is the frameworks strategie on locking doing transactions in the database.

adrianthedev 4y ago
Sorry about that. I'll try to make that clearer. We have an FAQ item on teh bottom of the page. The pricing is per project (per app). You pay $250, and you get one year of updates and then use it forever. The license is a Perpetual Fallback License. When you stop paying for a subscription, you will still be able to keep and use the latest version of Avo at the point in time when the subscription ended but you will loose the ability to update to a newer version. Regarding locking and doing transactions, it does not support that, but that's a very good idea and not that difficult to add in the near-future. Ideally to let the developer specify what kind of locking strategies to use. I added this topic to keep track of. https://github.com/avo-hq/avo/discussions/982 https://github.com/avo-hq/avo/discussions/982
- danenania 4y ago
  The "one year of updates" thing is kind of confusing. What if an app has a longer lifetime than that? Can you no longer get updates to Avo? What about bugs and security updates? I think you're over-complicating the pricing. Why not just say it's $250 per project per year? You can still keep the fallback option and explain it in your FAQ. It would be more immediately understandable this way imo.
  - adrianthedev 4y ago
    I tried that and the question that popped up was "what if I don't pay anymore? will I not be able to use it then?". It kind of turned people away, and that's why I change the copy. If an app has a longer lifetime than a year, and I hope it does, then you'd have to resume the subscription to get the updates (bugs and security). It's the way the perpetual-fallback license works. There are plenty of products (table plus, jumpstart rails) and large companies (jetbrains) that practice this model. I wish there was an easier way of shipping those updates without a subscription.
    - andi999 4y ago
      But you dont say how much the subscription is.
      - adrianthedev 4y ago
        Ok. I see that. I pushed an update to fix it. It's $249/year afterwards.
    - danenania 4y ago
      I think it’s a mistake to optimize for people whose focus is what happens if they stop paying you. They’re unlikely to pay in the first place and are more likely to be difficult customers even if they do. Customers who get value out of your product will want to pay and keep paying and be sure they’re not going to miss important updates if they forget to renew in a year. These are the customers to focus on imo. People are happy to pay subscriptions for software they get continuing value from. There’s no need to reinvent the wheel on this.
      - adrianthedev 4y ago
        but I see what you mean and I think you're not wrong.
      - adrianthedev 4y ago
        I mostly agree with you, but that's on more "traditional" SaaS products. When it's a service. This is more of a product. There are developers and agencies that buy Avo, build something for a customer and then transfer the license to them. The customer might not even know that the agency bought something. They might not want to pay something ongoing. Yes, one could make the case that "hey, you pay hosting ongoing after the project is delivered, why not pay the admin framework?" and that's fair, but I just don't know if we're at that point yet. I'd love it if Avo would bring us closer to that point.
        danenania 4y ago
        I see your point, but I think it’s just a framing issue. It’s great to have an option for people who are concerned about this, but not at the expense of confusing customers who just want to pay you and keep paying you for your thing, and also killing your year 2 retention by making it opt-in instead of a normal subscription. Looking at jumpstart rails, they seem to be doing exactly what I’m suggesting. It’s a simple per project per year price, but then in their FAQ they explain that you stop getting updates if you stop paying. On the agencies point, yeah I think it’s normal for agencies to sign a client up for a bunch of services they need to build the project. You’ll just be one more on the list.

Pricing is unclear. It has a fixed price and later talks about subscription. How much is the subscription. Also at what is the frameworks strategie on locking doing transactions in the database.

adrianthedev 4y ago

Sorry about that. I'll try to make that clearer. We have an FAQ item on teh bottom of the page. The pricing is per project (per app). You pay $250, and you get one year of updates and then use it forever. The license is a Perpetual Fallback License. When you stop paying for a subscription, you will still be able to keep and use the latest version of Avo at the point in time when the subscription ended but you will loose the ability to update to a newer version. Regarding locking and doing transactions, it does not support that, but that's a very good idea and not that difficult to add in the near-future. Ideally to let the developer specify what kind of locking strategies to use. I added this topic to keep track of. https://github.com/avo-hq/avo/discussions/982 https://github.com/avo-hq/avo/discussions/982

danenania 4y ago
The "one year of updates" thing is kind of confusing. What if an app has a longer lifetime than that? Can you no longer get updates to Avo? What about bugs and security updates? I think you're over-complicating the pricing. Why not just say it's $250 per project per year? You can still keep the fallback option and explain it in your FAQ. It would be more immediately understandable this way imo.
- adrianthedev 4y ago
  I tried that and the question that popped up was "what if I don't pay anymore? will I not be able to use it then?". It kind of turned people away, and that's why I change the copy. If an app has a longer lifetime than a year, and I hope it does, then you'd have to resume the subscription to get the updates (bugs and security). It's the way the perpetual-fallback license works. There are plenty of products (table plus, jumpstart rails) and large companies (jetbrains) that practice this model. I wish there was an easier way of shipping those updates without a subscription.
  - andi999 4y ago
    But you dont say how much the subscription is.
    - adrianthedev 4y ago
      Ok. I see that. I pushed an update to fix it. It's $249/year afterwards.
  - danenania 4y ago
    I think it’s a mistake to optimize for people whose focus is what happens if they stop paying you. They’re unlikely to pay in the first place and are more likely to be difficult customers even if they do. Customers who get value out of your product will want to pay and keep paying and be sure they’re not going to miss important updates if they forget to renew in a year. These are the customers to focus on imo. People are happy to pay subscriptions for software they get continuing value from. There’s no need to reinvent the wheel on this.
    - adrianthedev 4y ago
      but I see what you mean and I think you're not wrong.
    - adrianthedev 4y ago
      I mostly agree with you, but that's on more "traditional" SaaS products. When it's a service. This is more of a product. There are developers and agencies that buy Avo, build something for a customer and then transfer the license to them. The customer might not even know that the agency bought something. They might not want to pay something ongoing. Yes, one could make the case that "hey, you pay hosting ongoing after the project is delivered, why not pay the admin framework?" and that's fair, but I just don't know if we're at that point yet. I'd love it if Avo would bring us closer to that point.
      - danenania 4y ago
        I see your point, but I think it’s just a framing issue. It’s great to have an option for people who are concerned about this, but not at the expense of confusing customers who just want to pay you and keep paying you for your thing, and also killing your year 2 retention by making it opt-in instead of a normal subscription. Looking at jumpstart rails, they seem to be doing exactly what I’m suggesting. It’s a simple per project per year price, but then in their FAQ they explain that you stop getting updates if you stop paying. On the agencies point, yeah I think it’s normal for agencies to sign a client up for a bunch of services they need to build the project. You’ll just be one more on the list.