Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[al1947]

Matt wrote:

We'll try to be fair.  Feel free to recommend what you think would be best.

In my experience, charging full price for a beta -- especially one that has a drastically reduced feature set -- is a little unusual. It has been working OK in the couple of days I've tested it, but it is definitely a beta. (For example, it's a memory and processor resource hog on my system.)

I would balance that off by the fact that there are Mac users who have been begging for a port of MC, and you are providing it today to whoever wants it. And I think I can safely presume that you can't afford to be doing that for free.

Balancing those considerations off, it would seem to me that "fair" would be that if someone has paid for the beta at full price (or the $5 discount you ran in June), you guarantee a free upgrade to the first version you regard as an actual release rather than a beta.

[benn600]

Personally I'm just happy they are developing a Mac version and I have always said I would support it, at nearly any price.  I am not aware of a media player that even approaches what MC will do, and its development is not free.  Perhaps they could have made it clearer that the purchase price is merely for the beta version?  Or maybe they will discount the next upgrade to those who purchased the beta--which would be wonderful.

[JimH]

Perhaps they could have made it clearer that the purchase price is merely for the beta version?  Or maybe they will discount the next upgrade to those who purchased the beta--which would be wonderful.

Here's what we said:
http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=78389.msg533043#msg533043

[al1947]

As I said, I think making a Mac port available is much welcome. And I would add that I don't think JRiver should be penalized for truthfully calling it a beta. However, part of my point is that as a matter of sound customer relations, it would be good if you clarify your intentions with respect to what you regard as a "full" Mac product.

APPEARANCE
Early builds are a direct port from Windows, so they look like a Windows program.  We're working first on stability, second on bugs, and third on making the program look more Mac-like.

SCOPE
This version (18) will not include video.  The first builds are audio only, and some features are still unavailable.  A few may never be available.  When the feature set is more complete, we expect to add images, but this may not be a free upgrade.  Video support will take longer, perhaps as much as a year.  Media Network features are now working.

FEATURES
See the "Scope" paragraph just above.  We don't have a detailed list or a detailed plan at this time, so we may not answer questions about specific features that you would like.  Our goal is for MC Mac Version 18 to provide an audio experience that is equal to that of the Windows version.

I am perfectly OK with a Mac version having a different feature set from the Windows version. I most likely am going to buy MC simply to fill a need to handle FLAC and HD audio, for which native support is lacking on a Mac. Images and video are a lesser concern to me since the native Mac software is acceptable. (Blue-Ray support is not a big deal with me, but I would imagine that there are Mac users that would give that high priority, however.)

At the end of the day, I am perfectly happy to pay for a product even if it is a work in progress. But I think "fair" to have a better understanding of the feature set I am buying than stated in your FAQ.

[shAf]

Here's what we said:
http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=78389.msg533043#msg533043

I'm not sure what has generated this "fairness" topic, but given what you have stated in the above link, and with regard to what users of the earliest versions of the Windows product expected, and received relative to the price then, there does seem to be a disconnect between what is currently offered for both platforms for the same money.  JR isn't saying so, but are they needing to charge the same price for a lesser product because they're not selling as many Mac versions?  I can understand this but only up to a point--that is, they're possibly not selling as many because it's still in beta, and word of mouth isn't yet to the point for all iTunes users knowing there is a better alternative (leastwise for music).

IMHO, what is unfair is that MC18 for the Mac will probably never be anything other than beta, while JR moves to MC19 and asks us to pay for yet another beta.  As far as I'm concerned, it isn't about the money--rather, it's more about a marketing practice that is unfair.  In all fairness to these Mac users, who have contributed to making this version what it is today, we shouldn't be asked to pay out anything additional for a finished product--we've already paid.

My opinion having been said, I'm likely go go along with whatever LR wants--iTunes and the alternatives are that bad.

My CA$0.02 sense