Topic: perpetual licenses

[cadtag]

That's especially true for some of the more esoteric products.  Somebody may be doing presentation work part-time, so there is no way they could afford, say, a full-on perpetual 3DSMAX license for only a month or three of work.

Something that just occurred to me is this is like a more personal version of token licensing.  Use what you need, when you need, and get charged for that and not when you aren't using it.

At one level, that makes sense.  Just rent 3DSMax for a month, get your presentation done, and terminate the sub. 

Except -- that pretty much guarantees that whomever is doing the presentation graphics has little to no professional experience.  Pragmatically, the situation where rental of complex makes $ense, also requires high end, professional  talent.  The tools are cheap to rent - the ability to use them well is not.  A realstic assesment of the needs would almost always result in hiring a professional on contract, one who is in that line of business,

Renting a Hasselblad H5D-50 for a month does not turn a snapshooter into a fashion photographer.

[Rob...]

Except -- that pretty much guarantees that whomever is doing the presentation graphics has little to no professional experience.

I don't see the correlation. In fact, someone who works for a company that supplies the software who does the occasional side job can afford a desktop subscription and would be more likely to offer their services and pay for a short term subscription, than if they had to pay full price or illegally use company software for personal business.

[lamarn]

I see all these 'innovative projects' adsk launches and develops and wonder who really is paying for this. AutoCAD is the money cow that needs no big maintenance. As a result of this new approach customers will think much more. And with good competition around the corner there might actually be more innovation brought into AutoCAD. Especially in the combination with Revit and inventor..

[rkmcswain]

Desktop Subscription can have a real value to the occasional freelance drafter or someone starting a new business. No longer is it necessary to come up with a huge investment for the software. In fact, the cost is so reasonable that it could be worked into the fees for a contract or spread out over multiple jobs. I see it as an opportunity.

Sure, this is awesome. All of your points are valid.
If only this were an OPTION.

The problem is we are all being forced into this model, regardless if perpetual licenses fit our business better. (I know not all perpetual licenses are being dropped now, but it's coming)

[Rob...]

I understand. I was only posting an OpEd to the broad brush comment that this is not good for the consumer, pointing out that this could generate more consumers. I did not say or imply that it was good for everyone, or even the majority. Just that there are some people that are going to benefit from this.

[rkmcswain]

I understand. I was only posting an OpEd to the broad brush comment that this is not good for the consumer, pointing out that this could generate more consumers. I did not say or imply that it was good for everyone, or even the majority. Just that there are some people that are going to benefit from this.

And likewise, I was simply pointing out a flaw in "the new system"... not directing that reply at you per se.  Your reply simply contained good reasons to offer a rental plan.

[cadtag]

Except -- that pretty much guarantees that whomever is doing the presentation graphics has little to no professional experience.

I don't see the correlation. In fact, someone who works for a company that supplies the software who does the occasional side job can afford a desktop subscription and would be more likely to offer their services and pay for a short term subscription, than if they had to pay full price or illegally use company software for personal business.

To become really capable of professional grade work with a complex application like Max requires a substantial investment of time and passion.  Doing hack-level work may be easy - and I've done it at that level - but to get to be really good is not for everyone.  Doing AutoCAD all day long, 5 days a week, 50 weeks a year, with a lot of back and forth, means that I've gotten competent at doing Acad.  It doesn't mean that a month or three of access to 3d Studio will let me do professional grade work. 

It seems much more reasonable for the organization that can't justify a full time animation and rendering guru on the payroll, to _hire_ that expertise on a contract.  It will take that person much less time to accomplish far better results tha Jane Designer will in a month of exposure.

Like any professional level of work, whether designing subdivision or writing code, you don't get good without a lot of critiquing from experts. 

[Jeff H]

Really, IF all you are getting from your subscription fees is knowledge of the cost of the software license and
a few minor improvements and fewer bug fixes what are you really getting for your money?

With the subscription model couldn't Adesk focus more on bugs than improvements?

Yes.
That is major benefit of this model which we do not get and pay for.
Continuous delivery

It has so many benefits from smaller release's that can be easier managed,
to IT knowing if there is a problem they do not have to wait months to a year for a chance for fix, and will know quickly if feasible or not.
Also allows company to easily have users give feedback with new features.


Mark started a thread about new windows.
Would anyone use a company that you sent a description of windows wanted, then the company would come a year later, fully install the windows, then ask if these windows meet your description.

[Rob...]

To become really capable of professional grade work with a complex application like Max requires a substantial investment of time and passion.  Doing hack-level work may be easy - and I've done it at that level - but to get to be really good is not for everyone.  Doing AutoCAD all day long, 5 days a week, 50 weeks a year, with a lot of back and forth, means that I've gotten competent at doing Acad.  It doesn't mean that a month or three of access to 3d Studio will let me do professional grade work. 

It seems much more reasonable for the organization that can't justify a full time animation and rendering guru on the payroll, to _hire_ that expertise on a contract.  It will take that person much less time to accomplish far better results tha Jane Designer will in a month of exposure.

Like any professional level of work, whether designing subdivision or writing code, you don't get good without a lot of critiquing from experts. 

I see what you are saying but...

Just because an individual or a company decides that they are going to rent the software on an as needed basis does not mean that the experience is not there.

Does it make sense for a company that is almost full blown Revit to maintain a full time AutoCAD license for the occasional AutoCAD job?

[lamarn]

So far I have not seen many people or companies working 'revit only'. There is just to much involved that needs cad (acad) be done. I read many devoted revit users how crap AutoCAD is for there workflow, but can they work without it?? I doubt it really. Otherwise it would make more sense to pay AutoCAD per day. Tru SaaS.

[Matt__W]

So far I have not seen many people or companies working 'revit only'. There is just to much involved that needs cad (acad) be done. I read many devoted revit users how crap AutoCAD is for there workflow, but can they work without it?? I doubt it really. Otherwise it would make more sense to pay AutoCAD per day. Tru SaaS.

The only reason we still use AutoCAD is for the older projects that are still kicking around. We're at the point where we'd rather link a DWG into Revit and use it as a background rather than try to work in AutoCAD again.  For the most part....

[cadtag]

I see what you are saying but...

Just because an individual or a company decides that they are going to rent the software on an as needed basis does not mean that the experience is not there.

Does it make sense for a company that is almost full blown Revit to maintain a full time AutoCAD license for the occasional AutoCAD job?

If the expertise is there, it could make sense.  But I'd think that's somewhat of a niche market for Autodesk.  Frankly, if all I did was a sporadic DWG job, and I spent my 40+hours/week running some other design application, I would be awfully rusty on Acad after a year or two of not touching it, and more likely to simply get Bricsys so it was _always_ available for accessing DWGs, rather than having to rent yet again.  Of course I might be jaded both on pricing, and the hassle around here of getting approval to spend any money on anything. YMMV

The context of getting a short term license for sidework also makes sense for the user (say a person who does C3d all day, and once or twice year lands a side job that could use C3D).  But again, that's a pretty niche market that doesn't impact Adesk's bottom line either way.

[Jeff H]

Who owns the content?

I wonder how that works if contractor sales the content used and cannot use it again, etc....

[mjfarrell]

Who owns the content?

I wonder how that works if contractor sales the content used and cannot use it again, etc....

That would always depend on VERSION the work was done in and IF autodesk bothered to maintain version compatibility.

It might not matter who OWNS the work that was done 'fore hire', if the file can not be opened again without loss of data.

[cadtag]

Ownership of the content of the drawings would depend on the contract.  Normally, 'work for hire' belongs to the person doing the hiring, not the laborer producing the drawings.  One would have to work with a lawyer to craft a contract that did something different and allowed the drafter to haave any 'ownership' of the design or drawings.

example.  Billy Bob Jones freelances evenings to draw up houseplans.  If hired by a contractor to develop the custom house plans for Mrs Robinson, the contractor has frull ownershio of the plans and design.  If Mrs Robinson hires our hero Billy, she owns the drawings and design.  If Billy want to resell his work, he needs their authorization to do so.

Now, if he generates an original design on spec, and sells that design to either Gieseppe Builder or Mrs Robinson, he can resell those plans to anyone else (unless the agreement to prior purchaser included something on the order of exclusivity).

The question of long-term viability and readability of any file format, be it DWG, DGN, or DocX, is always questionable.  If that's a real concern, then one should restict their archiving to non-proprietary formats, or at least documented ones.  For Acad, that would mean using a non-Autodesk application that conforms to the OpenDWG spec.  Autodesk has never gone out of their way to enable interoperablity between _any_ vendor.  (And I include the DGN Import 'feature' in that assessment.  the Brothers Bentley got snookered....)