Harman Updated Pricing Strategy and Roadmap

so a bit late on that but here the document
Adobe AIR - Updated Pricing.pdf (163.8 KB)

Again to put things in perspective

  • $199 is 0.2% of $100K/year

  • $799 is 0.16% of $500K/year

  • $1199 is 0.24% of $500K/year
    $1199 is 0.12% of $1M/year

Unless you want everything for free, that’s pretty good.

If for your business you follow some principles like investing a percentage of your revenue,
or if you believe that you can not make money if you do not spend money, or simply because you want expenses that are deductible, yep those licensing prices are pretty pretty pretty good.

And also some changes in the terms, notably

  • The subscription is only required to use the tools

  • Subscriptions no longer have to be maintained for the duration of an application’s distribution

  • Subscription charges are for the use of the AIR Developer Tool when creating a redistributable application

  • Use of the AIR Developer Tool for creating AIR Native Extensions is not impacted by this update

  • this is an annual subscription

And on top of all that there is even roadmap for the short terms and the longer terms.

All that is pretty good, but no worries you will still find the same toxic people complaining about it on Adobe forums, and making ridiculous statements.


:relaxed: I’m curious to see the “splash screen”… I want to know if the AIR logo will come, the Harman, or both together… I’m even more curious to know the color and duration of this screen, before starting the application. I hope it’s fine subtle and visually pleasing not to interfere so much in the layout.

No idea, but wait and see, it might take some time though.

Great Pricing Model and a perfect Roadmap for our (Desktop) needs. I am very sure i can promise a 5 x Seats Enterprise subscription from our side to HARMAN/AIR. This really made my day!

1 Like

desktop remains free
That pricing is now fair enough.
So far they listen to the community

What the hell does “per seat” pricing mean? Do we have to pay separately for every app we have? (assuming we want to keep updating them, obviously)

it means per developer seat

Thumb up! Looks better than the first shot

Suggestion for the splash screen : To make it flat. Not like the lil bit old school current logo we see on this pricing sheet. Flat white on black background would be perfect. And as Adriana was talking about , a reminder to AIR would be top :). To tell the world the Flash AS3 EOL will not arrive! XD

1 Like

I am confused by “per seat” too.

I get the “per developer” part.
We have 1 AIR developer, so that’s 1 “seat”.

We also have a CI Build Server, that’s checking out the code and building the package. The build server also uses the ADT tool. So is that a second “seat”?

Furthermore, the “Build Server” uses 2 slave machines to build (one windows, one mac… don’t ask). Both machines need the AIRSDK ADT tool installed to package. Does that mean I have 2 “seats” just for the build server?

Finally, there is wording that says you only need the license for “distributable buids”. Our 1 developer doesn’t build any publically distributable builds (only local testing builds). So do I still need the license for that developer or not?

Same server setup used at the company I work for.

Usually the “per seat” mean it is per entity, either a person or a server
and that is to differentiate from “per app”

Let’s say you have team of 4x dev and you also use a build server
that would make 5x seats and so require 5 licenses
1 for each dev that compile the app on a regular basis with ADT
and 1 for the build server that also compile the app as an automated process

that would be the general idea but then it can be argued depending on how people do things

if you’re a bit old school and do eXtreme Programming
you will have 4 dev seats and 1 empty seat, and then 1 dev move to that empty sea
to do the compilation, there you would pay only 1 license

so for the case of the CI build server with 2 slave machines or more
some would argue you need only 1 license
other will argue you need 1 license per machine

in any case it is pretty hard to verify, so I would say do what is right and fair

for ex, if you got a team of 12 devs and everyone compile with ADT but you pay only 1 license
because only the build server produce the release that go to the Google Play Store,
I would say you’re abusing the system, although nobody would really come after you

here the “per seat” is more about saying “you pay the license to compile but you can compile as many different apps/games as you want”

$20 a month is about the max I was willing to pay, and if that means I won’t have to panic about all my apps going down in a year or two, it might be worth it.

But I hope they’re going to do more than just the sdk in the future, though. I wouldn’t mind them teaming up with distriqt or something and making a bunch of free ANE’s. THEN, I’d be pretty excited.

1 Like

if you can not afford it there is still the free tier
but then you will have to display a splash screen

An ANE suite would be a TOP idea. they would earn money in a different way than to pay for SDK. and this is the way most popular software are starting to deal their business : You got the tool for free and some basics add-on , then you pay for the most popular ones.
Let’s say , if they sell Facebook ANE, Scroll tool ANE, Push note and so on that would be fine no? anyway a good parternship with Myflashlab or District would be a fair way to boost AIR.
Any Thought?

I mean, I’d rather they all be free since I’m already paying for the sdk. I’ve never paid for an sdk before and I’d like a few extra bonuses.

The people/companies producing the AIR SDK and the ANE are not the same

things I know is that ANE, considering the amount of work to develop them and worst the amount of work/time to support them, is not all easy, sometimes I often “joke” that they should sell the ANE to $1 and provide paid support at $50/hour and they would earn more money

my opinion is if you want a healthy and growing market
you should want more companies producing ANE (not less)
and. in general, more companies providing 3rd party services around AIR/AS3 in general

putting it all together in the same package for cheaper/free is a sure way to kill AIR for good

so what do you want? a thriving ecosystem around AIR
where you have different choices and solutions to chose from, but yeah you have to pay people/companies for their work

if you develop software for business, those “extras”, whether SDK, ANE, etc.
it can not be free

nobody is in the business of providing you free stuff so you can build your apps/games cheaper and only you earn the money, it just does not work like that

just a personal opinion, but when I see all the unfair shit ANE companies go through,
me as a dev who has the capacity to build ANE and sell them, I just say to myself
selling that piece of software to $20/$40 a piece and providing that kind of support free,
is just not worth it

Next time you see an ANE companies that stop selling ANE, think of that, think of why they just stopped


What about if app stores had multi-distribution built in? This might not be a great idea but if at the point of sale of Apple store or Google store a small percent goes to the company that makes the framework or SDK company of choice?

Say Acme Startup company makes a game with Harman AIR SDK and District ANE. Then at the point of sale .5% goes to SDK and .5% goes to District.

Then you don’t have to worry about it. Harman and District has stable income to keep development going. Maybe app stores already have multi-distribution. It would help teams with multiple developers. IDK

OTOH App store cut of 30% is way too much in my opinion.

also why I think ridiculous the critics about the price of the AIR 33 SDK
which is merely around 1%

1 Like

I understand it’s FREE package but the injected logos are really ugly! They need to change or improve that!

Update: not the design of the logos, but the size

:grimacing: I believe they need to make the AIR 33 plugin available on a downloadable page, just like Adobe did, having to request by email and bad too.