+1-888-365-2779
Try Now
More in this section

Forums / General Discussions / Sitefinity 4.0 RC

Sitefinity 4.0 RC

183 posts, 0 answered
  1. Arno
    Arno avatar
    249 posts
    Registered:
    08 Sep 2010
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    I'm shocked by those prices! The majority of websites is owned by small companies or private persons, not by large organizations who only take you seriously from $10000. Sure, some small companies expect everything to be free, but many of them are willing to consider a commercial CMS for the right price. Sitefinity at $899 had a unique and reasonable price tag: right in between "free" and the really expensive CMS's. For me (2 people working part time on the website), it was reasonable enough to seriously consider it (haven't purchased yet). I know I won't purchase for $1999 (I do need multiple languages). That's not because it's not worth it, but I simply don't have that kind of money. Sitefinity was the only affordable well documented and up to date CMS for .NET as far as I am concerned. But now, the licenses to build a real website are priced like all the other CMS's. Sitefinity does not stand out any more.

    VT>> At $899 we were nowhere near the really expensive CMS systems:) Those start at 6 figures just for the base licenses. We were like... free. Even at $1,999 Sitefinity is very very competitive even just on checkmarks and not taking into account the developer or end-user experience.

    Paying more for an outstanding product (it really is!) is fair, but this is ridiculous, unless it's a strategy to keep large customers only. That would be a shame, as everyone is hunting for them and they are really not that interesting in many cases.

    VT>> We are most interested in making existing customers happy. The problem is that so far the happiness of many customers was working against us and we needed to make some adjustments even at the risk of alienating some customers. But that's for the brighter future of the product and the customers that choose it. We need to be successful in order to help you be more successful. 

    Also - read my previous comments. If we wanted only the big customers, we wouldn't bother adding SBE and Community in the first place. It's easier for us not to have them and just focus on the expensive SKUs.
    I'm still considering to purchase 3.7 for $899 to get the free upgrade to 4.0. However, I find it important that a CMS has a large and active community using it. I'm worried that the community will not grow or even shrink due to this pricing scheme.

    VT>> It will not. It will grow stronger just because you'll see that for most projects the Standard is good enough, for others that the SBE is good enough and that your customers would love Sitefinity and be ready to pay a small premium to get an outstanding and well-supported CMS.
  2. Daniel Plomp
    Daniel Plomp avatar
    952 posts
    Registered:
    18 Feb 2004
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Well, maybe Telerik wants to leave the small businesses and non-profit organizations behind and only focus on enterprises? To compete with SitePoint etc? I can understand that, but like said before: there was a really good CMS system to use for small businesses and NGO's for a good price.

    VT>> I commented on that in other posts. We're not abandoning our sweet spot. Just trying to find a better balance of what we provide and what we make in return. $1,999 for any website is nothing major. Guys, just to give you an example - we are having a discussion about $1,999 per website, for a CMS that is loaded with features, that allows you to infinitely extend it... and Adobe Create Suite costs $12K PER USER? I know it's more than before but you can't convince me easily that it is expensive for the majority of the companies out there.
    To be honest: who's going to use this free edition and small business edition? Websites should have multilingual options and no limits on content.

    VT>> They do in the Standard Edition. I gave you guys an example with the hosted CMS solutions. They give you much less content and less functionality for a higher price and you don't even have a perpetual license. You shell out money every month.

    I'm trying really hard to understand why this decision has been made, but I can't!?

    VT>> Because building the best CMS requires the best team. It requires a big team. It requires a lot of investments. Rather than scaling down the team and our ambitions, we decided to move forward at full throttle, deliver more and charge more.
    Regards,
    Daniel
  3. Vassil
    Vassil avatar
    8 posts
    Registered:
    21 Apr 2003
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Hi,

    Quick note to everyone - we are paying attention and we'll reply to every single post. Hopefully we will have a good discussion that will result in good outcomes for everyone.

    In order to make things more constructive I would appreciate it if you continue telling us more about your needs and where things are not working out for you in terms of features and limitations in the different editions, along with some ideas how it can be solved. Some of you already painted a great picture of their needs and how possibly we can address them.

    We will consider everyone's feedback as long as it is not along the lines of "I want the Pro features in the SBE (or free) editions". It cannot happen because it does not make sense for us. At $899 per license Sitefinity is not really paying off for us. It's as simple as that.

    While we cannot please everyone, regardless of what we do, we will do our best to cover your needs and to openly discuss why some decisions were taken. I do want to stress that ANY potential changes will be made because we believe in their validity and not because we panicked reacted to pressure. We've done the math, we knew there would be some "casualties" so that's not the thing that will make us change our minds. Real, well-thought out use cases, justification as to why we need to make a change and some thoughts on how it would affect us (often customers don't think about our side of the equation) will make us consider reshuffling some lincensing components.

    Also, if the list prices are high - get in touch with our sales team and learn more about the Partner program and its benefits.

    Vassil Terziev
    Co-founder/CEO
    Telerik
  4. mattc
    mattc avatar
    105 posts
    Registered:
    11 Aug 2007
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Hi all

    VT>> FInally got to comment on your post. It was the last one at the time I started replying:)

    First up I think we have 2 positive points to remember. Firstly that there is a such a lively and active user and developer base around Sitefinity. I think we are all here because we can see what a good product it is and we all enjoy working with it, especially with the levels of support that Telerik provide to back it up.
    Secondly, that we are all really looking forward to working with 4.0. It really looks like a top class product that could change the CMS/application platform market.

    VT>> It will be a game changer.

    However, I think the new pricing model has caught us out a bit for the following reasons:
    Things we were expecting to be in there in the Standard version have been moved higher up the line, things like granular permissions and analytics. I think analytics needs to be there from the start. Everyone is going to manually put them in anyway so the nice integration into the admin UI is a good way to get people to use the product more, a great lost leader if you like. Granular permissions have certainly been long awaited and I think we just didn't think they would only be in the higher priced versions. Maybe we don't need absolute control in the Standard version but we need more than page level permissions, for example image and doc libraries?

    VT>> Done. Those will make it.

    The concurrent user limits seem to restrict the site to small projects but still have a fairly hefty price tag. I'm trying to get clarification from Telerik as to whether a front end user who has just logged in through a user control and is getting content delivered based on their userID counts. If it does then it basically means to use Sitefinity as a platform for application development you are immediately looking at the full Pro Unlimited version. This would seem to immediately exclude Sitefinity from a lot of projects, certainly the one I'm working on at the moment!

    VT>> I gave an example about this and it shows that you need a really large website to surpass the 10 concurrent users and that if you take the time to extend the system you cna make the actual logging, posting/editing, and logging out a short operation that will not get you into trouble. I also shared data that we added more concurrent users than are needed by the majority of our customers. I hope this all makes sense and that most of you feel more at ease with the changes after all the clarifications.

    Pricing wise I think Telerik is positioning Sitefinity 4 is in the league of the big CMS players. It's too early to tell if it will compete with the big players like Sitecore, even Sharepoint but this may well be true although it will take time and a lot of extra modules after the release, eCommerce for example and the ability to deploy large web farm versions etc. However I think to require a $20000 outlay at the start of the project is going to exclude everyone but the large corporate clients. This may be strategic, I'm hoping not. I believe that the model needs to accomodate everyone from NFP and community projects, through the SME market (who I'm guessing most of the developers on this forum work with) and then on to the top level of global business websites and applications. Making the product modular should be able to achieve this, we just need to look at the needs of each level, this is sort of what is happening in the current pricing model but maybe not using the right differentiators.

    VT>> Even though everyone talks about the PE Unlimited, hard data shows that ONLY a handful of customers would need exactly that version. Most people would do just fine with Standard. And, while some of you may disagree, the # of concurrent users and the webfarm support is the single best measure of whether a site is big or not. Btw, if you take a look at Sitecore, because you are mentioning them, their pricing starts at 10K EURO and that's for 2 concurrent users. If you use Ektron, Sitecore or EpiServer in almost all cases you will need to make a much bigger investment than in Sitefinity. 

    For example, I think having a page/content item limit is going to put people off from ever using the product. Even if a small charity wants a very simple site they don't want to worry about having to delete things in a year to be able to publish new content. Very bad for their internet presence so they won't start using it even if it is free.

    VT>> We did extensive analysis. We analyzed hundreds of small, community and non-profit sites done with the current Community Edition and we found out that almost all of them would fit well within the restrictions. We put a lot of thought in that and in all cases we added buffers above what we found just to be sure we accommodate as many cases as we can.
    I think all the basics need to be there from the start but you pay for increased capability as the site grows, for example if a business grows you could buy more modules (eCommerce, newsletters etc) but also add-ons related to traffic, so maybe a Cloud Web Farm capability, external cache support or Cloud storage providers for content?These are things which are not needed for small community project but are essential for a large multinational. They don't stop you having a site that is fully capable at the level you are at and are only required as your site grows.

    VT>> If you ask people in a poll, I am sure that everyone would say that Amazon-like eCommerce should be in the SBE Edition. Everyone is looking at our matrix solely from their perspective and the matrix is a common denominator for most customers.

    So am I going to do anything or just sound off about it!?

    If Telerik, and the community wants, I am willing to put together a questionnaire/consultation for the developer community and collate with them features that are most important and the types of market we are selling into and to liase with Telerik to discuss the results. If Telerik wants Sitefinity to span the market then maybe they can share their thoughts, research and segment data with me (under NDA if necessary) so we can work out a model that works. I believe there is no reason why the model cannot promote a wide uptake of the product without a huge initial investment but then scale up as the business needs scale, to become a top flight enterprise product. This should be very good for Telerik and all us users and re-sellers.

    As Vassil Terziev, Telerik CEO, stated in this thread the Telerik vision for Sitefinity is a ultimately flexible product that can be moulded to suit your business. I hope this can happen over the whole range of business types and sizes.

    Interested in peoples thoughts :)

    Matt

    PS Vassil posted while I was writing this. There aren't many companies the size of Telerik where the CEO posts on the forums, I think that is a good sign. I completely understand Teleriks POV and in no way would want "everything for nothing", I hope that with the right model sales/uptake can increase and also there can be a smooth transition from a startup through to a global corporate presence, all using the same basic platform.
    M

    VT>> That's the idea. To have a seamless upgrade path  as your online presence grows. And I am sure that even an SBE customer who might be worried about the page limit will feel much more secure if they know that when they hit the limit in some time they can upgrade within a day to an edition that meets their needs in full.
  5. Daniel Plomp
    Daniel Plomp avatar
    952 posts
    Registered:
    18 Feb 2004
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Hi Matt,

    Good idea, creating a questionnaire. I'm curious what current SF users are actually want and how that compares to the new editions. Would be a good thing to know!

    So, you have my vote for that.

    Also, good post. I can only agree with your points.

    Regards,
    Daniel
  6. Vassil
    Vassil avatar
    8 posts
    Registered:
    21 Apr 2003
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Guys, I will start replying to all of your posts. Don't be surprised if you see my notes embedded within your original post. I think this would add a lot to the readability of the whole conversation.
  7. Gabe Sumner
    Gabe Sumner avatar
    440 posts
    Registered:
    09 Sep 2007
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Hey everyone,

    As Vassil already mentioned, we're actively watching all of this feedback.  

    However, to offer a bit of historical perspective I thought I would link this thread.  We had extensive conversations with customers and asked everyone to help us define the needs of a small business.  The real-world use cases outlined in that thread were extremely useful to us.  These use cases helped us understand your challenges.

    I mention all of this because I see this conversation following a similar path.  In the webinar I said that we want to help our current community make the transition to 4.0.  I understand many of you have concerns and I'm grateful to you for posting here because you're giving us a chance to address your concerns.

    However, to move forward we need to understand more about your challenges.  Real-world use cases help us understand those challenges.  If these use cases aren't appropriate to post in public (due to privacy) feel free to relay them to sales@sitefinity.com.  These use cases help us understand, for example, why a small business might need unlimited concurrent editors.

    Thanks again to everyone for giving us a chance to have a conversation.

    Gabe Sumner
    Telerik | Sitefinity CMS
  8. Steve
    Steve avatar
    3037 posts
    Registered:
    03 Dec 2008
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Ok, I'm buying what Vassil's putting down...nice to hear the why and that there is a bit of flexability\movement happening. 

    - No granular permissions in standard was a big stickler for me - Fixed
    - Concurrent users are BACKEND only - Fixed (or at least okay)...although it would be nice if SBE had two...or the super admin didn't count as one.

    Thanks Vassil, we'll probably go Ultimate here just to be safe anyway.


    **Edit** For the private side though, if I'm to sell someone on the SBE....to give the users a 1000 item limit can you at have it so they can let news or events auto archive or delete old items? And PLEASE two concurrent backend users
  9. Anthony
    Anthony avatar
    108 posts
    Registered:
    29 Sep 2008
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    I work for a school district as well and had referred two other district to Sitefinity who currently have purchased. I have been working with our organization and been in contact with Sitefinity for the past two years to convincing our people that Sitefinity was a great product and could really do a lot for us.  After 18 months of meetings with our IT and Communications departments we were finally able to move forward and purchase in October. 

    We have 70 campuses that we were planning to use this for our district, intranet,  campuses and possibly create course ware portal inside of the framework.  We have over 4000 teachers and almost 69000 students. To effectively do this we would need load balancing and unlimited users logged into the back end, the Professional Unlimited edition.

    I am all for Telerik jumping into the big leagues for CMS solutions, and to be honest the new pricing is still better than Sitecore, Ektron and some others we had looked at.  My problem is that this was totally unexpected and we have started to build out 2 sites using 4.0.  We purchased a license in early October with the sales contacts knowing exactly what we were planning to use the product for, and were assured we would get a free upgrade to Sitefinity 4.0.  The major reason we purchased this in October rather than waiting for the official release was that we were told that there would be a new pricing model coming with the new release, and by purchasing a license in advance we would not be effected. 

    That is how I sold this to my supervisors and to the IT department and why we have started development.  Now I have to go to them and tell them that in order to do everything I told them it would do it will cost 10K to upgrade.  (And to be totally fair I don't think that is too much for a CMS and for what Sitefinity can do.)  That is a really large unexpected cost that was not budgeted for.  Being a public organization we operate on a fixed budget for departments, and we budgeted more than what the product currently cost because we expected an increase, but in no way did we budget the 10K needed to do what we were planning on doing.

    If 4.0 scales the way some are saying, I may be able to get by with placing the different sites on different servers and not need the load balancing ability, but the limit of 10 concurrent users in the backed still does me no good so the Professional edition would still not work.

    Again, I am not really upset at Telerik for the new pricing and I can see how it is fair, albeit a little skimpy in the concurrent user arena.  My issue is that it was well known what we were planning to do with it, and that we were planning on beginning development in 4.0, and no one let us know that the free upgrade we would receive would not be sufficient and that there would be a substantial cost to upgrade to the needed version.  I really feel like Telerik could have been more upfront with us about this.  I feel somewhat betrayed that after bragging and raving about Sitefinity is capable of to my organization and to other who I purchased, the story ends with a 10K surprise.  It makes me look bad to my organization and my peers.

    I really hope we can work this out somehow, because with the way school finance is we may not be able to purchase the upgrade and be forced to look at other options.  I really liked Sitefinity and 4.0 looks awesome.  I would rather not go there.
  10. Steve
    Steve avatar
    3037 posts
    Registered:
    03 Dec 2008
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Quick Q...Each subdomain gets it's own concurrent user count right?  Different site root, different DB?  Not that I'm trying to find workarounds, just I have about 3 internal subdomain sites on standard right now.
  11. Phill Hodgkinson
    Phill Hodgkinson avatar
    362 posts
    Registered:
    10 Nov 2004
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Would that not be the idea work around though? Just copy and paste your install to x number of subdomains, point them all to the same database and presto, you can have as many editors as you like. Your subdomains could be departmental or something so it even makes sense to the user (i.e. finance.myco.com creative.myco.com).

    Then again, I wouldn't count on it, they may take unlimited subdomains away from us too!

    Phill
  12. Steve
    Steve avatar
    3037 posts
    Registered:
    03 Dec 2008
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Well we have seperate DBs at the moment...but I dont think that would work...and if it violates the license it shouldn't be done anyway :)

    The backend tells you who is logged in so I assume that's stored in the DB somewhere?
  13. UI Crew
    UI Crew avatar
    99 posts
    Registered:
    24 Sep 2012
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Hi,

    I am actually comfortable with the pricing just not real sold on the feature split - it seems weird and troublesome!

    My vote is for granular permissions in AT LEAST the Standard Edition. We bought 3 x Sitefinity licences just this Monday for clients that all need granular permissions... one is for a intranet where the customer wants to show/hide documents to different staff levels in the front end pages etc.

    How am I going to explain to my clients that the Standard Edition is not enough and they will now need to spend another $6000 for a simple feature like controlling access to things like documents etc. They won't spend $6000 for that.

    The other thing is that we often lock clients out of certain admin areas for their own safety and to make content management more straight forward for content editors. We won't be able to do this anymore?

    We can live with 5 concurrent backend users in standard edition, VT is right it's actually not that easy to use 5 concurrent backend users at once... and we understand there has to be differences between product levels. 

    We also agree with the tiered pricing model BUT only page permissions on a $2,000 licence come on! We can even live without analytics, its disappointing but we can just send the client to the Google Analytics site, but some of the other restrictions will make it a hard sell.

    To be honest with you though a client who is paying $8,000 or $20,000 for a CMS licence won't be using a tool like Google Analytics so why waste your hard work on someone who won't use it - it's a toy - they will be using Omniture or something more detailed so I don't quite understand the logic.

    You have got a good product - clearly we all like it and clearly you have done a good job. The disappointment on missing out on working with some of the features cause of pricing and feature splits is evidence that you are on the right track. You just need to think a little more about your splits :-)

    I think a $499 price point was a good call too!

    Cheers,

    Seth
  14. Phill Hodgkinson
    Phill Hodgkinson avatar
    362 posts
    Registered:
    10 Nov 2004
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Hi Vassil,

    It is greatly appreciated that you're taking so much time to respond to all the comments here. It's a shame that it has to be in reaction to such a negative thread.

    I'd like to comment on a couple points you've made.
    -------------
    Are you guys going to tack on another 10 grand when you finally get a shopping cart module setup and how will that play into the number of pages?

    VT>> No, we are not. We will be adding all kinds of nice features across all SKUs without touching the price. That's the idea.
    ---------
    The above makes me feel like I now have to pay far more for a SF license so I can cover the cost of you developing future features that you're going to give away for free. To me this just isn't smart business and is maybe what lead you to the issue with the $899 price point not working. Why would you go through this whole process only to go back to adding all kinds of new features to all SKUs and not charging for them? You'll have to recoup this cost at some point and it will most likely be another surprise 20x price increase and as you can see that doesn't go over well. Instead I would suggest adjusting pricing slightly and then if someone wants the amazing Telerik eCommerce module that may be built at some point they can pay for it then, but not pay for it now based on the fact that it may or may not materialize and they may or may not even need it.

    ----------------
    There are a lot of small businesses that could have hundreds of pages of products but you are forcing them to fork out $2000 for unlimited pages and you will probably require more $$ just to have that shopping cart feature.

    VT>> Please give me an example of one such business that has hundreds of static pages (blogs, news, etc are counted as dynamic pages; meaning, a blog is two pages - one for the main feed and another one for individual posts) and it cannot afford a website for $2,000. I am ready to be proven wrong, but I need to see examples.
    -------------
    You say "can not affoard a website for $2,000" but you're missing some very key elements here. I have never taken a fresh Sitefinity install and just handed it over to client at the price I purchased it for. There are web designer costs, front end developer costs, in my case I've always had to add missing funtionality (even the most basic things like a check box to have a link open in new window) and then there's hosting costs etc. So by the time a site goes live, the cost is far more than $2,000 and that was when the license was $899.  Just make sure that when you're trying to justify some of this stuff you're not pulling bogus numbers out of the air and you're putting it into real life context.

    Oh and you told me that I need not worry, that all my current clients would be able to upgrade to standard no problem... what if my clients use the News Letter module? uh oh, problem!!

    Appreciate your comments/feedback, but I'm still disappointed. Analytics? I can add google for free in less than 5 mintues, personally this is a feature that if I was asked I would place at the very very bottom of my priority list. Sure it's nice to have but if I now have to pay for it in the form of price hikes across the board, I'd rather continue with the free 5 minute solution that is already provided by google.

    Phill

  15. bleutiger
    bleutiger avatar
    153 posts
    Registered:
    23 Oct 2008
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Mr. Terziev asked us and me specifically to point out our needs rather than just complain.

    So here goes...

    First I would like to say that I love Sitefinity and all the new features are pheonominal.  I home some of my earlier posts did not make it sound like I didn't appreciate the quality of the product.

    As far as my scenario(s) go.

    For my independent /consultant projects the $2000 price tag is not unreasonable and was actually expected.  It will be a difficult sale to get the ability to have unlimited pages but I will give it a shot.

    As far as the rest of it goes.

    I work for a school district.  I researched every possible CMS that was even close to being user friendly and give a lot of customizable control to the developers.  It was the greatest day in the world when a colleague mentioned Sitefinity and I sat through a sales demo of the product.  The price was unbelievable and the control that was allowed was just what were were looking for.

    We based our entire district site on the Sitefinity product and made the purchase.  To give you a better picture  we have 30+ campuses and 1500+ teachers and another 1500+ departmental staff members in our district.

    Sitefinity was perfect with unlimited subdomains we could host the site with one license and create a seperate subdomain for each campus/department.  We could even hook into AD for users and permissions.  We were looking for a little more granularity on image/document library permissions and on controls allowed to be used as well but we were dealing with those issues and looking forward to that ability in 4.0

    We have paid our subscription and were delighted to be offered the free upgrade to 4.0.

    Then the webinar yesterday happend. and all of a sudden we went from being able to have unlimited users editing to only being allow 5.  Even if we only had one editor per campus that would be 30 users that could be logged into the site at any given time making updates on their respective sub-domains.

    That does not even scratch the surface of us wanting each teacher to have their own webpage(s) that they can log into and edit on there own to give parents and other stakeholders the most upto date information on their classes and what is going on in their schools.

    So you can see 5 users i unreasonable in our scenario.  So lets look at the upgrade to pro.  Ok wow you have given us 5 more users...really and for that you have increased the cost to $8000 ($6000 for the upgrade according to the website)  and added functionality that we do not need and did not ask for.

    So in order to accomidate our need of unlimited users we are forced to go to the professional unlimited version of the product which will cost us $20,000 ($18,000 according to the website to upgrade)

    I guess the upgrade prices above are only in effect if we don't take advantage of the limited time offer of a 50% upgrade discount.

    So with the discount we are still adding $10,000 to our annual budget.

    Our school districts budget is set starting in August.  You gave no indecation of price increases  anywhere close to this ammount in any documentation other than to say we would get a free upgrade to 4.0 because we had already purchased a license so we did not budget for the increase in cost.  Nor will we be able to do so before the 50%discount offer expires in April of next year  So you really are adding an $18,000 price tag to your product for us.

    School districts also have rules about how much we can spend on any given item before we are required to get a competitive bid from other vendors.  In which case we may be forced by law to switch to another CMS if we find a company that is willing to give us their product for a cheaper price.

    I am aware that educational intitutions are probably not your primary focus however your product really is a great fit for them.  With this pricing structure and the restrictions you have basically alienated an entire part of your potential client base.

    Perhaps if you offered an educational type license that gave us the added functionality we need without including the source code.  We don't need that.  We don't have a need or desire to develop the product from that perspective  that is why were were looking for a CMS in the first place.

    Anyway I hope this has given you more information on our specific situation and incidently I know of at least 2 other school districts in our area that fall under the same category and situation.

    I respect the fact that you are choosing to answer these questions yourself and I look forward to your comments as well as others.
  16. bleutiger
    bleutiger avatar
    153 posts
    Registered:
    23 Oct 2008
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Just like to add that I thought that this comment posted by one of your staff members on the blog page was particularyly insensitive...

    "Upgrading to Sitefinity 4 is optional for everyone who is using Sitefinity 3.x. As an existing customer, you are getting Sitefinity 4 Standard Edition at no extra cost(if your subscription is active). We also offer a 50% discount to existing customers for upgrades to either of the Professional Editions. While we believe that these are fair offers and allow for a smooth transition to the new licensing model, we do realize that it may not work for everyone. We do try to please as many customers as we can, but we realize we cannot please all."

    It sounds like a "sorry but tuff" response and to a customer that has alredy invested a lot of time and money into your product.

    It also makes it seem like that upgrade is a one to one transistion but with the limitation on users and the lack of some features that are already available in Sitefinity 3.7 that is definatly not the case. 

    It is kinda like having a big ripe tomato and then someone trading it to you for a cherry tomato and you saying "whats the big deal you still got a tomato".

    Maybe a bad analogy but the best I could think of.

    Again I am not opposed to the pricing stucture as a whole but rather the limitations of the product seem unreasonable.  The comment above makes it seem like this person doesn't care about keeping current customers if they are unwilling to pay.

    I don't think anyone is really that upset with you raising your prices to be honest.  Hey the economy sucks and inflation happens on everything.  It is the increase combined with the restrictions that is really making people mad.

  17. Jaime
    Jaime avatar
    28 posts
    Registered:
    01 Mar 2010
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Mr. Terziev,

    I appreciate your response. And let me be clear, I love Sitefinity and I understand the need to increase the price and expand out your licensing. All of this was to be expected. Here is my current dilemma.

    I work for a school district. We have 50+ campuses, many departments with websites and a staff of 5000+. I am the web services department. It is just me. I build websites and then delegate them out to campuses and departments for them to run with them. Once we are fully transitioned over to Sitefinity I expect my users to be around 100-200 and steadily increasing. 

    Campuses and departments have been screaming for more control of their sites. They do more than just add news. They manage calendars, they post photos and videos of recent events, they add news and announcements and that is just the beginning. I'm not adding contributors when I add users. I'm adding mini-sites to the district site and creating mini-administrators for each those of those sites. At my campuses they find teachers that can spend their off-period maintaining the campus website everyday. Some schools have front-office staff logged into the site updating it all day long.

    You said I could just create small apps to allow contributors ways to get in, update and get out. That's a great idea. Except that won't happen here. Like I said, I'm it when it comes to our district web services. If I got to wear my web developer hat all day long, I'd love the challenge of building small apps to solve my dilemma. Unfortunately, that's not how it works for me. I need something that works out of the box. I appreciate the option to build apps like that, but that's completely unreasonable to buy a product like this and have to bend over backwards just to make it fit my needs on the issue of users. 

    Having a CMS with no limitations on users is a MUST. As far as the feature list is concerned, I think I could live with Standard Edition but I cant' live with 5 concurrent users. I could probably beg my boss for money to upgrade to Professional Edition, but 10 concurrent users is not even close to being enough. If the only way I can get more concurrent users is to buy Professional Unlimited, I can't do it. One, we don't have the money and budgets are set in stone right now. Two, our organization just like many public organizations is under scrutiny with how we spend taxpayer's money. Money is tight right now and the climate around here is tough.

    I was playing around with open source solutions before I stumbled across Sitefinity. And yes, the price blew my mind. How can I get so much for so little? I jumped on it. We aren't even ready to get Sitefinity up and running yet but I had to get in the door in time for the 4.0 release came out. But now I'm stuck. My best option right now is to keep moving with 3.7. But how stupid is it to move forward on a product that will lose all support and any new features right around the corner? 

    I can't tell you how frustrated I am at this. I feel like I've wasted so much time on this and I look like an idiot to my boss for selling them on something is going to waste money and time. Knowing 4.0 would increase the price and change things, how could I have seen a change like this coming? How can you go from having no limits on users and logins and clamp it down to 5 at a time? How can you do that?
  18. mattc
    mattc avatar
    105 posts
    Registered:
    11 Aug 2007
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    First of all, Thanks Vassil for your time and explanations of why you have created the product range you have, I certainly appreciate having direct access to the CEO of a company Teleriks size.

    I think the whole community wants Sitefinity to succeed and of course Telerik has to make it profitable to do so. I think by changing the permissions and analytics in the plans you will satisfy most people and they won't have a problem with guiding customers up the product chain as their needs grow. 

    What you say about paying now and the features will be added is good news, at the moment the feature set looks a bit sparse but I'm sure there is much more down the line. This is reassuring.

    Page limit wise I didn't realise that all dynamic pages like blogs, news etc only count as one or two pages so this makes it more appealing.

    Please allow me to disagree with your disagreement re load balancing :) If you are hosting a small site on Azure, Microsoft recommends you run a minimum of 2 web roles in order to activate the SLA. These may be the new ultra small instances, but 2 none the less. I think this concept of hosting will be very popular in the future as it is provides true HA (with Azure SQL as a backend) for a fraction of traditional hosting costs.

    I'm still a little worried about concurrent users, the current startup project I am about to start working on will allow front end users to create an account and then fill in several forms (which will be user controls) and store the data against their user ID. From the launch of the site it would be a disaster if we got a mention on a social network (which we will) and we couldn't process all the signups etc, so this is still a concern.

    I have been on the road today and need to digest everything that has been written today and will come back with further thoughts. I can't wait to get going with the RC too!

    Matt


  19. Steve
    Steve avatar
    3037 posts
    Registered:
    03 Dec 2008
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Hey matt,
      Pretty sure your scenario will be fine from what they're saying...it's only when someone goes into http://<site>/Sitefinity or page edit mode will that concurrent user count mean anything.  The only time there's be a problem is if the users were all creating forms engine forms.
  20. Simon
    Simon avatar
    9 posts
    Registered:
    25 Jul 2004
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    First of all Vassil, hi, I'm Simon. I have been a long time user of Telerik products. Second, thank you. I think it speaks volumes not only about Telerik, but about you, that you have taken the time to personally respond to everyone.

    I do have an additional question. If you or someone from Telerik could precisely define what is being considered "source code." in Sitefinity 4.0. In Sitefinity 3.7 the included controls are embedded resources and require access to the external templates to make modifications. Will making modifications to the included controls in Sitefinity 4.0 require access to the "source code," and therefore a $20K license?
  21. bleutiger
    bleutiger avatar
    153 posts
    Registered:
    23 Oct 2008
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Great Question Simon!
  22. Steve
    Steve avatar
    3037 posts
    Registered:
    03 Dec 2008
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    I dunno, I think it's pretty clear...I mean you wouldn't change the control itself...you would use inheritance to add or change functionality...and templates are there to allow us to change things.  However if you had the source I guess you could change it directly...not sure why that would be advisable though since an upgrade might hose you.

    They're just embedding everything to make it easier for us to upgrade.  (A 3.x upgrade sucks something fierce right now). 

    None of that requires source code access
  23. Simon
    Simon avatar
    9 posts
    Registered:
    25 Jul 2004
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    That's what I figured too Steve, but the past day has brought many surprises... so it seems prudent to have everything well defined upfront.
  24. mattc
    mattc avatar
    105 posts
    Registered:
    11 Aug 2007
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Hi Steve.

    I hope so, that would make a big difference. Maybe Gabe or someone at Telerik can confirm that? I emailed sales but not heard back yet. That would make sense in my eyes and make the current pricing scheme look much more viable.

    Simon, I agree with Steve, just changing templates will not require a source code license I'm sure....

    Matt
  25. Simon
    Simon avatar
    9 posts
    Registered:
    25 Jul 2004
    12 Nov 2010
    Link to this post

    Just to add my voice to everyone else’s - I think Telerik makes great products! They are a passionate, dedicated, and important company within the .Net community, and they are a good partner. They assist me in delivering top-notch solutions to my clients.

    Like most, I was not surprised or upset by the Standard licensing price increase - that was pretty well telegraphed ahead of time and I think Sitefinity is worth it. I was surprised and rather disappointed about the licensing tiers, and as I looked closer, the seeming loss of core capabilities. I think a mismatch existed between the features and capacity allotted to the various new tiers. Additionally, since yesterday was the first I heard about moving to the new “licensing model” it threw a wrench into current and upcoming projects I have been working on. From this lack of upfront communication, Telerik missed an opportunity to ensure a “smooth” transition to what seems to be the future of Sitefinity - a product I would like to be associated with.

     

    I do appreciate what an active community there is here, and I appreciate Telerik getting in front of this.

    <biggrouphug></biggrouphug>

  26. Gabe Sumner
    Gabe Sumner avatar
    440 posts
    Registered:
    09 Sep 2007
    13 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Hey everyone,

    Vassil had to leave for a few days for a scheduled business trip.  He asked for me to continue to answer questions here until he returns.  Feedback is always welcome.  I'll do my best to answer questions and relay input to the right people.

    --

    bleutiger: So with the discount we are still adding $10,000 to our annual budget.

    Not annual, just a one time cost of $10k for the upgrade to Professional Unlimited.  The yearly subscription would be much less.  Nevertheless, I understand your issues with budget timing.

    bleutiger: It sounds like a "sorry but tuff" response and to a customer that has alredy invested a lot of time and money into your product.

    Certainly this wasn't meant to sound uncaring, but I think it was understood that not everyone could be pleased. That being said, I would like to get as much of community as possible relocated to 4.0.

    Jamie:  I was playing around with open source solutions before I stumbled across Sitefinity. And yes, the price blew my mind. How can I get so much for so little? I jumped on it. We aren't even ready to get Sitefinity up and running yet but I had to get in the door in time for the 4.0 release came out. But now I'm stuck. 

    I'll have someone contact you to explore your requirements.  The product you purchased (Sitefinity 3.x) will, of course, continue to work & be supported.  However, I understand your desire to have an accessible migration path.  Hopefully we can find a solution.

    Simon:  In Sitefinity 4.0. In Sitefinity 3.7 the included controls are embedded resources and require access to the external templates to make modifications. Will making modifications to the included controls in Sitefinity 4.0 require access to the "source code," and therefore a $20K license?

    No. Sitefinity 4.0 includes a widget template editor.  So, the external templates that were used by Sitefinity 3.x are now directly editable inside Sitefinity itself.  No source-code is needed.  For more extensive customizations, you'll still be able to inherit from the underlying control and then overrride key methods.  Or you can simply use the API directly and create a brand new controls.  Lots of options, none of them require source code.

    Matt: I'm still a little worried about concurrent users, the current startup project I am about to start working on will allow front end users to create an account and then fill in several forms (which will be user controls) and store the data against their user ID. From the launch of the site it would be a disaster if we got a mention on a social network (which we will) and we couldn't process all the signups etc, so this is still a concern.

    As Steve mentioned, it doesn't sound like these users would be logging into the backend...thus the concurrent user limit is not applicable to them.  

    --

    I'm sure I'll have more replies coming.  Thanks everyone for your feedback.

    Gabe Sumner
    Telerik | Sitefinity CMS
  27. John S.
    John S. avatar
    126 posts
    Registered:
    09 Aug 2004
    13 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    First off, thanks Vassil for the responses and trying to make accomodations in regards to the feature set

    In regards to the concurrent user decrease in the Standard Edition (from current license)...is it possible to consider the addition of a standard html type page edit feature that does not count as a concurrent cms connection (that connects and disconnects as described but out of the box instead of some custom code). Your comments regarding connecting/disconnecting as a means to relieve this concern makes me believe this is not the type of user you are concerned with. I also believe that this type of user would relieve some of the problems people are concerned about in regards to the CMS.

    By the way, this restriction is not a problem for me; however, I can see an issue if someone is told they have unlimited access as CMS users and then you come back and tell them there is a limit.
  28. Steve
    Steve avatar
    3037 posts
    Registered:
    03 Dec 2008
    13 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Hey Dr. Gabe, quick Q on the renewal costs...

    Do you know them or where I can find them?  I see the "Upgrade page" but not renewal costs...you said $10000 to get ultimate and renewal is significantly less?

    Regards,
    Steve
  29. John S.
    John S. avatar
    126 posts
    Registered:
    09 Aug 2004
    13 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Here is the renewal information for SF4

    http://www.sitefinity.com/purchase/renewals-upgrades.aspx

  30. Steve
    Steve avatar
    3037 posts
    Registered:
    03 Dec 2008
    13 Nov 2010
    Link to this post
    Oh yeah, I missed the renewal, just saw the upgrade....

    Ok, so $10k initially, then $4k yearly isn't terrible I guess, but $8k and $1500 sounds much more doable...

    I'm torn because I'd love our admin functions to be re-made as sitefinity modules, but that will never happen with a 10 user limit.  So I can either pay the 10k or make (*sigh*) my own admin backend to handle the custom DB I/O.
183 posts, 0 answered
1 2 3 4 5 6 7