This is probably the longest reply I made in my life, but I felt like I needed to write this.
Oh, I don’t know, how do many other companies stay in business that provide free quality software (like DaVinci Resolve), some of which is even open source? They find other sources of income and get ahead of the competition. And that is how they survive and thrive.
I am not saying that Steinberg should completely switch their business model and make everything free, but you are making it sound like they’ll go completely bankrupt by giving people, who just bought Cubase 13, a free Cubase 14 update, which I truly believe they / we deserve, in this particular case.
Furthermore, if Steinberg mainly consists of a bunch of developers who are not really interested in marketing and expanding their business, then maybe it’s time for a change if this company is to survive. Programming will get easier and easier in the future with help of AI, which will make development easier for everyone.
So what’s left, then? The brand, the image and a lot of customers who trust the company and who don’t want to feel like they are being treated like fools, which is the case in this particular situation here.
You, and other like you, have to stop living in denial.
And it is morally right of Steinberg to reward those who have special knowledge with a free Cubase 14 update? I’m talking about those who know, when the new Cubase will be released, who know not to activate Cubase 13 yet, and who know that they can just continue using a 60-day trial, until Cubase 14 releases, which they now get for free! Stop with this “moral” thing, please. It makes no sense at all.
You are making it sound so dramatic. Steinberg develops software for creative individuals. Surely, they could be more creative, themselves, in working out more flexible solutions, when it comes to fairness, justice and treating their customers right?
You sound like a guy who is worried to “disturb the great order of things!” and just let things be as they are, otherwise the whole world would collapse. Well, it already is collapsing in a way - they are ending the support of an old system which is eLicenser.
Then SB should adapt to stay alive. How can you expect to stay alive as a business in this comlex, competitive environment by remaining the same? This is probably why SB are switching their model from USB dongle to their new licensing system. Even though their products will be pirated more now, and it will anger some old customers, still, they probably calculated the risks and made a hard decision, which is a good sign.
And speaking of eLicenser support ending. Yeah, that’s another thing. Pushing the FOMO of “the eLicenser ending soon, upgrade or else!”. Now there were two big reasons for us to utilize the September sale. The attractive prices AND the end of eLicenser. Setting the double lure onto the trap to reel in even more customers. I mean, I get it - strategically this makes perfect sense to maximize the profits. But as I said again and again: Cubase 14 was released too fast, some got lucky and got it for free, others had “special knowledge” and got it for free. And the rest of us, suckers, well…
Yep. Some might argue that “obsolete” is not the best word to use here. I would personally say “inferior”, compared to Cubase 14. Especially in regard to some “features”, that I prefer to call: “fixes and patches that should have fixed Cubase 13”, like the attrocious white menu bar.
Speaking of white menu bar. I agree so much with this! The white menus have been a problem for a long time and to me it seems like a neglected part of Cubase that needed fixing for a long time.
I created a whole feature request here, asking them to fix this: [Feature Request] True Dark Mode (GUI) for Cubase on PC
And it’s not because I find them “ugly” or “unstylish”, but because they genuinely cause me pain in my eyes and my head. Because white background with tiny white text is just painful to look at when almost everything else in Cubase is dark, especially when it’s dark outside and you are getting ready for sleep.
And now that they finally patched this, they have labeled it as a “feature” in Cubase 14, which they now ask a full update price for.
I also mentioned this in the following reply, in another topic:
To conclude the white menu bar topic, this should have been a fix, for Cubase 13 too, and not a new “feature” only reserved for the newest version. It’s things like this that make me angry. It’s like people put up with it long enough, and then Steinberg thinks that they can stop patching current (now previous) version of Cubase. And instead of patching things that needs to be addressed, immediately, they leave the holes open, just to patch them in the NEXT version… for a price. And this becomes like a loop, where some things don’t get fixed until their completion, because it removes reasons and excuses to create future updates (or patches, as I would call them) in the future and charge money for them.
To paraphrase some of my own reply from above (from another topic):
“They can add as many fancy new features, VSTs and workflow improvements as they like and call them “features” for their new version of Cubase, that they charge money for. But basic necessary fixes that help us to SEE without getting headaches, should be free patches that fix current Cubase versions, in my humble opinion.”
One could argue: “well, white menus is not a bug, you can still use the menus and their functionalities”. Sure, you could, but I bet that if your eyes were just as sensitive and you got headache from staring at white blocks on your screen, you would not use that argument. If they at least could update Cubase 13, giving us dark menus, I would be slighly more “OK” with not getting Cubase 14, just yet. That’s one of the biggest things that bug me, at the moment.
Yes, I think that would be fair. If they don’t want to give us Cubase 14 update for free, then why not at least give a little discount as a gesture of kindness and humulity.
And who does benefit from that, in the end? The “voucher game” that SB created was a way for people to start talking about it, selling vouchers, donating vouchers, creating more customers for SB. The same customers that SB were planning to sell the Cubase 14 update to at a full price, shortly after the sale.
Exactly. It’s not like Steinberg will get “poorer” by allowing some people to get their newest patch… I mean update. A lot of us could have gotten Cubase in “other questionable ways”, but we have chosen to go full legit and support the company that we love and trust. Stop abusing that trust!
Not a bad idea. They could make a system that calculates the date from the day of activation (or purchase) to the current day and make a special discount / voucher / code, based on that, for that particular user.
As @mavo0013 suggested above, it a good idea, I think, or at least it’s a good initial suggestion that can always be customized. Things don’t have to be that black and white.
There are a lot of replies in this topic, but you are one of the few who actually nails it. You are formulating it clearly and on point and I completely agree with you.
Related to the above, yes, this is what I feel like, as well. It’s like we are playing poker with Steinberg. Instead of going to a shop, and be greeted by a polite, smiling seller who wishes to sell you the best thing and tells you everything you need to know to get the most out of your money, you instead are greeted by a shady dealer who just wants you to buy an inferior thing, makes you sign a contract and then he can squeeze just a “few more” bucks out of you to fix the aforementioned inferiority.
I know that this comparison might seem a bit wacky and exaggerated, but find I it necessary to get my point across.
Maybe it has something to do with the anonymity of the online shopping, that SB feels that it’s justified to do as they do.
It seems like it and feels like it, at least, whatever it may be or whatever they call it.
And why should customers not be allowed to haggle, at least a little? Why should they be forced to accept every decision and price that the seller establishes?
This is the essense of my frustration, as well.
No, Steinberg didn’t sell us a different product than the one we ordered, just a slightly inferior one, compared to the one that they were planning on releasing, shortly after.
You can pack your arguments, however you like, that it’s just “business”. And Adobe could also say: “We just make you pay us cancellation fee for early termination, while thoroughly concealing this policy, before you press Accept, because it’s just business”.
And no, I’m not saying Steinberg is Adobe. Steinberg is much better than them. It’s just an example for the sake of principle, since you came up with “it’s business” argument.
I couldn’t agree more. I even asked one of the Steinberg guys (Matthias) about this, in detail, in another topic, but he didn’t really address it.
This was my initial reply to him:
And this was his reply:
Me:
Matthias:
Me:
And then he stopped replying to me by posting this comment, not really addressing the core issue:
There is no reasoning with them, when they keep deflecting like that.
They could have said something like that, yes. Like: “Cubase 14 will be released around date X. If you activate your Cubase 13 license now, then you will have to pay the full price to update to Cubase 14 (no grace period), but if you wait until after the 9th October, then you will be eligible for a free update. Do you accept? Yes / No”.
But then again, there was the loophope that enabled you to use a 60-day trial right from the moment you bought Cubase 13 and until the Cubase 14 release, without any consequence - oh, yes, there is a consequence - you get a FREE update, lol. It seriously feels like a cheatcode. Don’t you see there is something wrong here?
By the way, I already posted these links above, but I will post them again reenforce my points, especially in regard to my “A B C” example.
and
So, tell me what you think. (this is to @HidMov )