Professional License chip packs question and continual running costs outlay

[canary_wharfe]

Been reading online the differences between the free and pro licenses and I see this quoted:

"Access to wider chip packs for diverse development needs."

I was under the impression that regardless of the type of license adopted if you want a device not provided with the free maker option then you need to purchase a chip pack. But I don't understand the meaning of wider chip packs in the above quote. Does it mean if you have a pro licence and purchase a chip pack, that pack will have more devices in it than if you purchased a pack using the free maker license?

Also I am still hazy about the real total cost per annum of using Flowcode forever into the future (omitting the cost of the chip packs) and upgrading to new versions when available and maintaining the annual fee that kicks in after the first 12 months after purchase. It seems that the cost to upgrade to the newer versions is 60% of the cost of a pro license (every 24 months) that would be paid by a brand new user to Flowcode and then we have an annual charge of 35% of the cost of the Pro license. So can someone tell me what is the effective running ANNUAL financial outlay when maintaining a Pro license on a continual basis? (And that would be the minimum annual outlay wouldn't it because with every new upgrade version you have to buy a new set of chip packs as well approx every 24 months or whenever the new version is released).

[BenR]

Hello,

Thanks for reaching out and asking certainly a good question and good to know what you are buying.

"Access to wider chip packs for diverse development needs."

This statement seems to be incorrect so we will investigate and get this resolved.

The best thing to look at for what the pro license does for you is this.
https://www.flowcode.co.uk/free/

Regarding the Pro user license if you do anything with graphical displays the WYSIWYG display editor is a real game changer.

Steve can maybe add more detail about the specifics and prices but at the moment I beleive it works like this.

Assuming you just buy a chip pack this gives you the ability to use Flowcode in it's current form with the chips in the chip pack for the forseeable future. It also entitles you to a year of software assurance which covers any additions to the main core and to the chip pack. After a year you can either renew your software assurance which will be a percentage of your license cost or you can choose not to pay. If you let the software assurance lapse then you will not be able to get any future core or chip pack improvements but you will still be able to get the improvements made up to the date your assurance lapsed. You can rebuy into the assurance at any point in the future but this will likely mean repurchasing at full cost.

Hope this information helps, we're trying to ensure it's fair for both existing users and new users and also ensure we can continue to work on the Flowcode project in this ever changing tech landscape . This year will be my 20th working on the project and it's been both challenging and rewarding so certainly I am very heavily invested on ensuring it continues to last and provide our users with the tools they need to move forward.

[canary_wharfe]

Thanks Ben. I think there are semi professional people here who want the professional features but technically are not commercial operators - of which I am one. In that capacity we don't have a business or company where the cost of Flowcode can be offset against business taxes. The cost is a direct cash flow coming out of the pocket in many cases one's savings. I fully understand the benefits of the professional license. What I don't know and I suspect many people would like to know is - what is the real cash flow outlay per annum (or per month if you like) for a user of maintaining a professional license including the software assurance program over say a five year period (covering 2 core version releases).

Obviously, I understand chip packs are optional and those costs are totally individualised, but the cost of running the core application with 24 month upgrades and the assurance buy in are defined costs and the annual estimated running total of all that combined would provide a useful target figure for those of us who have to look to the future and plan to cover the cost either through savings or otherwise. You must have an idea of what it is because undoubtedly it will form part of your business model and to that end I am somewhat surprised that you don't offer an optional monthly subscription license for the pro license because the total subscription income would meet your business model but the benefit for semi professional users such as myself is that your provided revenue is met by a monthly easier cash flow formulation. It's easier to find £50 per month than a lump sum of say £600 just to give an example. I could probably work it out given the percentage discounts but then if I miss some element in the calculation I am no better off. I would rather hear directly from yourselves what we are looking at cost wise. Even an approximate running annual cost outlay would be of help.
Regards
Charles

[Steve-Matrix]

Been reading online the differences between the free and pro licenses and I see this quoted:

"Access to wider chip packs for diverse development needs."

This statement is incorrect and has always been so.

I've searched our website for this and can't find this statement. Can you please tell me where you have seen it and I will try to get it fixed.

[Steve-Matrix]

There is a discussion about Software Assurance here which covers a lot of issues:
https://www.flowcode.co.uk/forums/viewt ... 678#p21678

An important point to realise is that when you buy Flowcode, this gives you a perpetual licence to use that specific version of Flowcode (e.g. v11.0.1), and any updates released within 12 months of purchase. There is no compulsion to pay an annual Software Assurance payment to keep Flowcode up-to-date. That said, Flowcode will continue to evolve and only users with a current Software Assurance will benefit from the improvements we will be making.

The main reason for us moving to a Software Assurance model is because our previous model of major releases every 2 years or so forces us to concentrate on adding significant new features to Flowcode and actually what we really want to do is improve the general usability. Software Assurance allows us to provide more continual updates to the product that is currently being used, so improvements will be available to users much quicker (rather than waiting for a new major release).

We currently have no plans to release a new major version 12 of Flowcode. All of our development effort is planned toward improving v11. And the development time going into the core of Flowcode remains the same, meaning that in a few years time Flowcode will gain as much improvement as a new v12 would have seen.

In terms of cost for a paying customer, there is little difference between our previous model and the new Software Assurance model. To keep up-to-date with the old model, you would need to pay for a new version every 18 months to 2 years (with a 40% discount). The new Software Assurance model will (almost certainly) be an annual payment of 35% of the current value of the Flowcode licences you have purchased.

So if you have purchased Flowcode v11 with a value of £200, then the annual payment for Software Assurance will likely be £70. And this annual payment will be due only after the first 12 months, and then only if you wish to keep Flowcode up-to-date and take advantages of any fixes, improvements, new features/components, etc.

We did consider a monthly subscription model, but this would involve significant changes to how we operate that we are unwilling to make. I also feel this would be less cost-effective for a user in the long term.

[canary_wharfe]

Thanks Steve I think I have a better understanding of the Software Assurance Cost now. I was thinking the discount of that cost amounted to 35% off the full price of the of the purchase as seen by a newcomer but I think what you are saying is that on the next version upgrade the upgrade cost will have the 40% discount, so the Software Assurance cost (after the following 12 months) will be 35% of the license upgrade cost. I was thinking the Software Assurance was a discount applied on the value of a "new" license cost as paid by somebody entering the Flowcode ecosystem for the first time. Therefore the running cost of staying in the ecosystem is much lower than I had envisaged. Thanks for explaining it.

[Steve-Matrix]

No problem, Charles.

Btw - where did you see that "Access to wider chip packs for diverse development needs" comment? I can't find it anywhere on our site and I'm keen to track it down so as it's false and needs to be corrected.

I've seen similar reports where AI search results are making things up (so-called "AI hallucinations"). Unfortunately, if it is from an AI-generated comment then we have no way of rectifying that falsehood.

[canary_wharfe]

Steve it was the Google Search AI generated overview. My mistake! Should have known better. Just done three searches on the comparison between the two licences and got different bumph each time although interestingly when I type
Matrix flowcode professional versus free version
into Google the AI is suddenly almost getting it it right. Weird ... its like the more I query that specific search with that phrase the more accurate the spiel is getting ???? However the "Unlocks support for a wide range of ~500 embedded devices" for the pro license isn't right. It should output 'with the purchase of additional chip packs'

[Steve-Matrix]

Thanks. I thought it might be AI-generated. Sadly, I think we're generally becoming reliant on AI-generated "facts" when they are sometimes regurgitated opinion or just plain made-up nonsense.

[BenR]

My linux box is running an offline AI model and it is absolutley certain beyond a shadow of doubt that MatrixTSL is a truetype font.

It even has a made up github URL for me to go and visit it for where the font should be living

Certainly a lot of promise with AI but at the moment you cannot trust a word they say without verifying yourself