Subscription Fees

[richrf]

Hi,

Jooske suggested that users of ProcessGuard (and WormGuard) discuss the notion of paying subscription fees. Briefly my views:

I do believe that a non-recurring license fee model, was inherently flawed. There is no way to continue developing products based upon obtaining a sufficient number "new licensee fees" on an on-going basis. I have never heard of a successful product that was based upon such a licensing model. I believe DCS made a major business error when they embraced such a model. Eventually, it has to break, as it did with TDS-3.

While I am more than happy to pay annual subscription fees for products like ProcessGuard and WormGuard, because I do want support and upgraded products, I am very reluctant to say at this point that I would pay DCS any further fees, until they at least acknowledge that they compounded their initial errors (in their business model) with the way they handled the termination of TDS-3. There has to be at least some indication from DCS that they understand that leaving users high-and-dry with no warning, is not a good way to do business. It would seem a bit risky to give further money to a company that does not acknowledge this basic business principle.

I am still very happy with ProcessGuard and WormGuard, and see no reason to force the demise of these products by inflexibly sticking to a revenue model - i.e. , one-time license fee for perpetual updates. But I would like to see the company come forward with not only a good business revenue model, but also a good business customer service model - and that includes better treatment (an apology?) of customers who were relying on TDS-3 and had the rug pulled out from under them.

I continue to wish the best of luck to my friends at DCS. The only way to learn is from mistakes. And the only way to go beyond mistakes is to acknowledge them and apologize for them.

Cya around,
Rich

[twig]

There are products that do offer life time licenses . Spyblocker / spystopper /
I have a life time license for mailwasher / benign/ adaware se ( given for supporting the product in its donation days . Upgrades are freely given by personal email notification > i have a license for process guard as tds 3 and process guard / worm gaurd and choose to use only process guard . Would I bother renewing it if it was a yearly subscription .... proberbly not. I feel I have donated enough .

[x32]

-{ Quote: "I do believe that a non-recurring license fee model, was inherently flawed. There is no way to continue developing products based upon obtaining a sufficient number "new licensee fees" on an on-going basis. I have never heard of a successful product that was based upon such a licensing model. I believe DCS made a major business error when they embraced such a model. Eventually, it has to break, as it did with TDS-3." }-Examples of successful software that uses a non-recurring fee abound. Most software, in fact, is of this type. TDS-3 bombed because of all the time spent on signature updates, not because of the licensing scheme of the core product. This is per DCS admission, not conjecture.

[Notok]

I do agree with the sentiment, richrf, well put.

There's plenty of products that have survived on this model (one time payment), and plenty that have switched but "grandfathered" old customers to keep old promises. Starting to charge for major revisions on new apps wouldn't be too unreasonable, but ultimately DCS will decide what's best for them and their customers, hopefully it will be something that everyone can be happy with if it does change.

[richrf]

Hi all,

It is difficult for me to think of the products that you are talking about. Spybot is pretty out-of-date at this time. I no longer bother running it. Ditto for Ad-aware. Ditto SpywareBlaster. Updates are too few and far between. They just don't seem to find the "tough stuff" anymore. For this I rely on products like KAV and Ewido. (I use to rely on TDS-3). Ewido does have a free version, which is basically being supported by its licensed real-time version, however I question how long this model will last. Eventually, to be competitive, someone has to pay (developers donating their time?), and I don't know how long this will last. TDS-3's "life span", is about what I expect. For some, it may be enough.

FireFox, is a good exception to this rule, but even here history shows that free products eventually either die out for lack of revenue or are bought out (Netscape).

Rich

[Paranoid2000]

I'd disagree with a subscription fee (with the implication that the product would stop working if it was not paid) for products like PG that do not require constant updates - the cost of maintaining such software comes down to bug fixes and feature add-ons which can be done "as time/resources permit", as opposed to signature updates which look to be an ever-increasing treadmill.

An upgrade fee for major updates (which would be an optional payment for those happy to remain with their purchased version) would be another matter however.

[twig]

-{ Quote: "Hi all,

It is difficult for me to think of the products that you are talking about.

sorry Richrf, spyblocker http://www.spyblocker-software.com/spyblocker/index.shtm
i has nothing to do with spybot nor spyware blaster. Its still possibly one of the better products available and I think a forerunner of many of the later.

[richrf]

-{ Quote: "I'd disagree with a subscription fee (with the implication that the product would stop working if it was not paid) for products like PG that do not require constant updates - the cost of maintaining such software comes down to bug fixes and feature add-ons which can be done "as time/resources permit", as opposed to signature updates which look to be an ever-increasing treadmill.

An upgrade fee for major updates (which would be an optional payment for those happy to remain with their purchased version) would be another matter however." }-

Hi P2000,

I think there are always lots of things that a developer can do to a product to make it function better. I am sure DCS has a long list of requests from PG's customers just as Mike has, over at Tal Lemu. Things, for example, like tracking all sub-processes. But, of course, there is a whole lot more, as users who are beta testing Online Armor right now can see. The only way that PG can maintain a competitive position, as far as I can tell, is to have a reasonable revenue stream. Otherwise, the product becomes falls behind, becomes outmoded (a la TDS-3), and then ceases to exist because it doesn't pay to maintain the product with no revenue coming in.

ZoneAlarm handles it in an interesting way. Users can keep using the product "as is", or can pay a fee to get the latest updates/upgrades. That seems to work for ZA.

Rich

[twig]

I think with this situation It may come down to whether enough would choose to continue to support them , looking at the comments in the forum I would wonder if people would do so. Theres a great song called "6 months in a leaky boat " and I cant help sadly wondering if this is the situation .

[steverio]

I don't think it will be very popular with many users having software such as PG and WG that times out or stops working unless they pay a subscription fee. I don't mind having a choice to pay for an upgrade depending upon improvements or features being offered. I think that at some point as technology advances and security defense gets tougher to control, a decision to migrate to an improved version might be beneficial.

[---]

-{ Quote: "Hi,


While I am more than happy to pay annual subscription fees for products like ProcessGuard and WormGuard, because I do want support and upgraded products, I am very reluctant to say at this point that I would pay DCS any further fees, until they at least acknowledge that they compounded their initial errors (in their business model) with the way they handled the termination of TDS-3.
" }-

Yes, It is fitting that DCS apologise to everyone for not only being foolish enough to offer life time licenses, but also for the mess they made once they wised up to the foolish promise.

Without such a apology, I doubt if any of us will be willing to pay a cent more. If only they had wised up to what Richrf and the other were saying years ago, and charged us substantial sums yearly, they wouldn't be in this situation now.


-{ Quote: "
There has to be at least some indication from DCS that they understand that leaving users high-and-dry with no warning, is not a good way to do business. It would seem a bit risky to give further money to a company that does not acknowledge this basic business principle.
" }-

Yes, and to prevent such a thing from happening again, I further propose they engage someone who has a real grasp of sucessful business revenue models and business service models as well as years of experience in starting companies to guide the company to prevent this from happening again.

Ideally this person should also be someone who is well known to the Wilders Community.

I'm sure you know who I'm referring to.

At the very least a business proposal plan covering their plans in the short term (3-5 years) and their long term goals. This should be prepared and submited to the Wilders Forum for approval before anyone of us will spend a dime on your products.

Transparency after all is the life blood of the financial markets and it was this failure to communicate that led to the TDS fiasco.


-{ Quote: "
I am still very happy with ProcessGuard and WormGuard, and see no reason to force the demise of these products by inflexibly sticking to a revenue model - i.e. , one-time license fee for perpetual updates. But I would like to see the company come forward with not only a good business revenue model, but also a good business customer service model - and that includes better treatment (an apology?) of customers who were relying on TDS-3 and had the rug pulled out from under them.
" }-

Indeed. You're telling them Rich! We demand an apology as well as a good accounting of the future plans of DCS. After all as customers we are one of the stakeholders (together with Employees, Shareholders and suppliers) of DCS's future too.

By acting quickly you can hence safeguard the reputation of DCS.

-{ Quote: "
The only way to learn is from mistakes. And the only way to go beyond mistakes is to acknowledge them and apologize for them.
Rich" }-

"Mistakes are a great educator when one is honest enough to admit them and willing to learn from them" - Annoymous

-{ Quote: "FireFox, is a good exception to this rule, but even here history shows that free products eventually either die out for lack of revenue or are bought out (Netscape)" }-

Firefox? In fact, they started Mozilla Corp... A business for profit corporation to market firefox and Thunderbird. So no, they are not an exception to the rule.

[Vikorr]

Hmmm...I'm half and half here.

To my way of thinking, products with signatures, that require daily updates, need a yearly fee to be feasible. Still it's a tough market where AT's weren't as publicly well known or supported as AV's, and the vast majority of people likely don't like to pay yearly fees for 2+ different security products.

But products like PG, WormGuard, and Port Explorer don't require a yearly fee. They don't require maintenance...so why should a user pay annual fees for something that the makers do not have to put any effort into ?

However, I have nothing against a 'build licence' for such products, where you would pay for new builds (although I would hope, that for existing customers, the new build would be cheaper than the original price).

I know not everyone agrees with such things. So that's something we have to leave to Wayne to figure out if it needs changing or not.

[Jooske]

Hm thanks for opinions so far.
I wonder what could be reasonable? Kind of membership and free use of all the software there is with registration keys of course, the one product using more updates then the other but that would be covered by the membership? So the software keeps functioning at all time of course, but updates could be an issue.
Often administration for memberships and reminding users costs more then what it gives, that's why it should be a low price, say some $10/year for all the software together. Of course i don't know about possible legal implications of such an idea. But lots of small fees together pay the engineers.

I would not call TDS a disaster, let's call it a drama :)
The time frame was rather long and all new answers to a changing internet evolution must be given to keep many steps ahead of that, which is not possible with the original TDS concept in the build, if i read Wayne's message well.
Think it must be really hard to throw all aside what has been build on and we have been betatesting parts of and which technologies are partly included in ProcesGuard and have shown their value.

OK, back to the original question what we think of renewal fees, even though it is all against the DiamondCS business concept. Mind you, i don't say it is going to happenat all, it is just a discussion what we think about the idea.

[SpikeyB]

I agree with Paranoid2000 and steverio (i.e. no annual fee, happy to pay for upgrade).

-{ Quote: "The only way that PG can maintain a competitive position, as far as I can tell, is to have a reasonable revenue stream. Otherwise, the product becomes falls behind, becomes outmoded (a la TDS-3)....Rich" }-There is a difference between PG and TDS in terms of the amount of effort required to support the product.

[richrf]

-{ Quote: "There is a difference between PG and TDS in terms of the amount of effort required to support the product." }-

Hi SpikeyB,

It is true that the product works as is, though it is not clear whether it will continue to work, without maintenance, on future versions of Windows.

But that aside, there is a tremendous amount of work that needs to be done to keep ProcessGuard competitive. Online Armor is building in lots of new features into its product to make it more "intelligent" in the decisions that it will be making. Mike Nash has already discussed this on the OA thread. Should OA be successful in this regard, new users will naturally purchase OA instead of PG (just like new users began purchasing products like Ewido instead of TDS-3), and without new users the revenue stream for PG will dry up.

In time, PG would fall behind in technical capabilities since DCS would not have sufficient revenue to compete against other vendors. This would include firewall vendors like ZoneAlarm as well as AV/AT vendors who would also most probably enter into the HIPS market, since it is undoubtedly the technology of the future.

The net result would be that DCS would not have sufficient resources (money and personnel) to compete and would slowly become less of a marketplace force - probably dying out. Call it slow starvation. Some users may be satisfied with products from other companies - as TDS-3 users who switched to Ewido, and other users may miss the technological creativity that DCS brought to the marketplace.

As for myself, I don't believe in trying to squeeze the last ounce of juice from a turnip. I would like DCS to be a healthy vibrant company, so that it can compete on an equal footing.

Just some thoughts,

Rich

[worldcitizen]

As far as I'm concerned it's give and take on both sides.

Ok - DCS wants a way out of free upgrades then COMPROMISE a bit instead of acting like a stubborn mule wanting everything it's own way.

Do it like this..... First CONSULT members how they would feel about getting the next upgrade to Womguard and Process Guard free but then PAY for major upgrades after that. So a 3.3, 3.2 does not incur any cost but a major upgrade to say PG version 4 will incur a fee.

Don't do a TDS 4 to us where we are given no notice and then our software just stops working (updates). Allow us time and show us the courtesy of consulting us and taking us into their needs and plans and I will be willing to COMPROMISE.

But if DCS just came out tomorrow and said 'right, PG and WG are no longer free upgrades' and you'll HAVE to pay' then I would really be p..ssed off something awful especially after this. But if they COMPROMISE and give us one free upgrade which many of us have never ever had yet then I'd be more than happy to continue supporting them because at least I got one free upgrade. Although a lifetime of free upgrades was promised I'd be happy to settle with only ONE but I must get at least that ONE to stop me from feeling lied to about the lifetime free upgrades because the promise should at least be honoured ONCE as a goodwill gesture as much as a confidence building measure that DCS 'sticks by their word'.

Things CAN be worked out but as I said it's give and take. I will offer to forego permanent free upgrades for ONE free upgrade and then afterwards pay for every major version. This is as far as I'm willing to go but that's more than fair considering I was promised 'lifetime free upgrades' and I think if DCS are smart enough they would take up this offer if enough people support it because it will bring back a good relationship with many again as well as free them from the lifetime free upgrades model but they should be willing to give at least the next major upgrade free to both WG and PG to show that they are trying to honour their promise and not just try and wiggle out of it like with TDS 4 which was a disaster as far as I'm concerned.

DCS WILL find many, many, many people here are extremely reasonable and understanding towards their problem with lifetime free upgrades but many do want to get at least that one upgrade to feel good about it all and I really hope Wayne reads this because I think DCS should be willing to do this as it will free them from a curse as well as make us feel a whole lot better.

Dave

[richrf]

-{ Quote: "
DCS WILL find many, many, many people here are extremely reasonable and understanding towards their problem ....

Dave" }-

Hi Dave,

I agree. Most people are reasonable, if they are dealt with in a reasonable fashion (though this is not always true, as I learned in my own business career).

It is possible that there were extenuating circumstances, that forced DCS to act in the manner that they did with TDS-3. If they had no choice, then they will have to live with the fact that they lost a lot of good-will from both TDS-3 and ProcessGuard customers.

However, if the whole affair was just a business decision that ran awry, they should step forward, provide a reasonable plan going forward, as you suggested, and continue to build competitive products for the marketplace.

As it stands now, I still find PG (with RegDefend), best of class and I would not want to see it wither away as did TDS-3. The money is inconsequential, but I would like to deal with a company that is reasonable.

Thanks for your thoughts,
Rich

[Rui]

Hi all

I am a licensed user of PG, WG, PE and TDS-3.

As richrf has very correctly stated, the revenue model adopted by DCS has turned out to be a disaster, and this question at this particular moment is only a symptom of the crisis DCS is currently facing.

I understand that software development has considerable costs, and it is only natural that the user should pay the price of apllication upgrading, provided it is a significant one, and not a minor update (bug fixing, etc.).

I cannot help thinking that this question of paying subscription fees concerning PG is - probably - the surface side of the problem. Perhaps the profound meaning of this question might be the following: Would you accept paying subscription fees/upgrades of DCS products, after the way TDS-3 was terminated?

The main part of the problem for me is not a question of paying, but a question of trusting or not DCS, after THE WAY its flagship application was discontinued.

As far as I am concerned, I have many, many doubts...

Regards

Rui

[worldcitizen]

Wayne and Gavin,

'Bring it on'!!

Lets talk about getting rid of that terrible commercial model of free lifetime upgrades. I'm willing to forgo the free lifetime upgrades for ONE free upgrade of remaining software and then pay you guys for every major upgrade FOREVER. (not minor update)

I'm flexible and understanding and willing to help you out. All I want to be sure about is that you were willing to honor the free lifetime upgrade promise by giving me ONE free major upgrade to WG, PG and PE. Let's ALL be flexible and help out. Let's all reach a COMPROMISE!

This IS a way out of all this and I strongly suggest you read this and think about it.

To those who consider it their RIGHT to have free lifetime upgrades because DCS promised them......

I urge you all to reconsider and try and put yourself in the same situation. How could any economy run on such a model? A TV a car, a computer with a lifetime FREE guarantee?? The world economy would go broke in 5 minutes. If you say that's not your problem then it will be if DCS folds won't it??

It's reasonable though to give DCS and ourselves a face-saving way out to offer to forgo the free upgrade promise on ALL DCS products for ONE free major upgrade on remaining products with no funny business such as changing the name of software etc and then after that to pay for major, not minor upgrades after that. That would make DCS competitive again and free us from our unreasonable expectations based on a flawed economical model which DCS advocated but are finding out fast doesn't work.

It's a win/win compromise that benefits everyone and all will gain by improved and better software as well as more regular updates and upgrades (we hope).

If DCS went under because of having to maintain their free lifetime upgrade offer it would be just as much our fault for insisting on it so much as you won't find such offers rampant. Almost all software now comes with 1 year of free updates or maybe if you're lucky a free upgrade if you bought it in the last 6 months, but IF we want to keep getting the BEST security software then we need to have DCS around and if the free lifetime model is killing them then let's offer on this site to do away with it but on the understanding that we do receive that ONE free upgrade so that at least the promise was kept. To expect more, I feel is unreasonable and too great a burden on DCS and I want them around for years to come.

Dave

[se7engreen]

I think DCS should adopt the same model that Agnitum has with Outpost. You are not required to pay a yearly fee to use the software, but a yearly fee is required to receive updates and upgrades during that year. This helps keep the cash flow moving as well as puts a bit of pressure on DCS to keep active in development.

That's my one cent...

[worldcitizen]

-{ Quote: "I
The main part of the problem for me is not a question of paying, but a question of trusting or not DCS, after THE WAY its flagship application was discontinued far as I am concerned, I have many, many doubts...
Rui" }-

Mate. How many times has this happened? Never until now! They handled it like a person who has never faced a crises before - badly.

The first time you used your PC or drove a car you never crashed your PC or got booked? DCS are not 'rip off merchants'. I know enough about human beings and human nature to know that their intention was NOT to harm their clients. If anything, we saw the human side of DCS making mistakes in public relations but they are not public relations experts - they are security software programmers and some of the best and most trusted on this planet.

They could have handled it differently but they've never ever had to face a situation like this before so they deserve a break. If they do the same again and again then I'd be right up them but we can all forgive them this time for sure.

Let's ALL help them get out of this ridiculous lifetime free upgrade policy because if we don't then we can well expect other products to fall just like TDS 3\4 did!!

Let's all offer to give up our free lifetime upgrades on ALL DCS products in return for ONE free major upgrade of all DCS products we have and then pay for major upgrades after that.

Dave

[Rui]

-{ Quote: "I think DCS should adopt the same model that Agnitum has with Outpost. You are not required to pay a yearly fee to use the software, but a yearly fee is required to receive updates and upgrades during that year. This helps keep the cash flow moving as well as puts a bit of pressure on DCS to keep active in development.

That's my one cent..." }-

It seems to me this is a fair business model.


-{ Quote: "Let's ALL help them get out of this ridiculous lifetime free upgrade policy because if we don't then we can well expect other products to fall just like TDS 3\4 did!!

Let's all offer to give up our free lifetime upgrades on ALL DCS products in return for ONE free major upgrade of all DCS products we have and then pay for major upgrades after that.

Dave" }-

I think Dave's proposal is an adequate one and I am willing to subscribe it.

I can imagine the crisis Gavin and Wayne are facing and wish them no harm, but exactly the utmost opposite. But I also would like Wayne assuming a more flexible and less self-centered (to say the least...) attitude.

I love DCs products and I am sure we all need a strong, healthy and competitive DCS. It would be sad for me seeing DCS going down the drain.

More opinions, please

Rui

[tlu]

-{ Quote: "Wayne and Gavin,

If DCS went under because of having to maintain their free lifetime upgrade offer it would be just as much our fault for insisting on it so much as you won't find such offers rampant. Almost all software now comes with 1 year of free updates or maybe if you're lucky a free upgrade if you bought it in the last 6 months, but IF we want to keep getting the BEST security software then we need to have DCS around and if the free lifetime model is killing them then let's offer on this site to do away with it but on the understanding that we do receive that ONE free upgrade so that at least the promise was kept. To expect more, I feel is unreasonable and too great a burden on DCS and I want them around for years to come.

Dave" }-
Wise words, Dave, indeed! I stand by them from the bottom of my heart. And I'm convinced if all those TDS users who are shocked, insulted or whatever right now think about this situation quietly they will eventually come to the same conclusion.

[steverio]

Everyone's opinions here are very important but I find it hard to think that DCS would not have already thought of some of these alternative options presented here and come forward to discuss their situation with all their product line, if they were in a predicament.

[worldcitizen]

I personally think that we have to make a move because I don't think that DCS is feeling like another confrontation over free lifetime upgrades just yet. You know..once bitten twice shy?

They may be really needing to make the move but because of all the hostility over TDS 3\4 they held off. Why don't we band together and make them an offer too good to refuse?

I have already sent them an email offering to forgo my free lifetime upgrades in exchange for ONE free major upgrade for the DCS software I have and then to pay for upgrades after that and I encourage every fair-minded person who wants to have DCS secure their PC's for a long time to come to take this initiative.

We haven't exactly created an environment for DCS to come forward with such a proposal with all our bitching so I think that WE should get the ball rolling now. We are the ones that stand to benefit by being the best protected people on the planet IF DCS is around long enough.

Dave

[Wayne - DiamondCS]

Folks, all we've done is discontinued one product - we're not the first software company to discontinue a product and we won't be the last. That only affects one program - TDS, so it really has nothing to do with ProcessGuard licenses (or Port Explorer or WormGuard), so although I can understand and appreciate the speculation you have nothing to worry about! So allow me to clear things up...

We've been releasing software since the mid 90s and I believe our policy is one of the best and fairest for customers - pay once (at a very low price) and that's it - any and all updates to that program will then be free. No subscriptions or anything like that, and no paying for any updates. This is what I personally believe is fair for both developer and customer, and is what I believe customers want and accept as fair also.

Many software companies charge for minor updates, and most charge for major updates. We charge for neither.

The year is now 2005, it is approximately a decade after we started releasing software so I urge readers to consider our track record, as that speaks for itself. Consider TDS customers for example - we have a lot of customers who purchased TDS once in the mid 90s when it was TDS1/TDS2, and just paid $30-$40 for it, and that is the only payment they ever made - all these years later and we were still working daily for them to provide the daily database updates. Compare that to how much you've paid over the years for your antivirus scanner. When minor program updates were made available, they were offered to customers for free. When major updates were made available (ie TDS2, then TDS3), then again we still made these available free to TDS customers, something that most software companies do not do as although it's great for the customer it actually costs the developer, but ultimately our interests always have been and always will be customer satisfaction.

Due to the high-maintenance nature of TDS and the ever-increasing rate at which trojans are being released it became impossible to adequately analyse and add detection for every trojan, which consequently tied up all of our time, money and resources, essentially putting an end to development and even hampering the development of TDS4 itself. However, TDS is the only program we have that is like that, all our other programs are 'conventional', so we will never be forced to make decisions like we had to with TDS, and we're now free to develop more and more software for you, our customers.

Our license policy for all of our software has not and will not change - to register our software only requires one single (very inexpensive) payment, which entitles you to any and all subsequent updates to that program (both major and minor), and whenever possible we try to make our software available for FREE - remember we only sell a few programs, but we have dozens of freebies on offer (and even more when we release our new-look website).

Don't just take my word for it - ask any TDS, ProcessGuard, WormGuard or Port Explorer owner how many times they've ever paid for our software, regardless of how many years they've been using it. Their answer will always be: Once.

Best regards,
Wayne

[Inf]

-{ Quote: "Folks, all we've done is discontinued one product - we're not the first software company to discontinue a product and we won't be the last. That only affects one program - TDS, so it really has nothing to do with ProcessGuard licenses (or Port Explorer or WormGuard), so although I can understand and appreciate the speculation you have nothing to worry about! So allow me to clear things up...

We've been releasing software since the mid 90s and I believe our policy is one of the best and fairest for customers - pay once (at a very low price) and that's it - any and all updates to that program will then be free. No subscriptions or anything like that. This is what I personally believe is fair for both developer and customer, and is what I believe customers want and accept as fair also. The year is now 2005, it is approximately a decade after we started releasing software so we do have a track record you can look at. Consider TDS customers for example - we have a lot of customers who purchased TDS once in the mid 90s when it was TDS1/TDS2, and just paid $30-$40 for it, and that is the only payment they ever made - all these years later and we were still working daily for them to provide the daily database updates. Compare that to how much you've paid over the years for your antivirus scanner. When minor program updates were made available, they were offered to customers for free. When major updates were made available (ie TDS2, then TDS3), then again we still made these available free to TDS customers, something that most software companies do not do as although it's great for the customer it actually costs the developer, but ultimately our interests always have been and always will be customer satisfaction.

Due to the high-maintenance nature of TDS and the ever-increasing rate at which trojans are being released it became impossible to adequately analyse and add detection for every trojan, which consequently tied up all of our time, money and resources, essentially putting an end to development and even hampering the development of TDS4 itself. However, TDS is the only program we have that is like that, all our other programs are 'conventional', so we will never be forced to make decisions like we had to with TDS, and we're now free to develop more and more software for you, our customers.

Our license policy for all of our software has not and will not change - to register our software only requires one single (very inexpensive) payment, which entitles you to any and all subsequent updates to that program (both major and minor), and whenever possible we try to make our software available for FREE - remember we only sell a few programs, but we have dozens of freebies on offer (and even more when we release our new-look website).

Don't just take my word for it - ask any TDS, ProcessGuard, WormGuard or Port Explorer owner how many times they've ever paid for our software, regardless of how many years they've been using it. Their answer will always be: Once.

Best regards,
Wayne" }-

Thanx for clearing that up again ;) I believe you and I pitty the rest ... I wonder how they would feel when they only received one chance...

but best to y'all

Tupac Rules!!

[FirePost]

-{ Quote: "Registered\licensed use of ProcessGuard entitles and allows you to use all the features of ProcessGuard." }-If they add features then I get to use those too! :)
Thanks for reiterating that.
2nd Edit to explain quote in message below.
Wayne posted while I was rereading my license and I changed my post when I saw that. In the below message he was quoting my original line which I removed while he was replying to it :)

[Wayne - DiamondCS]

-{ Quote: "Some softwares may be suitable for a subscription based model, PG is not one of them." }-
I agree with you and I think most people would.

Subscriptions are an easy way for companies to make a steady cashflow and in some cases they are warranted (for example where daily maintenance work is required), but we're not interested in it as we don't believe it would be fair for our customers. Even when we had a program which required daily maintenance we never charged subscriptions, even though we kept maintaining that program for our customers for the better part of three quarters of a decade - all for just one single inexpensive upfront registration back in the mid 90s.

Conventional programs (the majority of programs) take quite a while to build, but once made they don't require as much time updating or adding new features as all the main work has already been done. It still does cost the developer(s) time, money and resources to make such minor updates available for free, but those costs can be accounted for in the initial purchase price. TDS aside, all of our programs are conventional in that sense, so we would never expect any of our customers to pay subscriptions for them, and we remain committed to offering our software at the lowest possible prices. (Some of the most advanced kernel-level security software ever released for just $29? Maybe I am going crazy ...)

[Infinity]

yes you are Wayne .. you should be punished ...


;)

[Old Monk]

Wayne

I'm very much a newb to these forums and security in general.

Having asked for advise in these forums I have SpyBot ( for free)Adaware ( for free) Spyware Blaster (for free) trialled and now run Ewido for free) A2 (for free) Trojan Hunter Paid trialled twice (for free) TDS-3 trialled (for free) intend to try OA (for free)and amongst other things now have now paid for PG full I really don't see how you can or why you should justify your actions any further.

Your company produces outstanding value for money products as do others - witness your support for these forums and others with new to market products like Mike Nash with Online Armor.

I bank on line and without these forums and products such as PG I would feel vulnerable.

Sometimes I read threads from people here that expect everything for nothing

Thats not the way world works.

Good luck - I know very little but you have my support

Cheers

Jon

[Carver]

I really don't see how you can or why you should justify your actions any further." }-

If the people here can show him a way to make DCS better, why shouldn't he take the advice and after all we are his customers and he wants to please the customer.

[bigc73542]

I agree that it is paramount to please your customers. But if you are supporting multiple types and versions of softwares and one of them is causing you to have trouble maintaining the other programs for the (customers) it only makes good bussiness sense to get rid of the program that is causing the hardship to the customers and the company. Anyone that can't understand this has no idea of what it takes to run a bussiness. I believe DCS has done what was necessary to keep ther company afloat and be able to keep on supporting the customers of their other products.

bigc

[richrf]

-{ Quote: ". Anyone that can't understand this has no idea of what it takes to run a bussiness. bigc" }-

Hi bigc,

I did run, and was on on the board of directors, of several businesses large and small. It would never occur to me to do what DCS did in regards to terminating a critical product, without warning, on a Friday evening. It is, in my opinion, very poor business practice and shows a willful disregard of customers.

When faced with similar problems, I not only went out of my way to make sure that customers were supported for a period of time until they could transition to another product, I, on some occassions, used my own personal money to make customers whole.

DCS's approach is certainly open to criticism. Clearly, the world is big, and there are numerous points of view. However, I think it is very easy, for someone who understands and runs businesses, to make a case that DCS's decisions in this case were imprudent and ill-advised. Anyway, time will tell.

Regards,
Rich

[Wayne - DiamondCS]

Rich,
We're more than open to criticism which is why all these threads are still open and why i've responded to hundreds of emails this week, but don't you think we would've given more notice if we could? :) We didn't give any notice for the discontinuation of TDS for several reasons, some of which I haven't/can't disclose as they're private business matters so you don't know the full story therefore I ask you not to assume that we were in a position to do so, thanks mate (can't blame you though as you can only make assumptions based on what you know). However giving notice actually would've done very little anyway if you think about it - the program was going to be stopped anyway, so when that decision was made to stop development it became the best interests of our customers to stop immediately, not keep it dragging on even further. This is obviously a big business decision, but we're not afraid to make the big decisions if it's in the best interests of our customers. What difference would another week or two's worth of databases make anyway? And regardless of how much notice we gave it still wouldn't affect the fact that there is going to be no TDS4. Obviously the more notice the better, but why do you actually need notice anyway, just to give you time to find another anti-trojan scanner? If people are after an alternative anti-trojan scanner I'd tell them don't bother, other anti-trojan developers are in the same boat as us regardless of what they do or don't tell you, and from my skills and experience over the years the performance of all anti-trojan scanners is going downhill, as there are just far, far too many trojans being released for those one-man operations to keep up. Just get a good anti-virus scanner, they're as good as if not better than anti-trojan scanners at detecting trojans these days, especially packed and modified ones. We will not release software if it isn't adequate at doing its job, and it's becoming increasingly clear that unless developers change their pricing structure (to raise funds to hire more analysts) and decide to work on nothing but their one anti-trojan program exclusively then they won't have any chance of getting anywhere near adequate/acceptable detection rates, and even then they'd still be competing with the anti-virus companies who have far more resources money and analysts. Customers shouldn't stand for software if it degrades like that, and I will not develop/release software that doesn't do its job properly, especially when we could be working on better software for our customers.

Best regards,
Wayne

[richrf]

Hi Wayne,

Thanks for clarifying your position and views. As always,

Warm regards,
Rich

[steverio]

-{ Quote: "Hi Wayne,

Thanks for clarifying your position and views. As always,

Warm regards,
Rich" }-

Yes, I give Wayne thanks too and everyone else. Sometimes making a decision and others knowing what all the intentions are can be a most difficult thing to see. One thing for sure is that everyone is the same in regards to being responsible for their own choices based on what they know and understand. So, its only sensible to respect each others decisions whether they are likable or not.

[----]

-{ Quote: "Subscriptions are an easy way for companies to make a steady cashflow and in some cases they are warranted (for example where daily maintenance work is required), but we're not interested in it as we don't believe it would be fair for our customers." }-

I must say this is a pretty strange thread.

The customers are clamouring to pay a subscription fee, but the vendors are refusing . ;)

I wonder how many customers they will lose because of this decision.

[smf]

The Grand Champion of lifetime free upgrades and still going strong:

Total Commander, formerly Windows Commander.

It's been around forever, continues to have regular significant upgrades and continues on a torrid pace to get new customers. It's possible!

PS:
For those people that give Total Commander a bad review, you haven't looked under the hood. This is an amazing program that isn't bloatware.

[Wayne - DiamondCS]

-{ Quote: "It's possible!" }-
Yes it certainly is possible. For example, TDS existed on a single registration for the better part of three quarters of a decade, which is a long time for any program but especially considering that TDS required fulltime daily maintenance by multiple people. Some people were lucky enough to buy TDS when it was TDS1 and only paid some $30 for it and that was back in approximately 1996, so if you assume 9 years of free updates with 365 days in a year it works out to 3285 days worth of updates at a cost of just $0.009 per day (yes, not even 1 cent) which is all they've ever paid - not much considering the daily maintenance required to keep the program running.

[Tuggboat]

I sure am glad Wayne's old school. I bought all your products because I recognized this old fashion business model of actually caring for your customers without it being a farce like a lot of "caring" businesses today.

Also they offered me a lot of capabilities I did not know were available in windows. DCS provides me a window or doorway back into the nitty gritty of personal computers . That has cost me a lot of money in the last year though. ;D

Quite a few other small software companies have benefitted by my exposure to DCS. So even if the financial fruit of DCS is somewaht meager or parasite ridden, No small amount of self satisfaction that you have benefitted the community as a whole is rightfully yours. THAT subscription you can draw on for as long as you live. You have in your own way reached quite broad arms across the globe.

To stay on topic :) I would never consider subscription fees on a product that didn't require constant new data like the signature data base. One thing I might consider though is a per infestation removal fee. I know this model reeks of a certain spyware companies model of free then 30 some bucks for the program to remove the bogus spyware, half of which was never there. But its just an idea for a new business model that would reflect customer percieved value and at the same time reward a company for the support it sometimes takes to rid someone of these deeply burried problems. Only a company steeped in integrity or new with honest roots could get away with this because the backlash might be heavy.

[richrf]

-{ Quote: "To stay on topic :) I would never consider subscription fees on a product that didn't require constant new data like the signature data base. " }-

Every good security product needs constant updating. The database is simply one aspect. For example, the scan engine in an AV needs constant updating. The "heuristics" engine in an AT needs constant research and updating. Over the next several months, I expect that Online Armor will spend tens of thousands of dollars upgrading the "intelligence" in their product.

A "one time" charge essentially means that future customers will be subsidizing the upgrades (if any ever come) for current customers. It will be interesting to see who this all turns out, since clearly competitors such as Safe N' Sec and Online Armor recognize the need for a recurring revenue stream in order to pay for future upgrades in security.

Rich

[Oddbod]

PG isnt a antivirus app or a antispyware app & it doesnt need constant updates so why should most folk even consider a subscription for it, maybe U would like to do that RichF & have the funds to do it but not everyone has.

Simply put if PG was to go subscription based then i would drop it right away & use other apps instead.

Bringing up this topic while there is still a lot of anger about TDS isnt gonna do DCS any good at all.

[Paranoid2000]

-{ Quote: "A "one time" charge essentially means that future customers will be subsidizing the upgrades (if any ever come) for current customers." }-That is the normal pattern for most software since sales start off low and (if the program is any good) should increase as time passes. Signature-based programs incur greater maintenance costs due not only to the work required by the developer to keep databases current but also the increased bandwidth cost due to frequent updates.

However making a regular payment compulsory for software not requiring such maintenance effectively reduces customers from "owners" to "renters" - the company no longer has to bother with providing upgrades in order to keep the money rolling in (as in Microsoft's Licensing 6 (http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-947168.html)).-{ Quote: "It will be interesting to see who this all turns out, since clearly competitors such as Safe N' Sec and Online Armor recognize the need for a recurring revenue stream in order to pay for future upgrades in security." }-A good reason to steer clear of Safe'N'Sec in my view but Online Armor only requires further payments if you wish to upgrade after the first year, there is nothing on TallEmu's pricing page (http://www.tallemu.com/pricing.html) about mandatory payments after purchase.

[richrf]

-{ Quote: "Simply put if PG was to go subscription based then i would drop it right away & use other apps instead. " }-

You would not need to pay a subscription if you were satisified with the product as is. You simply would not be able to take advantage of future updates which subscribers would be paying for. (Someone has to pay for development time).

Alternatively, you can move to a free HIPS product such as AntiHook (which as far as I can tell has less capabilities than PG at this time), or you can move to Safe N' Sec or Online Armor both of which have yearly subscription fees to pay for future enhancements and development. Of course, anyone not interested in future enhancements can simply not renew the license. Those who do, will benefit from the new upgrades.

Of course, this is a theoretical. Wayne has indicated that he plans to continue to sell his products on a one-off with permanent updates and upgrades available to anyone who purchases a license. It will be interesting to see if DCS can maintain a competitive product and support structure with this business model and revenue stream, since competitors will have a recurring stream of revenue which can be used to support the product.

Rich

[richrf]

-{ Quote: " Signature-based programs incur greater maintenance costs due not only to the work required by the developer to keep databases current but also the increased bandwidth cost due to frequent updates. " }-

Hi P2000,

You will note that there are some pretty long "wish list" threads for both ProcessGuard and Online Armor and Mike Nash (of Online Armor) has indicated that he has a very large system specification document outlining lots of future enhancements to this product. It will be up to users to decide whether or not they want to pay $15 a year to obtain these Online Armor upgrades. My best guess is that almost every user will. In the scheme of things, $15 is not very much. It is the price of two six-packs, or a family dinner at Boston Chicken. But each person has his/her own priorities. :)

Cya,
Rich

[Paranoid2000]

-{ Quote: "You would not need to pay a subscription if you were satisified with the product as is. You simply would not be able to take advantage of future updates which subscribers would be paying for. (Someone has to pay for development time)." }-What you are then talking about is not a subscription, but an (optional) upgrade payment - subscriptions entitle a purchaser to a service or product for a specific time so it is important to distinguish between software where future payments are mandatory (most anti-virus software, Safe'n'Sec) and where they are optional, not least since mandatory software is tied to the developer - if they go under then so does the software.

[richrf]

-{ Quote: "What you are then talking about is not a subscription, but an (optional) upgrade payment - subscriptions entitle a purchaser to a service or product for a specific time so it is important to distinguish between software where future payments are mandatory (most anti-virus software, Safe'n'Sec) and where they are optional, not least since mandatory software is tied to the developer - if they go under then so does the software." }-

Thank you for pointing out the distinction. I believe that this is an important distinction to make.

Rich

[Hard_Warrior]

-{ Quote: "
Mate. How many times has this happened? Never until now! They handled it like a person who has never faced a crises before - badly." }-

DCS isn't a "person" it's a company. There's a major difference between the two entities.

-{ Quote: "If anything, we saw the human side of DCS making mistakes in public relations but they are not public relations experts - " }-

Companies hire or rent situational experts all the time. Moreover, it wouldn't have taken a business school graduate to know that their chosen approach to handling the cancellation of TDS wouldn't go over too well.

-{ Quote: "
they are security software programmers and some of the best and most trusted on this planet.
" }-

;D Okay. All this says, though, is that they should have hired-in someone who understands sustainable business models, revenue flow and PR, right at first.

-{ Quote: "They could have handled it differently but they've never ever had to face a situation like this before so they deserve a break." }-

A break? Not in my book. What they deserve, AFAIC is a healthy dose of skepticism tempered by the fact that they've produced some very powerful and innovative SW in the past.

-{ Quote: "If they do the same again and again then I'd be right up them but we can all forgive them this time for sure." }-

As a savvy consumer, I'm not willing to be burned repeatedly out of some misplaced sense of loyalty. That's why I'll never buy another Saab. ;) Sure, if DCS produces something interesting I'll be right there. However, I won't whip out my CC as quickly as I would have before this situation.

-{ Quote: "Let's ALL help them get out of this ridiculous lifetime free upgrade policy because if we don't then we can well expect other products to fall just like TDS 3\4 did!!" }-

Help them out! This is an interesting choice of words. :) I've been more than pleased with PG, and TDS-3 before it. If Wayne says it's time to pay, as long as I can expect maintenance and all manner of upgrades in exchange I'll pay. As mentioned, the OP Pro model would work very well, for all concerned.

-{ Quote: "Let's all offer to give up our free lifetime upgrades on ALL DCS products in return for ONE free major upgrade of all DCS products we have and then pay for major upgrades after that." }-

Perhaps I'm missing something. I just don't understand why DCS needs our collective approval to save itself from dissolution.

[Vikorr]

Would just like to point out that Winpatrol is free, but you can buy the Winpatrol Plus version for a one off lifetime fee. It's still conintuing to develop after many many years.

[---]

-{ Quote: "Would just like to point out that Winpatrol is free, but you can buy the Winpatrol Plus version for a one off lifetime fee. It's still conintuing to develop after many many years." }-

Yes, but the rate of development is slow compared to OA.

Similarly for PG and RD. After a initial burst of development it died down.

This shows the superiority of OA revenue model.

Soon you will see that the correct way to pick software is not to look at its technical specs, but to look at the business company model.

[Bizarre]

-{ Quote: "Rich,
We didn't give any notice for the discontinuation of TDS for several reasons, some of which I haven't/can't disclose as they're private business matters so you don't know the full story therefore I ask you not to assume that we were in a position to do so, thanks mate (can't blame you though as you can only make assumptions based on what you know). Best regards,
Wayne" }-


My point is proven. This company has a affinity for secrecy that causes all types of speculation from customers. Both pro and anti-DCs are engaged in all types of speculation in these threads. It is hard to tell what is real. I think I will use software from companies that are less speculative and more stable. This company has yet to prove that it can even survive as a company.

This almost reads like a Spy vs Spy novel.

All I can say is "Where's the beef?"



Bizarre

[BlueZannetti]

-{ Quote: "This shows the superiority of OA revenue model.

Soon you will see that the correct way to pick software is not to look at its technical specs, but to look at the business company model." }-How can your first statement be at all correct? OA hasn't generated revenue at this point. Go to the site. It is still in beta, you cannot purchase it at this time. See here (http://www.tallemu.com/buyonline/index.php).

A premature conclusion if I ever saw one.

Blue

[Jaws]

-{ Quote: "Yes, but the rate of development is slow compared to OA.
Similarly for PG and RD. After a initial burst of development it died down. " }-

Since WinPatrol 9.0 appeared earlier this year, there have been some major upgrades to the program. It's development also seems to be accelerating as evidenced by the near release of ver. 9.7. And Bill seems to be ever present on his forum at CastleCops to help people out. I don't know how many people work for him, but WinPatrols track record looks pretty good to me.



-{ Quote: "Soon you will see that the correct way to pick software is not to look at its technical specs, but to look at the business company model." }-
That seems like a silly way to pick software. Hmm... this business charges me very year to use it, but technically it may be inferior.

Regards,
Jaws

[richrf]

Simply because two pieces of software are considered "security software" does not necessarily put them in the same class. I would consider KAV and NOD32 in the same class (in terms of importance to the security of a workstation). I would not put WinPatrol in the class of a KAV and even a ZoneAlarm.

Totally different kind of products. KAV I consider "must have", and must provide the highest level of security. KAV for example will stop 99% (or so) of the intrusions. For level of security is why users are will to pay annual fees because people realize the level of development and support that is necessary to "keep the bad guys out", as oppposed to "after the fact detection and alerts" which are more subjective and less comprehensive. I do not think BillP is suggesting that WinPatrol provides this level of security.

I consider products such as ProcessGuard and Online Armor, at least as important to my security as KAV, if not more so, since they are designed to stop the latest type of intrusions that are becoming too tricky and too often for signature based systems to catch (hence Wayne's remarks). I am quite willing to pay a company the necessary monies to build systems that are indeed more comprehensive and reliable than those of the former generation of security products.

Those who do not want to pay, of course don't have to. I know there is a very large community of people who use the free AVs such as Avast! and AVG. It is whatever fits your needs.

Rich

[Jaws]

Hi Rich,

Not wanting to pull the thread off topic since it's a PG support forum, But why are you dumping on WinPatrol?

Nobody suggested WP was in the class of KAV and BillP hasn't suggested anything in this thread. Different people have different needs and what someone deems necessary (or must have) the other person may not. I'm sure you don't want to impose your personal preferences on everyone else. Anyway the marketplace seems to sort thing out very efficiently.

Regards,
Jaws

[richrf]

-{ Quote: "Hi Rich,

But why are you dumping on WinPatrol?

Regards,
Jaws" }-

Who's dumping? I didn't even criticize, much less dump.

Based upon my own experiences with Anti-trojan software, it became clear to me that companies that have ongoing revenue streams, appear to have greater resources to maintain and continue to expand on their development. Case in point:

By the time TDS-3 was terminated, I had long since replaced it with Ewido. Why? Because Ewido's capabilities continued to grow (in relationship to other ATs) and it was continued to be maintained in such a way that it would be the most stable and had the least negative impact on my system.

I continued to use TDS-3 as a backup scanner, for the last six months or so (Ditto for BOClean), but Ewido became my primary AT scanner. TDS-3 just seemed to be getting "old" and wasn't picking up on things that Ewido was. Ewido, also basically replaced Giant Anti-Spyware.

Is this level of support worth $20/year to me? Absolutely. If DiamondCS was able to provide a comparable product for a one-time cost, I would have stayed with TDS-3, but they couldn't.

I believe that HIPS will be an even more contested marketplace, (there are lots of theoretical papers circulating now on how Host Intrusion Prevention can and must be improved to stop the next generation of bad guys), and will require ongoing revenue to build better software.

If DiamondCS can remain competitive, without a recurring revenue stream, then I will of course use it. I already have a PG license. If another vendor, e.g. Online Armor, builds a better product, and charges $15 a year for it, then I will happily pay for it. I am not going to quibble about $15 for a product that provides a very high level of security on my system.

Rich

[Jaws]

Hi Rich,

-{ Quote: "Who's dumping? I didn't even criticize, much less dump. " }-
oops... sorry. I misinterpreted these two statements:

-{ Quote: "I would not put WinPatrol in the class of a KAV and even a ZoneAlarm.

... as oppposed to "after the fact detection and alerts" which are more subjective and less comprehensive." }-

Regards,
Jaws

[Sith Lord]

-{ Quote: "This company has yet to prove that it can even survive as a company." }-
lol, theyre nearly 20 years old as a company and you saying they have yet to prove they can survive. lol

[Rilla927]

I agree with everyone on getting one free upgrade and then pay for major upgrades on PG,WG,PE. I just purchased TDS-3 about two months ago, and when I learned of them discontinuing the product I was shocked. I understand sometime's these things happen. Now, I do believe that TDS-3 should have been a yearly subscription, because of the upkeep, and it would have been worth it! I really like DCS Products and would like see them around in the future.

If there was a chance yet, for TDS-3 to exist, would you be willing to pay a yearly subscription? With the free upgrade to TDS-4? At least DCS would have a revenue stream. It's only my opinion, but I would except that so TDS-3 wouldn't dry up, and I think it would be a fair exchange because the definitions are updated so often, then they would survive.

Rilla927

[Juggernaut]

Could a mod prune the TDS-3 talk and move it over to the TDS-3 Speculation and bashing thread over at the TDS-3 forum? It's like a political campaign and these people will pitch their message anywhere they think someone may hear them, be it the correct venue or not.

I'm looking here to keep up to date on Process Guard. Not watch the on going battle over TDS-3. I can go the other forum section devoted to it if I want to see it.

[Tuggboat]

Lets not forget, Software gets a revenue boost everytime Windows upgrades. New holes will need patched and the old one will stabilize because less attacks will go after the old version. This lessens the need to upgrade the old version and at the same time creates plausible reasons for charging more for an upgrade for the NEW IMPROVED BILL GATES Compatible. Everybody will get a free ride soon. 64 bits coming down the ramp. Whole new set of software for that too. So hardware and OS can take the brunt of the blame for upgrade costs without the small vendoer getting charged with gouging. No need for constant charges.

I usually look forward to license expirations because I've found a products limitation and am looking for something better by then anyhow. These products don't roll in sync with each other on upgrades. every ones playing catchup or lead the field. Its not a static field at all. Call me disloyal if you must and I'll just insist I'm a bit progressive :)