NI charges for bug fixes? SP1 not free.

[Orion HE]

I am not used to this model.  As the proud owner of over a dozen professional software programs, I was baffled by NI's method of operations here.  I figured since Service Pack 1 was released and had bug fixes, that I, as an owner of Labview, would be able to partake of the bug fixes.  Typically, with every single other professional software package I have purchase, bug fixes are free (and expected), and new features cost money.  I just wanted to weigh in on this bizarre new procedure.

Releasing software with bugs and charging for the fix of the bugs seems at best, morally corrupt.  Is there any way for us that are still using Labview legitimately, to get bug fixes, without paying for these things?

[s7726]

Second!

[tbob]

Did you not get the SSP (software subscription plan) when you purchased Labview?  I'm not sure if this is added money or if it comes with the purchase.  But the SSP entitles you to one year of upgrades for free.  I thought SSP came with Labview for the first year, but then you have to pay for it in the following years.

[Orion HE]

I did get the SSP, but it has expired.  However, there is a difference between upGRADES, and upDATES, in my opinion.  Upgrades would include new features and functionality.  Updates would include bug fixes, stability refinements.  Look at Microsoft.  Windows XP to Windows Vista was an upgrade, which cost money.  Windows XP to Windows XP SP1, and then SP2 and then SP3 are updates, which are free.  Labview SP1 does not seem tantamount to an operating system upgrade, but more of a Service Pack update.

[SimonH]

Orion HE,

Let me try to clarify, NI does not charge for service packs for any version of LabVIEW which you purchase.

Every copy of LabVIEW includes a year of SSP, which gives you access to any service packs (updates) that we release for that version of LabVIEW.  For example, everyone who purchased LabVIEW 2009 is entitled to LabVIEW 2009 SP1 without any additional cost.  If you purchased LabVIEW 8.6, you are similarly entitled to the 8.6.1 update.  

Since we release a new (upgrade) version of LabVIEW each year your SSP subscription also gives you the chance to upgrade to a new feature release without any additional cost.  

If you choose to not renew your SSP subscription then you could get in the situation where you have LabVIEW 2009 (due to your purchase of LabVIEW 8.6 and the 1-year SSP subscription that came with it) but you would not get SP1 since your SSP subscription had expired.  At this point you are welcome to use the version of LabVIEW you purchased (LabVIEW 8.6) and it's update (LabVIEW 8.6.1) or even the new feature upgrade (LabVIEW 2009).

To reuse your Microsoft analogy; you do not get Windows Vista SP1 for free when you buy Windows XP.  You only get service packs for the version of Windows that you purchased.

Staying current with an SSP subscription is the most cost-effective way of getting new versions (upgrades and their updates) of LabVIEW, even if you intend to skip a release or two.

Regards,

SimonH

LabVIEW Product Manager 

National Instruments 

[Orion HE]

Simon.  Since you understand the Microsoft analogy, let me correct you.  We purchased Labview 8.6, with an included 1 year SSP, and within the year Labview 2009 was released.  Since we legally own Labview 2009 based on our agreement through the SSP, this is not something you are allowed to lord over us.  Now if I purchased a computer, and by proxy, a license for Windows Vista in July of 2009, I recieved not only Vista service packs, but also a free UPGRADE to Windows 7 in October.  Do you know what?  I also get Windows 7 Service Packs as well.  All of them.  For Free.  When I purchased Windows Vista, there was a grace period, similar to what is provided in the SSP.  But NI chooses to half-support the product that I legitimately own through the SSP.  These are upDATES, not upGRADES.  SP1 should be free support for the product I already own.  Instead, you are suggesting I go back to 8.6 with it's Service Packs.  This is like Microsoft telling you to go back to XP with it's service packs.  Yet we would be offended if they told us they were not going to support the product we legally own, and that we must return to an earlier version.  Insanity!

I use several professional audio products, and all of them operate under the same upgrade system.  When I upgrade, all of the .1, .2, .3 releases are covered.  I don't need to pay for patches.  Who in the hell should pay for patches?!?!?!?!?!

Who should pay for patches?  NI's customers?  Why? I don't know.

[herrlin]

NI engineers have to eat too. 

Also if your 1 year SSP is already up you must have started with LV 8.6.  So I would say if your not happy with LV 2009 and dont want to pay for the SSP to get the SP! go back to 8.6.

[Orion HE]

You can say that, herrlin.  But it wouldn't make any more sense if you did. 

If you bought a car with a glitch, or rather, dozens of glitches, in the onboard computer program, and the manufacturer had fixed them, but wanted to charge you for the upgrade, you would be OK with it, because the manufacturer has to eat.  You would be ok with them saying, "just drive your other car if you don't like the new glitchy one".  Now to take this example to it's current point of this discussion, you would be ok with this, even though every other car manufacturer in the world would fix the glitches for free.  What a customer you are.

[Orion HE]

I just received an email letting me know that the software we use to program our HMIs has been updated to version 2.6.  We bought it at 2.0.  They have poured new features and bug fixes into this application, and we haven't had to pay one cent extra to the manufacturer.  I am confident that they will charge for 3.0, and I expect that.  I just thought it was relevent that we are having this discussion about updates and methodology and then I get this email.  I guess other software manufacturers are just starving to death in the name of good will.

[herrlin]

If you want talk about cars its cool but I prefer if we got more specific referred only to Buicks.