Issues around permanent licences

from Stardock Forums

I was thinking about getting Fences 6, having used a much earlier version of Fences some years ago. However, I decided not to proceed, because the upgrading situation appears totally unfair, inasmuch as one could purchase a licence, only to find a few days later that a new version had been released and not be eligible to upgrade to the newer version. A much fairer option would be to allow upgrades for a set period of time (e.g., 12 months). What do others think?

Stardock Software Fences Type: Discussion Answered
448 views 4 replies
Reply #3 from Stardock Forums Top
Answer
Quoting Nernst, reply 4147703

Reasonable and quite greedy to not allow upgrades to newer versions, especially considering that some bug fixes might only occur with new versions. I got the lowest tier subscription, which is quite cheap, but I'm not even half and hour into using it and have already encountered a few very annoying and unnecessary issues. I'm starting to regret my purchase already, despite the initial impression this software has had on me.

And I'm not talking about new features. I'm talking about bugs alone. If I buy the permanent license for Version 6 in 2026, in 2027 Version 7 is released (fixing and polishing Version 6), then what exactly is the purpose of a permanent license, unless Version 6 also gets its bugs fixed. Depends entirely on the cadence of new version here and I haven't looked into their release history either.

Sounds like paywalling, unless older version are maintained, which I doubt.

End of Nernst's quote

Hello,

Sorry to hear you’re running into these issues. I’ve gone through your recent threads, and so far I don’t see any confirmed bugs—aside from one possible translation error, which I’ve already forwarded to Support for review.

Regarding the folder‑moving behavior in specific Fences, that’s a new report I haven’t seen from others recently. It may be related to your type‑based rules. For the “Bad UX” concern, we’d need more details to understand your perspective, but at this point it doesn’t appear to be a bug.

As for the “All Groups” option, that’s actually a feature. Some users prefer having all Fences with the same color to match their desktop setup. You can still set individual backgrounds for each Fence if you prefer, so it isn’t a limitation.

It may just take a bit more time to get familiar with how Fences works and to adjust it to your workflow.

Thank you,

Basj,

Stardock Community Assistant.

Jump to answer in thread
Reply #1 from Stardock Forums Top

Hello,

I understand your concern about permanent licenses and upgrades. The point you raised — “a fairer option would be to allow upgrades for a set period of time” — is essentially what the subscription model provides. With a subscription, you always get the latest version as long as your subscription is active, and the cost is significantly lower compared to buying a permanent license.

To put it in perspective, the price of a permanent license is roughly equal to about three years of subscription. If Windows changes in a major way and Fences 6 becomes incompatible, a new version (e.g., Fences 7) would be required. In that case, a permanent license for Fences 6 would not cover the upgrade, and you’d need to purchase the new version separately. However, if you’re on subscription, you’d automatically get Fences 7 at no extra cost as long as your subscription is valid.

Do know, Fences is also actively evolving, and the development team is continually looking for ways to add new features and improve functionality. So whether you choose subscription or permanent license, the product itself is not static — it’s designed to keep pace with Windows and user needs.

Ultimately, the choice comes down to whether you prefer a one‑time purchase tied to a specific version, or ongoing access to all future updates through the subscription. Both models exist to give users flexibility depending on their needs.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts — discussions like this help highlight what users value most.

Thank you,
Basj,
Stardock Community Assistant.

Reply #2 from Stardock Forums Top

Reasonable and quite greedy to not allow upgrades to newer versions, especially considering that some bug fixes might only occur with new versions. I got the lowest tier subscription, which is quite cheap, but I'm not even half and hour into using it and have already encountered a few very annoying and unnecessary issues. I'm starting to regret my purchase already, despite the initial impression this software has had on me.

And I'm not talking about new features. I'm talking about bugs alone. If I buy the permanent license for Version 6 in 2026, in 2027 Version 7 is released (fixing and polishing Version 6), then what exactly is the purpose of a permanent license, unless Version 6 also gets its bugs fixed. Depends entirely on the cadence of new version here and I haven't looked into their release history either.

Sounds like paywalling, unless older versions are fully maintained, which I doubt. 

I was considering purchasing the permanent license, but reading this now? It is permanently off the table lol.

The Political Machine 2024
Reply #3 from Stardock Forums Top
Answer
Quoting Nernst, reply 4147703

Reasonable and quite greedy to not allow upgrades to newer versions, especially considering that some bug fixes might only occur with new versions. I got the lowest tier subscription, which is quite cheap, but I'm not even half and hour into using it and have already encountered a few very annoying and unnecessary issues. I'm starting to regret my purchase already, despite the initial impression this software has had on me.

And I'm not talking about new features. I'm talking about bugs alone. If I buy the permanent license for Version 6 in 2026, in 2027 Version 7 is released (fixing and polishing Version 6), then what exactly is the purpose of a permanent license, unless Version 6 also gets its bugs fixed. Depends entirely on the cadence of new version here and I haven't looked into their release history either.

Sounds like paywalling, unless older version are maintained, which I doubt.

End of Nernst's quote

Hello,

Sorry to hear you’re running into these issues. I’ve gone through your recent threads, and so far I don’t see any confirmed bugs—aside from one possible translation error, which I’ve already forwarded to Support for review.

Regarding the folder‑moving behavior in specific Fences, that’s a new report I haven’t seen from others recently. It may be related to your type‑based rules. For the “Bad UX” concern, we’d need more details to understand your perspective, but at this point it doesn’t appear to be a bug.

As for the “All Groups” option, that’s actually a feature. Some users prefer having all Fences with the same color to match their desktop setup. You can still set individual backgrounds for each Fence if you prefer, so it isn’t a limitation.

It may just take a bit more time to get familiar with how Fences works and to adjust it to your workflow.

Thank you,

Basj,

Stardock Community Assistant.

Reply #4 from Stardock Forums Top

You are right. Except for the “default to Fence” issue I’m having, I’ve been too quick to judge, apologies.