Subscription Terms - bit disappointing

[maru]

Just a note: you can still "work" with your files if you don't have an active license - you cannot render though.

[DanGrover]

For what it's worth, The Foundry have a system for their subscription wherein you can allow it to lapse but if you wish to re-new it later on (for example after a significant new release) you have to back-pay for the entire time since you first let it lapse. As such, it's no cheaper to do it that way but it's also no more expensive - meaning that if you never find another feature that you think is worth investing in, you never have to pay again. If you do, then you do. IMO this is a fair system to pay for the development.

[PROH]

Yes, I agree. That could be a fair solution.

[Tanakov]

For what it's worth, The Foundry have a system for their subscription wherein you can allow it to lapse but if you wish to re-new it later on (for example after a significant new release) you have to back-pay for the entire time since you first let it lapse. As such, it's no cheaper to do it that way but it's also no more expensive - meaning that if you never find another feature that you think is worth investing in, you never have to pay again. If you do, then you do. IMO this is a fair system to pay for the development.

I tottaly agree.

[antanas]

For what it's worth, The Foundry have a system for their subscription wherein you can allow it to lapse but if you wish to re-new it later on (for example after a significant new release) you have to back-pay for the entire time since you first let it lapse. As such, it's no cheaper to do it that way but it's also no more expensive - meaning that if you never find another feature that you think is worth investing in, you never have to pay again. If you do, then you do. IMO this is a fair system to pay for the development.

I tottaly agree.

Me too ) and I'm too one of those "mentally alternative" Box+subscription users for one simple but very strong and quite valid (at least it is such for me) reason - I just hate all kinds of rentals, leases, loans etc. and never ever use those, well, I hate the whole idea of that and cannot bring myself not only to pay for that but even to use those rented\leased\loaned things as it just doesn't feel right for me that's all. So sadly if there will be no"FAIR BOX" there will be no more Corona for me which would be a real loss cause I love it and really appreciate the work you guys put into it and for those reasons I really want to use it legally, but those terms are just not too acceptable or friendly for us sort of already "handicapped" Box users. And by the way on top of Foundry's subscription system which seems to be quite fair for both parties\sides I can bring one more example - even more user friendliness oriented Itoo software's subscription system ...
I just simply want to not crap my pants out of fear each subsequent spring when I suddenly realize\remember that my subscription year is nearing an end and I will loose my updates forever if I'm not able to pay for it right then for some unforeseen reason.

[AndyQ]

Me too ) and I'm too one of those "mentally alternative" Box+subscription users

Rental software simply does not benefit the consumer. Like sheep everyone has fallen for the lower initial payments and bullying of big vendors like Adobe and Autodesk. None of those companies are moving to rental systems for any reason other than to maxmise profits. The old perpetual licence/discounted upgrade model was the strongest system of consumer protection. If a company produced a lame upgrade then customers could simply ignore it. The impetus existed for software developers to keep improving, making groundbreaking changes for each edition to ensure the client base wanted to purchase upgrades, for bugs to get fixed, for customer requests to be listened to. The problem was that we moved from a world of the many competing graphics vendors of the 80's and 90's to a state where a couple of big companies have swallowed up all of the competition and are effectively monopolies. Those companies knew their strength as industry standards would enable them to dictate the terms, hence the rental model was born.  Adobe have tried to keep their customers sweet by being very active with new developments but when you're stuck on a rental system with no real competition how long is that going to last? My guess would be only as long as they need to firmly entrench themselves and their system, there's no real pressure on them to keep innovating or even fix outstanding bugs and performance issues. It's another loss of freedom and consumer protection, but these changes are made slowly and comfortably so the dumb consumer just sits there and takes it, like the proverbial boiled frog. If it wasn't for the box licence option I wouldn't have even considered Corona, and I'm hoping to move away from 3DS MAX at some stage because of this very issue.