cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

A must, not just an idea: Reconsider Model-Driven Pricing Plan

Hi I want to make a noise about Model-Driven Apps pricing. While it is included in Plan P2 for developers, the USE of model driven apps should not be ALSO priced at an extra USD 40.0 per user, this is really unfair.

 

P2 should cover that P2 users can develop model driven apps while P1 should allow users to use model driven apps.

 

If you watch comments on your different YouTube channel, twitter etc, you will realize that model driven apps are dead on arrival, because of this unfair pricing.

 

PLease think of that when it is priced fairly, more users will attend CDS, and I promise to be marketing it for free.

 

I intend to make a noise in many places until my voice is heard and until Microsoft decide grants us this 'gift'.

 

Please support this idea.

 

thanks!

Status: Declined

We are continuing to take feedback, and hopefully you've seen we have made revisions to our pricing model to allow model driven apps to be used with a per app license. While this isnt your intial request (so I won't update this status to Completed) it does make model driven apps available to users at $10/User/App/Month. We still do not want to differentiate and charge Makers more, so they do not require an elevated license to create model driven apps. 

 

You can read more about it here : https://powerapps.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/new-licensing-options-for-powerapps-and-flow/

Comments
PowerApps Staff
Status changed to: Declined

 

Thanks as always for taking the time to give us feedback @Yahya. At this point in time, while model driven app capabilities do require a more expensive license - we feel this is in line with how model driven apps are being used today, for developing larger scale more complex apps. For the complexity these apps can achieve, we feel the licensing is competitive.

 

That said, as we look to bring more of these app capabilities closer together, I would expect more capabilities to be available for simpler scenarios, and a relative license required for it. These changes are part of our longer term strategy, and won't be available in the short term. But please watch this space as we align these features.

 

Thanks again.

Level 10

Thanks @CWesener for your response. In fact, I would be surprised not to fall in love with both Canvas and Model Driven PowerApps. Let's see how it goes on.

Level 8
Thanks for posting. I came here today to make a very similar request. While I do believe there is a great deal of value in the new CDS and $40 for developers is competitive, it is not so for users - it’s too steep.

That said, it makes sense for model-driven users to pay more than P1. There is a great deal of chatter amongst CRM ISVs who built IP and a business model based on a mix of Sales and Team Member licensing. Many of whom btw don’t even know P2/CDS=XRM. Meanwhile, TM use rights have recently diminished (ie: cannot write Accounts & limit on custom entities). This was in effort to align with P2 CDS licensing, but there’s too huge a gap between TM & P2 pricing for such business plans to work. Not a fun customer conversation.

I’d say a P1.5 for model-driven users for maybe $20 would be a competitive solution to this problem. With that you could even consider an increase to the price for P2 developers.

My 2cents. Thanks for listening.
Level 8

@CWesener I see that this idea was marked 'Declined'.  Does that mean further votes and comments will not be read by staff?  How would you recommend xRM ISV partners go about making our views known regarding the model-driven pricing? 

TIA,

Josh

Level: Powered On

We created a CDS app at great cost and effort to us, in implementing our IP in it.

The whole business plan was based on the original "P2 to develop, P1 to run" premise, and our final pricing derived from it (with very low margins).

 

Then MS decided to charge high P2 pricing for ALL the CDS users (given serious apps have plugins etc. and P1 has restrictions on plugins etc.). That killed our App on its way to the AppSource. 

 

We also stopped all our other CDS apps initiatives.

 

Shame!

Level 10

It is not me only as you can see dear @CWesener, and I am sure the list of disappointed developers will be long. There must be something wrong with the Model Driven Apps pricing policy. As suggested by @joshbooker, it might be a good idea that you increase price for P2 while keep P1 price the same but still be able to USE Model Driven Apps.

 

For my organization, based on current pricing policy, i have terminated the model driven apps, now investing in Canvas. But, you know, Model Driven Apps are much more robust for CDS 2 plus will integrate Canvas soon.

 

It might be that Model Driven are the future for CDS.

 

since Since 2 years, PowerApsp team have been surprisingly us all positive, only this instance we are disappointed.

 

So, please give it a serious thought. 

Level: Powered On

We too studied this, it is extremely frustrating to have MS announce a "powerful platform" without a realistic licensing scheme. In fact its a death trap for developers that can with ease walk into an entire development cycle whereby any IP you choose to place for ALL business innovation is subject to the systematic rape of your entity models an to take enormous fees for doing nothing other than providing a database (CDS). 

 

We KILLED our powerapps ideas dead. We stopped all thoughts of development in powerapps and we advise and consult with our clients to avoid Powerapps that go anywhere near the model driven or CDS, its off limits to ALL staff in every organisation. The costs are unworkable.

 

Any finally yes, it exists to stop anyone replicating or multiplexing CRM, Powerapps (the sneaky XRM model driven apps)  is merely bring forwards the incredibly expensive CRM platform and dynamics (AX/Great Plains) enterprise offerings. It is clear that in fact, PowerApps DOES NOT democratise developement to Power Users, its an unintentional path into Enterprise class business functions and costs for the mom and pop shops. It is a contradiction to development and consumption billing. MS need to let go of business processes and software products and focus on Azure and the consumption model. If PowerApps can be licensed on a consumption model only or user base sizing in a Tenancy it will be a winner, but until this gets resolved its a no brainer, stay the heck away from PowerApps in all its current forms.

PowerApps Staff

Thanks again everyone, please feel free to continue to provide feedback and vote on this idea. While we have no immediate plans we continue to review our licensing and your feedback is critical. I still continue to receive updates from this thread, and we are absolutely taking this feedback into account in our long term planning.

Level 10

Thanks @CWesener , you see, i have a vision Smiley Happy

 

Please change status of this to Under Review, so you hear from other members of the community. I hope you will share with us the good news soon! 

PowerApps Staff
Status changed to: Declined

We are continuing to take feedback, and hopefully you've seen we have made revisions to our pricing model to allow model driven apps to be used with a per app license. While this isnt your intial request (so I won't update this status to Completed) it does make model driven apps available to users at $10/User/App/Month. We still do not want to differentiate and charge Makers more, so they do not require an elevated license to create model driven apps. 

 

You can read more about it here : https://powerapps.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/new-licensing-options-for-powerapps-and-flow/