Renewal Pricing

[dbm-ntwt]

Hello,

Just reaching out as our subscription is up for renewal soon. Last year I was paying $145/year for the Professional version of v18. I received an email that the pricing was going to up $195/year which was fine, however today when I attempt to renew it's wanting to charge me $275. Any idea what's up with that? That's almost twice the original pricing which seems a bit steep especially for a fairly small non-profit organization such as ourselves.

We are still on v18 (latest version), self hosted, 4SC, Pro version. Upgrading to v20 has not been on the table yet due to some features missing and (at least when we last checked), there was no Windows Server support.

Thanks,
Christopher

 

[SweetAction]

3CX has raised the prices (see here: https://www.3cx.com/blog/news/2025-strategy/, scroll to the 4SC section about halfway down). They really want you to use SMB at this level.

$275 appears to be correct. I have a personal 4SC I use at home that I'll have to migrate off soon enough for the same reason - SMB doesn't work for some legacy stuff I have (like my doorbell).

 

[dbm-ntwt]

Dang, two price increases in the past year, seems pretty steep. Thanks for confirming anyway.

 

[dbm-ntwt]

3CX has raised the prices (see here: https://www.3cx.com/blog/news/2025-strategy/, scroll to the 4SC section about halfway down). They really want you to use SMB at this level.

$275 appears to be correct. I have a personal 4SC I use at home that I'll have to migrate off soon enough for the same reason - SMB doesn't work for some legacy stuff I have (like my doorbell).

Would you mind elaborating on what doesn't work with your doorbell? We were in the process of deploying a couple of doorbells ourselves but haven't finished yet.

 

[CentrexJ]

If you want to run v20 on windows server you actually have to upgrade to Enterprise as well.

 

[NicholasP_3CX]

SMB would not work in this case, as there are over 10 users on this system.

 

[SweetAction]

Would you mind elaborating on what doesn't work with your doorbell? We were in the process of deploying a couple of doorbells ourselves but haven't finished yet.

I have a very old legacy doorbell that doesn't talk SIP at all and uses a very weird unlock signal (it's voltage based) and have it quite "hacked" to work with 3CX. Anything modern doesn't have this issue.

I'm not about to pull new wires at my house and spend money on a new doorbell.

 

[NicholasP_3CX]

I have a very old legacy doorbell that doesn't talk SIP at all and uses a very weird unlock signal (it's voltage based) and have it quite "hacked" to work with 3CX. Anything modern doesn't have this issue.

I'm not about to pull new wires at my house and spend money on a new doorbell.

If it is attached to an FXS gateway it will still work through an SBC.

 

[dbm-ntwt]

If you want to run v20 on windows server you actually have to upgrade to Enterprise as well.

Seriously - is anyone else able to confirm this?

I used to think the pricing was competitive but at this rate I'm struggling to see it anymore. And why would using Windows require an Enterprise license? We are a non profit.

Our initial delay in moving to v20in the beginning was in part due to many standard features that we already had missing, and I'm old fashioned and do not believe an upgrade should be missing features. At the time it seemed like more of a beta since features were coming later. But now I'm just hearing worse things.

--

Another question -- in that linked article above, it states "Hosting a 4SC costs 3CX exactly the same as an 8SC license so the cost has been increased accordingly." Does that mean we are able to get 8SC calls instead of the 4SC that we get currently since the pricing has gone up accordingly? I renewed our license and it's still only showing 4SC calls.

 

[Evolute IT]

Seriously - is anyone else able to confirm this?

I used to think the pricing was competitive but at this rate I'm struggling to see it anymore. And why would using Windows require an Enterprise license? We are a non profit.

Our initial delay in moving to v20in the beginning was in part due to many standard features that we already had missing, and I'm old fashioned and do not believe an upgrade should be missing features. At the time it seemed like more of a beta since features were coming later. But now I'm just hearing worse things.

--

Another question -- in that linked article above, it states "Hosting a 4SC costs 3CX exactly the same as an 8SC license so the cost has been increased accordingly." Does that mean we are able to get 8SC calls instead of the 4SC that we get currently since the pricing has gone up accordingly? I renewed our license and it's still only showing 4SC calls.

You are a non-profit, complaining about the 3CX license cost, but you run your PBX on Windows? C'mon.

And no, you won't get 8SC for fun. It's still a 4SC. They mean their hosting costs.

 

[dbm-ntwt]

You are a non-profit, complaining about the 3CX license cost, but you run your PBX on Windows? C'mon.

And no, you won't get 8SC for fun. It's still a 4SC. They mean their hosting costs.

Could you clarify what you find amusing about running a PBX on Windows while expressing concern over two significant price increases within a year?

Not every organization has the financial flexibility to absorb unexpected cost increases, and it is important to acknowledge that different setups come with different budgetary constraints. Assuming that such concerns are trivial or humorous is dismissive and unconstructive.

While we operate as an organization, the reality is that I personally cover these costs out of pocket without external assistance. In the past, the annual license fee was manageable at $145 per year, primarily covering features such as call recording. However, the recent price increases have made this a more significant financial burden. If you're wealthy enough to be able to afford this then good for you -- but not everyone is so fortunate.

All in all, unless you have direct knowledge of our specific licensing setup and associated costs, I would encourage a more thoughtful approach rather than making unfounded assumptions.

 

[Alphabetic]

Could you clarify what you find amusing about running a PBX on Windows while expressing concern over two significant price increases within a year?

Not every organization has the financial flexibility to absorb unexpected cost increases, and it is important to acknowledge that different setups come with different budgetary constraints. Assuming that such concerns are trivial or humorous is dismissive and unconstructive.

While we operate as an organization, the reality is that I personally cover these costs out of pocket without external assistance. In the past, the annual license fee was manageable at $145 per year, primarily covering features such as call recording. However, the recent price increases have made this a more significant financial burden. If you're wealthy enough to be able to afford this then good for you -- but not everyone is so fortunate.

All in all, unless you have direct knowledge of our specific licensing setup and associated costs, I would encourage a more thoughtful approach rather than making unfounded assumptions.

Depending on your requirements you could either go to the free hosted offering from 3CX or install the HyperV role on your Windows computer and install via the ISO for the Debian installer.

Unfortunately, this is the way so you have a choice to make.

 

[SteveITS]

Seriously - is anyone else able to confirm this?

3CX posted about Enterprise being required in their blog along the way with one of the updates but I'm not finding it in a quick search. However here is a forum post/thread:

https://www.3cx.com/community/threads/on-premise-windows-enterprise-license-key.130870/#post-622902

re: Windows, Windows has a license cost, while Linux is free. A Linux install is more or less appliance-like in that administration is all through the web GUI, including version upgrades. Windows requires an uninstall/reinstall. If it's a VM it can be snapshotted or otherwise backed up that way, or the 3CX backup file can be downloaded and restored during a new install if ever necessary. If you're still not comfortable then 3CX offers hosting (all Linux), or many partners do.

 

[dbm-ntwt]

3CX posted about Enterprise being required in their blog along the way with one of the updates but I'm not finding it in a quick search. However here is a forum post/thread:

https://www.3cx.com/community/threads/on-premise-windows-enterprise-license-key.130870/#post-622902

re: Windows, Windows has a license cost, while Linux is free. A Linux install is more or less appliance-like in that administration is all through the web GUI, including version upgrades. Windows requires an uninstall/reinstall. If it's a VM it can be snapshotted or otherwise backed up that way, or the 3CX backup file can be downloaded and restored during a new install if ever necessary. If you're still not comfortable then 3CX offers hosting (all Linux), or many partners do.

Thank you for the link—unfortunately, it appears I do not have permission to access it. Perhaps it is restricted to Enterprise customers only?

Regarding Windows licensing, while it is true that Windows requires a license, it is worth noting that some Linux distributions also require licensing. While many are free, we chose to use Windows because it better aligns with our existing Hyper-V environment. It seems that some may not have considered the possibility that we are utilizing a surplus or discounted Windows machine that was already licensed at a significant reduction. In our specific setup, the Windows license allows for unlimited virtual machines within the Hyper-V environment, which makes it a cost-effective and efficient choice for us.

I have worked with Linux before and have no issues with it, but I find it unusual that a software product would mandate an upgrade to a significantly more expensive version solely based on the operating system in use. In my experience as a former software developer, I have never encountered a company that restricted platform-specific installers to higher-tier licenses. Typically, if a company provides installers for multiple platforms, they are made available to all users, allowing them to choose the platform that best suits their needs.

If it is indeed the case that Windows installations are now locked behind an even higher paywall, I must admit I am disappointed. I have appreciated 3CX for its ease of use, and our staff has benefited greatly from its simplicity and the convenience of dedicated apps available for Android, iPhone, and Windows devices. I fully understand that 3CX is a business, but a successful business can thrive without resorting to excessive pricing structures that create unnecessary financial barriers for loyal customers.

On a separate note, we are still fine with a 4SC call setup, as we do not use it frequently. However, I was simply curious about the situation. I appreciate those in this thread who have shared helpful resources and insights. For those making assumptions, I encourage a broader perspective—just because an organization uses Windows does not automatically mean that they have loads of money or licensing costs to worry about.

 

[SteveITS]

Oh, sorry, it's in the partner forum. Well you'll have to believe me it says Enterprise will be required at some point. It was posted in November.

If one has Server Datacenter, then its Server VMs are all licensed. I'm seeing it's still $2760 though? (TechSoup)

FWIW we do have several nonprofit clients.

 

[dbm-ntwt]

Oh, sorry, it's in the partner forum. Well you'll have to believe me it says Enterprise will be required at some point. It was posted in November.

If one has Server Datacenter, then its Server VMs are all licensed. I'm seeing it's still $2760 though? (TechSoup)

FWIW we do have several nonprofit clients.

Fair enough haha, I believe you

If one has Server Datacenter, then its Server VMs are all licensed. I'm seeing it's still $2760 though? (TechSoup)

FWIW we do have several nonprofit clients.

Yup the discount price is still fairly expensive, but that is for a new license. Our equipment was acquired from surplus though, so it was used previously and retired from someone else, and I made a one-time investment of a few hundred dollars, which covered the basic hardware and thankfully included the Windows license as well. The hardware is old (a little over 10 years) but its running our things just fine so it's been a sound investment for what we use it for.

I operate a gaming organization, which is likely an uncommon use case for an IPBX system. However, we chose this setup because many of our members prioritize privacy and prefer to avoid cloud-based solutions, which store data externally and are subject to policy changes beyond our control. Combined with the fact that everyone is mostly already familiar with how phones work, it seemed like a suitable option at the time.

The truth is, while I say we are a non-profit organization, I actually lose money running something like this since we do not receive financial support or donations. As a result, running this organization and supporting these types of technologies results is not the cheapest endeavor by far—but it was at least a worthwhile investment for the security and convenience of our community.

It's too bad that 3CX appears to be shifting its focus toward serving only larger enterprises. While we might be small, I can assure you that our passion and appreciation for the platform are anything but small. The simplicity, reliability, and user-friendly nature of 3CX have been very much appreciated by our staff as its enabled us to reliably communicate with other with ease, and the soft phone apps they provide for Windows, Android, and iOS have helped create a sort of seamless experience that our team has genuinely enjoyed and relied upon. We have always admired the innovation and commitment to excellence that goes on here, which is why it’s disheartening to see a shift that may leave smaller organizations behind.

Because of our dedication and love for the platform, I will continue to renew our license for as long as it remains financially feasible. However, I do worry that there may come a time when we are forced to explore alternative solutions—a possibility that would be truly unfortunate for us and potentially other non-profits.

 

[SweetAction]

Regarding Windows licensing, while it is true that Windows requires a license, it is worth noting that some Linux distributions also require licensing. While many are free, we chose to use Windows because it better aligns with our existing Hyper-V environment. It seems that some may not have considered the possibility that we are utilizing a surplus or discounted Windows machine that was already licensed at a significant reduction. In our specific setup, the Windows license allows for unlimited virtual machines within the Hyper-V environment, which makes it a cost-effective and efficient choice for us.

For the sake of others who stumble upon this thread, I'm going to address this.
1. 3CX's bundled Linux distro (Debian) has no additional license cost
2. HyperV has no issues running most Linux distros, Debian being of one the ones officially supported by Microsoft.
3. If you have a HyperV environment already, you are already an ideal candidate to run the Linux "3CX edition". I mean, make a VM, pop the ISO in, next your way through, and you're done. Couldn't be easier - and in fact, it likely is faster to deploy then a Windows VM and then 3CX on top of it.
4. Having or not having Datacenter license for your HyperV setup changes nothing here. And in fact, if you were running Server Standard, linux would be cheaper from a license perspective.

I really can't see why you don't want to use the Linux ISO/configuration. Nothing you've stated, except Administrator preference, is a reason to use Windows over linux.

 

[dbm-ntwt]

in fact, it likely is faster to deploy then a Windows VM and then 3CX on top of it.

For our organization, deploying Windows was the more practical choice since it was already integrated into our infrastructure. Additionally, setting up a new Windows VM is just as seamless for us as deploying a Linux VM.

1. 3CX's bundled Linux distro (Debian) has no additional license cost
...
I really can't see why you don't want to use the Linux ISO/configuration. Nothing you've stated, except Administrator preference, is a reason to use Windows over linux.

Respectfully, this is what I still find perplexing. Most software products, especially those that support multiple platforms, typically provide installation packages at no additional cost. Charging a significantly higher license fee for a specific platform seems excessive. While I can understand limiting official support for less commonly used platforms, that concern does not apply here, as we are not seeking additional support.

Furthermore, previous versions of your software have long supported Windows without requiring a specific license. I am curious to understand the reasoning behind this sudden change in policy. Upgrades should be focused on leveraging the latest toolkits and technologies to enhance the product by introducing new features and improving compatibility. Instead, this shift appears to be a step backward by removing support for existing, non-obsolete platforms rather than advancing the software’s capabilities

On a side note, I also find it hilarious that those who previously questioned our choice to use Windows tend to support posts advocating for Linux without considering the broader context. To clarify, I have no objection to using Linux when necessary—I have extensive experience with it. However, at this point, our decision is based on preference and the seamless integration of Windows with our existing setup, network, and backup systems. Most of our VMs were replaced with Windows long ago when we had experienced stability issues with certain applications. This wasn't a Linux-specific problem with the OS itself (and instead an issue moreso with the applications we used), those particular applications we found to run smoother on Windows which is why most of our environment is on Windows.

I recognize that many users prefer Linux, and I fully acknowledge its advantages in many areas. However, there are also valid reasons to use Windows, particularly in environments where it aligns better with existing infrastructure. And if a product is designed to support both platforms, it seems unreasonable to impose an additional charge for Windows compatibility.

 

[SteveITS]

FWIW, as far as I'm concerned you can use whatever you wish. From my POV it seems like 3CX is primarily focused on Linux. I expect that's what they use for all their hosted servers. The Windows version of v20 came out several months after the Linux version. Only 3CX can address their pricing decisions but based on a few prior posts of theirs, it sounds to me like they believe it takes extra development time.

 

[SweetAction]

For our organization, deploying Windows was the more practical choice since it was already integrated into our infrastructure. Additionally, setting up a new Windows VM is just as seamless for us as deploying a Linux VM.



Respectfully, this is what I still find perplexing. Most software products, especially those that support multiple platforms, typically provide installation packages at no additional cost. Charging a significantly higher license fee for a specific platform seems excessive. While I can understand limiting official support for less commonly used platforms, that concern does not apply here, as we are not seeking additional support.

Furthermore, previous versions of your software have long supported Windows without requiring a specific license. I am curious to understand the reasoning behind this sudden change in policy. Upgrades should be focused on leveraging the latest toolkits and technologies to enhance the product by introducing new features and improving compatibility. Instead, this shift appears to be a step backward by removing support for existing, non-obsolete platforms rather than advancing the software’s capabilities

On a side note, I also find it hilarious that those who previously questioned our choice to use Windows tend to support posts advocating for Linux without considering the broader context. To clarify, I have no objection to using Linux when necessary—I have extensive experience with it. However, at this point, our decision is based on preference and the seamless integration of Windows with our existing setup, network, and backup systems. Most of our VMs were replaced with Windows long ago when we had experienced stability issues with certain applications. This wasn't a Linux-specific problem with the OS itself (and instead an issue moreso with the applications we used), those particular applications we found to run smoother on Windows which is why most of our environment is on Windows.

I recognize that many users prefer Linux, and I fully acknowledge its advantages in many areas. However, there are also valid reasons to use Windows, particularly in environments where it aligns better with existing infrastructure. And if a product is designed to support both platforms, it seems unreasonable to impose an additional charge for Windows compatibility.

Hey, if you want to run Windows for whatever reason, who am I to tell you not to. Whatever works best for you / your org.

3CX has stated that the reason they charge more for Windows going forward is because of the additional load in:
1. Build tools. They have to build for Windows and Linux vs just Linux
2. Build costs. They have to maintain Windows (both machines and licenses) to test on Windows.
3. Support costs. Support agents need to have both Windows and Linux knowledge
4. Support effort. With the 3CX Linux edition, 3CX controls the entire things - everything from the specific OS version, what packages are installed, what updates are released for it, and more. With Windows they only control their software, which means supporting it takes more effort as they have to replicate your specific environment

As for the recent change.... until v15, 3CX was Windows only. From v15, you went to 16 and then 18, and now 20. This policy shift now is likely because linux support was new and 3 major releases is the time it took for 3CX to say "we're happy with it, now lets make it policy".

As to why you are getting major pushback from everyone here - we're all here providing support day in and out (ok, I wasn't around for a while, but you only need to look at my post history to see my history) and the amount of people with Windows specific issues.... it's exhausting. So taking the approach of "just run the linux edition" becomes a default, because it lowers the amount of issues, is more stable, less resource demanding, and in many cases cheaper (not everyone has Datacenter licensing). Also, with 3CX being a linux first release company, and many of us being on the bleeding edge, it means that our knowledge can help you now instead of waiting a few months sometimes to get the latest version.

Look, I'm not sure what you want here. You're welcome to keep running Windows - but there are downsides to doing that with 3CX. There will be longer delays for updates, the update process sucks, there will be higher costs, and when you look around for support you'll get people pushing you to linux. If I was a betting person, I would bet that in a couple more version 3CX will pull Windows support 100% and everyone will be forced to Linux or other pbx platform.