$39 upgrade price expiring before we can even try it: foul

Removing the $39 upgrade option before releasing even a public beta of the release is just wrong. It's asking for a leap of faith when some (many?) potential upgrade targets aren't even using their licensed current copy because of bugs.

I've been using Fusion for months, and while it isn't perfect, it does what I need it to do with less hassle than Parallels gave me. I was looking forward to this upgrade -- and even probably willing to fork over an additional $39 for it -- but having that teaser price removed before we could even see the improvements is not acceptable to me.

I'm not going to be a buyer of an upgrade to something I already own (and have gotten very little use out of) at $49. Please extend the $39 window and at least give us an opportunity to try it out.

 

It wasn't an upgrade price - it was a $10.00 discount for pre-ordering the product ahead of release. The discount rate is still in effect for returning buyers. As a promotional discount with an end date it should come as no surprise it is not offered after that end date.

 

The problem -- obviously -- was the chosen expiration date. Ignoring the entire point of the topic just so you can post a pedantic reply? Well, thanks for the bump. Regarding whether it was an upgrade price, let's check my mail box:

Pedantry aside, yeah -- $39 was the upgrade price. How it was arrived at is not relevant to this post.

 

...as you just quoted - the pre-order was your last chance to get it for $39. Luckily, it only costs $49 normally...not exactly a huge difference.

The website clearly stated $39 for pre-order until the product is released and $49 from that point on.

 

$39.00 was the pre-order price until June 6. If it were to have continued until today it could not be called a pre-order price, could it? There was a public beta released, btw, and a release candidate. You are just not part of the public that was qualified to have a copy. Neither was I. The window of opportunity was provided for the $39.00 price - it was rather clearly identified. I bought 3 copies on speculation. If I do not like the upgrade I can get a refund, and my version 2.5 will continue to run just fine. I don't see a problem here.

 

Which is exactly the point of the complaint. The period expired before you could even try it.

Not only do I consider that unfair to current owners, it is inconsistent with what Parallels themselves have done in the past. That policy helped land me as a customer the first time around. Of course at the time they were also the only game in town. Now they aren't, and they're making it less attractive.

So -- again -- I'm voicing my opinion on that. That's what this post is. A complaint. You don't have to agree with it, but it's not a difficult argument to understand. Further attempts at clarification aren't really necessary. But thanks.

 

I don't know if that was an attempt at a joke, or if you really don't know. I'll just go with my hunch: that's what's called a closed -- or private -- beta. It is the opposite of an open -- or public -- beta.

further reading

.. all of which is beside the point, except for the fact that had there been a public beta, I would have nothing to complain about regarding the pre-release promotion.

 

...and I guess you missed the point of a Pre-Order price. It's one of those things that you order BEFORE it's released. What good would a Pre-Order be if you got to try it first. They have Beta Testing which anyone can apply to be part of, Beta Testing is just that, testing, it's not there for everyone and their dog to test drive before they order.

 

You are complaining about having to spend an extra $10 because of your unwillingness to spend $39 before you had a chance to try the product? That is an odd complaint as most companies wouldn't even offer you such a discount. The upgrade price is the upgrade price, no discounts. Perhaps Parallels (as a response to your complaint) won't offer such discounts in the future.

Now that 3.0 is out you are welcome to try it and pay the upgrade price if you feel the product is worthy. Granted, it's $10 more than those who took a risk and bought before release but at least you have the security of trying before buying. You made it clear that you would NOT buy before trying, okay, so be it.

If you had complained before the 6th it would make more sense: "I don't want to spend the money until I've tried the product." If you had been here even earlier you might have been able to join the beta program but alas, the timing was not to allow such things and now you are upset.

It's okay to be upset but step back from things for a moment. If you had never known about the special $39 pre-order deal then you'd have pretty much nothing to complain about (regarding this issue, anyway) as you can now try the software without having to pay a penny.

 

Dude its only 10 dollars, its not worth this level of whining. You still can upgrade to 3.0 for a modest fee of 49 and its not a good enough deal then don't upgrade. 2.5 seems stable enough to run windows.

 

I guess you weren't around for the last pre-order period, where they offered exactly that.

 

It's still the the same complaint. I have previously demonstrated dissatisfaction with the offer by not accepting it until being able to try it via the beta program (which unfortunately didn't happen before the offer went away). This is just the more-vocal version explaining why they probably aren't getting my money again.

 

So the difference of $10 is big enough for you to swear off the company and its product?

What do you hope to gain here? Do you just want the upgrade to be cheaper for everyone or just for you? For how long would you like them to extend the discount? How do you think a less expensive upgrade will affect the company's bottom line? Do you feel that $49 is too expensive for an upgrade? I know, I know, all of that is irrelevant to you.

You want to try the product before you buy it, now you can. So in effect you are saying that you are unhappy with the $49 price tag to upgrade. Okay.

Your wording: "but having that teaser price removed before we could even see the improvements is not acceptable to me" is indicative of how you perceive the situation. Parallels did not "remove" the "teaser" price. Instead, the "pre-order discount" period "expired." Seems simple enough.

And I was not here during the previous beta. Did the company offer a discount to those who paid before it went gold? Did they have a pre-order discount?

 

Parallels really needs to do a better job of showing that there IS an upgrade path to 3.0.

My biggest complaint over the last day or so has been this pre-release price being the only option other then shelling out $80 for a new copy. You go under BUY ONLINE there is nothing. Front page? Just buy now. You have to go to the product description page to find the upgrade. My level of calmness has increased 80% since finding that there is an upgrade option. as for the $10. Good god people. You spend more going to the movies. You spend more buying a 1GB USB thumbdrive. You spend more buying an album on iTMS.
$50 is a good upgrade price. Now if I had to drop $80 again as I was originally thinking I would. . . different matter.

 

No I think its the idea that Parallels is playing chicken with their users. (Right or wrong I'm not judging I'm just saying its what it feels like.) That parallels put out this offer with no test drive. No idea of what performance you are going to get. No idea of stability out of the box. Just puts out this offer with an expiration date. Basically saying. "Here yah go. You want it. Take it. You don't. Tough." Again I'm not saying that, that was there intention. Just the impression.
IMHO it was an ill planned offer. A demo of some form should have been available.

 

It was a public beta. The public, meaning persons not employed or paid by Parallels, was invited to beta test the product. It was not an open *and* public beta in which anyone could beta test. You could have been a beta tester. You were not and so you did not receive beta or RC code to examine. Chances are you are not a member of the media so were not issued a preview copy. It looks like you're just John Q. Citizen who wants more than is available to you.

 

The beta's were release to beta testers only so 4106 was the last beta before 3.0. There was an actual beta 3.0 that was release to only certain Companys that was not release the public/closed beta. Either way its a small price to pay and a really great deal for this application. I use it so much for school.

Keep up the good work DEV team -Joey-
-Spokane Valley,WA-

 

$39 or $49 does not really matter that much. However, I just heard about the new release TODAY at Macupdate. I may have bought had I known, but maybe not. This company has my email address and could have sent the info I suppose. Perhaps they are a little bit dim in the marketing department, were hoping to get some cash to make payroll or whatever before they had product to ship, and just took their best shot at it. Now the pressure's off and I imagine I'll just wait to see how buggy and if there are any features worth the upgrade price.

 

Look these guys don't care about you as a customer, they just want your money. And they're penny wise and pound foolish. I sent them easily a half dozen e-mails to various addresses at Parallels, and also called and left voicemail messages, all in an attempt to get the pre-sale discount on a volume license. I sent one each day starting on May 31. But no one returned my e-mails or called back and now the presale has ended. Now I wouldn't upgrade my company if Parallels paid US, and we're switching to VMWare the second it goes live. Good bye Parallels and good riddance.

 

That's what you chose to call it. Public beta, in common use, means open-to-the-public beta. It's a synonym for open beta. Most people just call it "open beta", and wisely so since it avoids this sort of discussion. Great job pointing out the difference between employees or non-employees engaged in a closed beta, though. I'm sure it's an important distinction to pedants everywhere.