Could, it is a possibility. Some people “stacked” their licenses (you can stack licenses on the backstage by doing multiple upgrades) to ensure themselves of preventing having to pay a higher update price in the future. The price once was $40 for the full version. Nowadays you pay a little more than that just for an upgrade. You also get more than what you got in the past. But frankly, if you stack your license, you are doing just yourself more a favor than the team because you do avoid the risen price updates.
-
Of course, you are absolutely right.
-
True… probably the only favor for the team when people are stacking up licenses is more income “earlier”.
It’s a matter of eating dinner today or breakfast tomorrow type afair…
Although let’s say you decide to buy 5 upgrades to take you 5 full version into the future. Going on previous release cycles a full version and licence has lasted something like 3-5 year a time, so with five of them that’s 15-25 years of updates. How many people can say for sure they’re going to want to be using exactly the same software in 25 years, or whether they’re even be making music, or even be alive for that matter???
Wise people, would use the same tools, over and over and over again, year in/year out. There are so many music tools on the market today… Not enough years in life, to learn em all. Choose your kit, learn it, and try not to worry bout tomorrow…
sound quality is: more about the time you have invested in using your reverb, than the reverb you are using.
Renoise, Reaktor, Max… These are the most infinite of music tools, when you consider the types of secrets they can reveal to you over time. In 25 years… Those of us still alive, should be Renoise Masters…
My .02 + random thought
cheers
This is all simple to fix.
- Obviously, registered users only, get to VOTE for which feature they want to pay for. There will be a set amount - I don’t know, $40 or something.
Then nobody can be disappointed, because only those whose ideas are implemented have to pay. It isn’t rocket science, I can’t believe you couldn’t think this up for yourself.
===============================================================
Edit: I apologise for repeating below half of what the OP said, but which you ignored completely vV- foolish of me to read half of his post and then all of yours first, where you ignored that he said VOTING and FEE, and exactly what I wrote below as well…
Sometimes I wonder why people bother posting on here, when along comes somebody else and just ignores what they’ve written, and answers a load of strawman nonsense.
Well done to the OP - a brilliant idea, let’s hope it’s implemented soon!
Look - we have five options, say:
- Piano roll
- Buzz sequence editor
- No idea
- No idea
- No idea
(I only put ‘no idea’ because apart from the lack of a Buzz sequence editor, there is nothing else I personally want from Renoise).
So say 100 people are willing to pay for what they want, one of the five options.
We all vote, and find out which idea is the most popular. Say it’s 80 votes for the piano roll (for example). The 80 voters who wanted it, pay $40 each, and the dev. team develop it as top priority. The other 20 users don’t pay anything, because, for now, they aren’t getting their wants implemented. The 80 users get the function they really want, and then we can do the vote again, in a few months time, or however long the dev. team think is appropriate, for another five options (no doubt including the remaining four from before).
The 20 who voted for the other options shouldn’t be disappointed, because they can see from the voting that the piano roll (for example) was what most paying voters wanted.
I’m sure being paid a few thousand dollars is enough motivation for any programmer!
Oftentimes that one missing feature can prevent you from using the program, and makes you use another program instead, while you wait for it to be implemented in Renoise.
Anyway - I have a solution to some of this - registered users pay Lua scripters to implement their wishes! I would be happy to pay $50 for a Buzz sequence editor, and if fifty other people (or however many a Lua scripter required to make it worth their while) paid the same, we would get what we wanted.
How amazing - he didn’t explain the disadvantages of what the original poster suggested, he explain disadvantages to something ELSE. How ridiculous - why did the OP bother posting clearly what he meant, when you just read vV’s errenous ‘rebuttal’ and act like that’s it? The OP has a solution to a problem. For some reason, the SOLUTION itself is a ‘problem’ to some people here, unbelievable.
I totally agree, I just can’t understand what the problem is with OPTIONS - if you don’t like it, ignore it, just pretend it isn’t there. I don’t want a piano roll either, but it doesn’t bother me in the slightest (and nor is it any of my business) if others want it, and are willing to pay for it, or just want to be able to vote on it, to tell the devs what they want the most.
As I’ve said several times before, some users seem to regard Renoise in its current form, as a kind of ‘cult’, which mustn’t be questioned, changed, updated, unless the ‘high priests’ say so (no offence to the devs., that’s just how I see how the users I’m talking about, see you.) It’s ridiculous. I want Renoise to keep improving and becoming easier to use to make music with, and anything towards that end is a good thing, whether I use it or not. I doubt I will use more than 20% of what Renoise can do, during my lifetime, doesn’t mean that those functions aren’t useful to hundreds of other users.
I have to say either you didn’t read the original post correctly or vV’s post confused in some way as it exactly addressed the idea expressed in the original post!
This is what my reaction is exactly about what the poster suggested:
"If you pay the fee, you get to suggest something and have more “weight” behind that suggestion than someone randomly complaining in the forums; i.e. put your money where your mouth is. "
“Don’t misunderstand me—paid users would stay on the same release schedule fee system, and wouldn’t pay any extra to have a fully functioning ReNoise. For people who MUST have features X Y Z, however, this gives them an opportunity to contribute more than just hot air.”
The developers have clearly stated they don’t want this because this puts on extra pressure on what supposed to be in the next update and it isn’t at all fair to those who simply payed for a full license.
Trust me, this is not a solution at all and to be fair, there is no real problem either, i don’t know of which problem you speak of?
I didn’t know the developers had stated that. I don’t see how it isn’t fair to those who paid for a full license, they aren’t losing anything, and if they really wanted ‘function X’ they could pay for it.
For example, say there was a vote as I listed above, and 80 of the 100 voters voted for the piano roll (which I don’t need), they pay, they get the piano roll in the next update, their majority vote proved that the majority wanted that function, and I wait until the next vote comes along. I don’t see the problem.
I don’t see how it CAN’T work, to be honest. Surely the developers don’t just randomly decide what they want to put into the next update, and completely ignore what the users say about that? That would be crazy. This way, everybody wins - people like me get what they want, IF we pay the developers extra to implement those functions. Nobody is asking the developers to drop all other work and focus on project ‘x’ for nothing. The functions that are most wanted get implemented, because obviously we would only pay for the function(s) we really want.
At the moment, as far as I’ve been told, the devs don’t have a voting system for users any more, so all users just have to hope that the next update contains whatever it is that they want. How is that likely to bring about functionality which a lot of users think is really important to them? It all seems like it’s down to chance at the moment, not that I’m saying that any of the updates haven’t been incredible, because they have, but it doesn’t help those people who want specific functionality implemented.
vV said:
But the OP said:
In other words, vV raised lots of ‘ifs’ which the OP clearly accounted for. I still can’t see how it can possibly not be a good thing for the devs - $4,000 odd if 80 people vote for a function? They are working on Renoise anyway, I doubt anybody is going to suggest (and get voted to no.1) a function which the devs. had no intention of ever implementing.
(I also agree with what vV actually said, but it didn’t address what the OP said. IF those things were the case (people paying for different options, paying different amounts, etc.) then I agree, but it isn’t what the OP stated.
Yeah, well, that is exactly the point, like registered users aren’t allowed to have a voice in this.
I can understand the idea that donating would push a program forwards on specific areas, but what if the implementation of the idea doesn’t suit some of the donater’s taste? and how much finetuning of the feature would that require (how much extra time needs to be invested into that).
The early Beta system works best so far and people get a voice in what is new in Renoise during Beta and things get modified, or improved or changed during Beta.
We once allowed the winner of one of the Renoise Beatbattle contests to submit a must-have idea that should be implemented. (That feature was sample recording and it got into the next version that got out for beta testing).
Perhaps we could do something like that again, i rather have that approach because it is more fun and everybody gets a fair chance in joining the competition. (Besides:the winner gets buttkicked for making a poor choice if he/she does so, not the dev-team 
)
Well, I don’t wish to sound rude, but I think that’s a really bad idea. The winner of a Beatbattle contest is ONE person, that is just crazy, allowing one person to dictate a must have feature.
I would imagine that most features people want are not going to be incredibly complicated, and we will be made aware by the devs. just what is and isn’t possible, when we initially suggest features to vote on. If somebody suggests something and the devs say “We can’t do that, it would take a year of coding”, then we accept it and suggest other things. The devs would have some idea of the complexity of each requested feature, and could say “Feature 1 looks quite easy, Feature 2 would require two to three months, etc.” and voters could then take that into consideration.
I don’t understand how the early Beta system works best - compared to users actually voting for what they would like. You say people get a voice during Beta and things get modified, or improved or changed during Beta, what does that mean? WHO decides all of that? A few people who post on a forum thread? Without a vote you have no way of accurately knowing whether you are doing what your users want you to do.
The Devs are our leaders and we invest them with trust and decisiveness. We respect that relationship because it brings the best results for the community overall. Make your suggestion, be patient, and in the meantime be openminded about finding your own workarounds and inventive solutions.
Currently this weighing of ideas is what they already do, you seem to forget that they do read the suggestions forum, they simply don’t always answer every suggestion.
If they keep coming back and people suggest specific solutions how to implement features (with screenshots and practical input:these have the highest chance to trigger a dev-response) you will get an answer what kind of work the suggestion would require.
Things like audio-tracks and a piano-roll has been explained they are on the to-do list, but because the amount of work that is required for it (complete rewrite of the audio engine) doesn’t put these desired features on the top priority list.
If they get to it, it most likely also means there won’t be much more features added into the next version either because of the time consuming work the implementation cost.
That is a thing people should account for, that the amount of things to improve and to add are slimming with each update, this means that the more desired features some wished for a very long time, may perhaps come in one of the next updates (depending on what the wish was and if it is realistic) but it also might mean that update log-files will not contain that mass amount of new or improved features as it was before.
I have hardly seen any of the devs saying “no” to an idea and if it is a true no, it is because the feature doesn’t suit anywhere in the concept of what Renoise is.
I think we should just stick with that voting system that we used to have in the backstage area.
The devs pick what they think are the best features, make a poll. and the feature that has the most votes will be implemented in the future?
No hassle with money-stuff then 