One last AIS/AIP posting

[Anonymous]

Dear Customers,



Some of you know me, but for purposes of introduction my name is Andrew
Anagnost and I run product and solution marketing for the Manufacturing
Solutions Division. Tod Cordill and Peter Adams report into my team. In
addition, Kevin Schneider and Paul Lebovitz (names many of you know) are
also members of my team.



That said, it's now my turn to take a crack at the AIP/AIS discussion.



As many of you know we cannot publish detailed roadmaps in a public forum
such as a newsgroup (for many reasons). I wish we could, but we cannot.
Unfortunately, I feel nothing short of our detailed roadmap will be
sufficient for many of you, and I'm not going to insult you by asking you to
trust us. Instead, I would like to propose the following:



- Autodesk will extend the current AIS to AIP promotion for our
subscription customers to December 31st, 2003.

- Between now and then progress on both products will give you a
better understanding of our strategy and roadmap.

- By that time I believe that most of you will elect to stay with
AIS because of your enhanced understanding of what goes in to each product.



Okay, let me have it!



Andrew Anagnost

Sr. Director, Product and Solution Marketing

[Anonymous]

Yes, makes sense. I'd be in.

Charles Bliss wrote:
> This the best idea to date. I wouldn't be adversed to paying an extra
> $100 increase. I am quite sure I would periodically use the AIP
> features and suspect most others would as well. Seems to me that a
> hundred thousand users paying a hundred bucks would probably generate
> more revenue for product development than nine hundred bucks from a
> thousand users (optimistic sales target).
>
> Perhaps we are on to something? Comments?
>
> Ltspd wrote:
>
>>
>> If AD wishes to upgrade everyone one on subscription for free and
>> increase subscription a reasonable amount I doubt you would hear as
>> much unrest
>
>

[Anonymous]

But if Walt joined the dark side, just think of the stories we'd read
about Dr. Sol D. Workus 😉

Charles Bliss wrote:
> I sure wouldn't want Walt Talking (or Writing) about me for a long time.

[Anonymous]

I mentioned this a while back. Charge me more, just give me more in return.
Autodesk seems to think CAD is getting too expensive. While I won't
disagree, a $100-$200 increase of AIS sure beats the $10k price tag of AIP
any day.

--
Sean Dotson, PE
http://www.sdotson.com
Check the Inventor FAQ for most common questions
www.sdotson.com/faq.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
"Walt Jaquith" wrote in message
news:EA957C7EB85DDE22E71CC8C1F9A4B953@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> If Autodesk announced that they had acquired some fresh technology, and
they were putting it in Inventor, but needed to bump the subscription $100,
I'd be agreeable. I understand that Autodesk needs to be profitable. When
you have a chance to buy something and get it now as opposed to spending the
time and money to develop it in-house (time and money that could have been
used to mature other existing tools), that's a good option, and I'd be
willing to help pay for it.
>
> And all this stink could have been avoided. What a concept.
>
> Walt
> "Charles Bliss" wrote in message
news:3F232BC8.4030000@cbliss.com...
> This the best idea to date. I wouldn't be adversed to paying an extra
$100 increase. I am quite sure I would periodically use the AIP features
and suspect most others would as well. Seems to me that a hundred thousand
users paying a hundred bucks would probably generate more revenue for
product development than nine hundred bucks from a thousand users
(optimistic sales target).
>
> Perhaps we are on to something? Comments?
>
> Ltspd wrote:
>
>
> If AD wishes to upgrade everyone one on subscription for free and
increase subscription a reasonable amount I doubt you would hear as much
unrest
>
>

[Anonymous]

Make AIP the package we all bought into, water down a version for the
companies that only need a basic to perform some simple work using Iv.

SWX's yearly subscription is $1295 and I think if AD added a couple hundred
to theirs they still would be a better value that the comp with as much or
more to offer than the comp. They still need to work on the bugs,
regardless of who's software you use it will have bugs and issues.

Paul


"Sean Dotson" wrote in message
news:93D59D36D4BA6CFEDC4FABF01B071845@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> I mentioned this a while back. Charge me more, just give me more in
return.
> Autodesk seems to think CAD is getting too expensive. While I won't
> disagree, a $100-$200 increase of AIS sure beats the $10k price tag of AIP
> any day.
>
> --
> Sean Dotson, PE
> http://www.sdotson.com
> Check the Inventor FAQ for most common questions
> www.sdotson.com/faq.html
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> ------
> "Walt Jaquith" wrote in message
> news:EA957C7EB85DDE22E71CC8C1F9A4B953@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > If Autodesk announced that they had acquired some fresh technology, and
> they were putting it in Inventor, but needed to bump the subscription
$100,
> I'd be agreeable. I understand that Autodesk needs to be profitable.
When
> you have a chance to buy something and get it now as opposed to spending
the
> time and money to develop it in-house (time and money that could have been
> used to mature other existing tools), that's a good option, and I'd be
> willing to help pay for it.
> >
> > And all this stink could have been avoided. What a concept.
> >
> > Walt
> > "Charles Bliss" wrote in message
> news:3F232BC8.4030000@cbliss.com...
> > This the best idea to date. I wouldn't be adversed to paying an extra
> $100 increase. I am quite sure I would periodically use the AIP features
> and suspect most others would as well. Seems to me that a hundred
thousand
> users paying a hundred bucks would probably generate more revenue for
> product development than nine hundred bucks from a thousand users
> (optimistic sales target).
> >
> > Perhaps we are on to something? Comments?
> >
> > Ltspd wrote:
> >
> >
> > If AD wishes to upgrade everyone one on subscription for free and
> increase subscription a reasonable amount I doubt you would hear as much
> unrest
> >
> >
>
>

[Anonymous]

I really did not assume you didn't believe it. Just
frustration showing through. As I told my boss the oter day, I have been through
this since the first days of CAD. We started with CALMA, up through many
versions of AutoCad, then Designer and Desktop and even had to bite the bullet
when many of our Eng. and Designers convinced management that Pro-E was the only
software that could be used to do their jobs.

So I have seen the best of the worst and worst of
the worst. At 57 I am getting to old for this.

Those not using Pro in ur offices are still ver
very very productive and cost affective with AutoCad and MDT6. We can weather
the storm a while longer to see how AIS/AIP washes out in the end. I did however
notice ADSK stock dropped .21 the other day. They maybe getting the message up
the ladder but I still do not see them turning from the AIP ships
course. I can onlu hope they do not drop the ball with AIS, we were close to
starting to se IV but 7 still did not remedy what we needed
healed.

[Anonymous]

Under the current conditions I would accept a reasonable increase based on
inflation, i.e. conditions outside of Autodesk's control.

Steve

"Charles Bliss" wrote in message
news:3F232BC8.4030000@cbliss.com...
> This the best idea to date. I wouldn't be adversed to paying an extra
$100 increase. I am quite sure I would periodically use the AIP features
and suspect most others would as well. Seems to me that a hundred thousand
users paying a hundred bucks would probably generate more revenue for
product development than nine hundred bucks from a thousand users
(optimistic sales target).
>
> Perhaps we are on to something? Comments?
>
> Ltspd wrote:
>
>
> If AD wishes to upgrade everyone one on subscription for free and
increase subscription a reasonable amount I doubt you would hear as much
unrest
>

[Anonymous]

Out of this whole sordid affair, THIS is a solution
that I think most people would accept.  Before the subscription service
that was started with the Inventor series, Autodesk had to rely on convincing
people to buy the next version of Autocad/MDT/Arch Desktop/etc. in order to make
money.  Now, they have a guaranteed annual revenue stream so long as they
show enhancements and don't tick off the consumers.

Why is it so difficult to admit that a mistake was
made, then do exactly as you have suggested by SLIGHTLY bumping up the
annual rate for us and placing the AIP functions in a single package as (like
everyone has pointed out) was promised when we originally signed on? 
Autodesk continues to have revenue, the users don't feel slighted, and Inventor
continues upon the road to greatness.

I wonder if creating a new post outlining this, and
having everyone who would agree to it reply would have any effect? (kind of like
a petition?  We seem to be doing a lot of that in California at the moment
;-) )

Long winded comment to basically say that yes,
LtSpd, Charles, Sean, and everyone who suggested it, I think it is an excellent
idea.

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"Charles Bliss" <
href="mailto:cbliss@cbliss.com">cbliss@cbliss.com> wrote in message
href="news:3F232BC8.4030000@cbliss.com">news:3F232BC8.4030000@cbliss.com...

This
the best idea to date.  I wouldn't be adversed to paying an extra $100
increase.  I am quite sure I would periodically use the AIP features and
suspect most others would as well.  Seems to me that a hundred thousand
users paying a hundred bucks would probably generate more revenue for product
development than nine hundred bucks from a thousand users (optimistic sales
target).

Perhaps we are on to something?  Comments?

Ltspd
@ wrote:

type="cite">

<snip>

  If AD wishes to upgrade
everyone one on subscription for free and increase subscription a reasonable
amount I doubt you would hear as much
unrest

[Anonymous]

I'll second that, provided that those of us who has left the subscription
program since the current Pro scam became known are able to resume without
extra cost.

Peter

"Alan Rennick" skrev i en meddelelse
news:3E1AD8F652983DD11B2ECC790632CD67@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Out of this whole sordid affair, THIS is a solution that I think most
people would accept. Before the subscription service that was started with
the Inventor series, Autodesk had to rely on convincing people to buy the
next version of Autocad/MDT/Arch Desktop/etc. in order to make money. Now,
they have a guaranteed annual revenue stream so long as they show
enhancements and don't tick off the consumers.
>
> Why is it so difficult to admit that a mistake was made, then do exactly
as you have suggested by SLIGHTLY bumping up the annual rate for us and
placing the AIP functions in a single package as (like everyone has pointed
out) was promised when we originally signed on? Autodesk continues to have
revenue, the users don't feel slighted, and Inventor continues upon the road
to greatness.
>
> I wonder if creating a new post outlining this, and having everyone who
would agree to it reply would have any effect? (kind of like a petition? We
seem to be doing a lot of that in California at the moment 😉 )
>
> Long winded comment to basically say that yes, LtSpd, Charles, Sean, and
everyone who suggested it, I think it is an excellent idea.
> "Charles Bliss" wrote in message
news:3F232BC8.4030000@cbliss.com...
> This the best idea to date. I wouldn't be adversed to paying an extra
$100 increase. I am quite sure I would periodically use the AIP features
and suspect most others would as well. Seems to me that a hundred thousand
users paying a hundred bucks would probably generate more revenue for
product development than nine hundred bucks from a thousand users
(optimistic sales target).
>
> Perhaps we are on to something? Comments?
>
> Ltspd wrote:
>
>
> If AD wishes to upgrade everyone one on subscription for free and
increase subscription a reasonable amount I doubt you would hear as much
unrest
>
>

[Anonymous]

I agree with this concept.  maybe the $100
bucks might be negotiable since they have dropped the 15% discount previously
offered, but still it seems the logical approach.

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"Charles Bliss" <
href="mailto:cbliss@cbliss.com">cbliss@cbliss.com> wrote in message
href="news:3F232BC8.4030000@cbliss.com">news:3F232BC8.4030000@cbliss.com...

This
the best idea to date.  I wouldn't be adversed to paying an extra $100
increase.  I am quite sure I would periodically use the AIP features and
suspect most others would as well.  Seems to me that a hundred thousand
users paying a hundred bucks would probably generate more revenue for product
development than nine hundred bucks from a thousand users (optimistic sales
target).

Perhaps we are on to something?  Comments?

Ltspd
@ wrote:

type="cite">

<snip>

  If AD wishes to upgrade
everyone one on subscription for free and increase subscription a reasonable
amount I doubt you would hear as much
unrest

[Anonymous]

15% discount. Yeah right, like we are all already accepting of THAT one -
like it ever really existed. .

"Jimmy Carr" wrote in message
news:0B5B3B55BA1B5E791EC3272204812B2E@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
| I agree with this concept. maybe the $100 bucks might be negotiable since
they have dropped the 15% discount previously offered, but still it seems
the logical approach.

[Anonymous]

Point taken. Just wondering. Did anybody here "not" take advantage of the
15% pre-pay and as a consequence get billed the additional 15% for just in
time payment?
"Ron Crain" wrote in message
news:F5FE4543EE28CCBB93D79B9CB2B6949D@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> 15% discount. Yeah right, like we are all already accepting of THAT one -
> like it ever really existed. .
>
> "Jimmy Carr" wrote in message
> news:0B5B3B55BA1B5E791EC3272204812B2E@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> | I agree with this concept. maybe the $100 bucks might be negotiable
since
> they have dropped the 15% discount previously offered, but still it seems
> the logical approach.
>
>

[Anonymous]

Ltspd wrote: "If AD wishes to upgrade everyone one on subscription for free
and increase subscription a reasonable amount I doubt you would hear as much
unrest"

Charles Bliss wrote: "This the best idea to date."

Alan Rennick: "Out of this whole sordid affair, THIS is a solution that I
think most people would accept."


I almost did not write another response because Autodesk's negative attitude
towards me as a customer is eroding my positive feelings about Inventor and
its capabilities. As a result I am feeling pretty apathetic about now and
willing to run whatever is needed to get the job done. So I will likely run
whatever my customer is running and if they have no preference, I will then
run whatever costs me the least amount of money. Since I can currently do my
job with Inventor 7, that most likely means not paying maintenance or buying
any upgrades until the industry shakes out well enough to discern a clear
preference for one package over another. I will then acquire that and use it
for the foreseeable future.

That said, upgrading everyone on subscription for free and increasing the
subscription a reasonable amount is not sufficient for me to stay on
maintenance. It addresses the current crisis, but does nothing to assure
this will not happen again in two to three years.

It is only a matter of time before we see more application specific
extensions and CAE tools (such as FEA various calculators) in Inventor. The
proposed solution does nothing to address the concern that Autodesk will
just release those as an "Engineering Edition" or possibly even a series of
separate that I would have to purchase and maintain. So we will once again
face the prospect of paying for upgrades over and above the maintenance we
will have already paid.

I would not be so concerned had Autodesk not repeatedly demonstrated their
desire to do this already (with the MDT to Inventor crossgrade and the
Inventor Pro upgrade). But now that they have abused our trust, I am
unwilling to give them the benefit of the doubt. They will have to
demonstrably commit to the understanding that my maintenance dollars are
paying for their premier "all-in-one" mechanical design tool, irrespective
of what they choose call it. If I am paying for maintenance, I do not want
to be faced with also purchasing upgrades every few years.

If Autodesk is unwilling to do this, I see no choice but to sit tight and
only pay for upgrades that I know provide a return on investment that makes
purchasing them worthwhile, assuming my customer does not state a preference
of course. That way I know I am getting a worthwhile improvement at the time
I pay for it, unlike the current proposition where I pay first and then hope
Autodesk will give us something worthwhile for my money.

Given Autodesk's current practice of blackmail pricing (pricing upgrades
excessively high to force users to subscribe to maintenance), I need only
pass on two or three upgrades to accumulate the cost of a new license.
Assuming I can pass on more upgrades than that, the additional money I save
can then be used for something else altogether. Of course when you consider
that Autodesk does not seem to be winning the hearts and minds of the user
community coupled with their practice of blackmail pricing, once I am no
longer on maintenance I will likely not be upgrading to a subsequent release
of Inventor anyway. And when I do buy another package, it most likely will
not be Inventor.


Sincerely,

Michael Trull
Owner
Design & Development Engineering
Apex, NC

[Anonymous]

Michael,

Your plan sounds well thought out. Autodesk's shift in vision for their
Inventor software will have many people waiting for proof of value before
spending their money, rather than having a spirit of investment in
AutoDesk's efforts.

Anthony Fettig


"Michael Trull" wrote in message
news:112F3DA8F676B79CA9DC2E83A706FDC1@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Ltspd wrote: "If AD wishes to upgrade everyone one on subscription for
free
> and increase subscription a reasonable amount I doubt you would hear as
much
> unrest"
>
> Charles Bliss wrote: "This the best idea to date."
>
> Alan Rennick: "Out of this whole sordid affair, THIS is a solution that I
> think most people would accept."
>
>
> I almost did not write another response because Autodesk's negative
attitude
> towards me as a customer is eroding my positive feelings about Inventor
and
> its capabilities. As a result I am feeling pretty apathetic about now and
> willing to run whatever is needed to get the job done. So I will likely
run
> whatever my customer is running and if they have no preference, I will
then
> run whatever costs me the least amount of money. Since I can currently do
my
> job with Inventor 7, that most likely means not paying maintenance or
buying
> any upgrades until the industry shakes out well enough to discern a clear
> preference for one package over another. I will then acquire that and use
it
> for the foreseeable future.
>
> That said, upgrading everyone on subscription for free and increasing the
> subscription a reasonable amount is not sufficient for me to stay on
> maintenance. It addresses the current crisis, but does nothing to assure
> this will not happen again in two to three years.
>
> It is only a matter of time before we see more application specific
> extensions and CAE tools (such as FEA various calculators) in Inventor.
The
> proposed solution does nothing to address the concern that Autodesk will
> just release those as an "Engineering Edition" or possibly even a series
of
> separate that I would have to purchase and maintain. So we will once again
> face the prospect of paying for upgrades over and above the maintenance we
> will have already paid.
>
> I would not be so concerned had Autodesk not repeatedly demonstrated their
> desire to do this already (with the MDT to Inventor crossgrade and the
> Inventor Pro upgrade). But now that they have abused our trust, I am
> unwilling to give them the benefit of the doubt. They will have to
> demonstrably commit to the understanding that my maintenance dollars are
> paying for their premier "all-in-one" mechanical design tool, irrespective
> of what they choose call it. If I am paying for maintenance, I do not want
> to be faced with also purchasing upgrades every few years.
>
> If Autodesk is unwilling to do this, I see no choice but to sit tight and
> only pay for upgrades that I know provide a return on investment that
makes
> purchasing them worthwhile, assuming my customer does not state a
preference
> of course. That way I know I am getting a worthwhile improvement at the
time
> I pay for it, unlike the current proposition where I pay first and then
hope
> Autodesk will give us something worthwhile for my money.
>
> Given Autodesk's current practice of blackmail pricing (pricing upgrades
> excessively high to force users to subscribe to maintenance), I need only
> pass on two or three upgrades to accumulate the cost of a new license.
> Assuming I can pass on more upgrades than that, the additional money I
save
> can then be used for something else altogether. Of course when you
consider
> that Autodesk does not seem to be winning the hearts and minds of the user
> community coupled with their practice of blackmail pricing, once I am no
> longer on maintenance I will likely not be upgrading to a subsequent
release
> of Inventor anyway. And when I do buy another package, it most likely will
> not be Inventor.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Michael Trull
> Owner
> Design & Development Engineering
> Apex, NC
>
>

[Anonymous]

Enter my vote for the proposed solution of upgrading all current
subscription holders to IVP with a reasonable increase in subscription cost.
Dump the "Professional" moniker. Keep AIS as the premier package and create
a "Lite" versioin.

We currently have 2 seats of AutoCAD. One seat is just Acad 2004 on
subscription. The second seat is on the AIS subscription (only one Inventor
license). The subscriptions are up for renewal at different times, and we
were going to upgrade to a second seat of Inventor as the AutoCAD
subscription renewal nears. Not gonna happen. We'll be staying with
AutoCAD 2004 and one seat of Inventor (whatever version that may be as my
subscription expires next April). We are investigating other software so we
can have 2 seats of true solid modeling in the event that Autodesk can't
resolve this issue to satisfy the users. Yes, it will be a pain in the
buttocks to learn and become proficient with new software, but we're
professionals. We've all done it before.

Mark Triton
Electro/Mechanical Designer

[Anonymous]

I recall reading an interview with CEO Carol, and the basic tone was that
she was gushing "Just look around, our software is used for designing almost
everything you see!!!"

It seems to me they will need some real humble pie, perhaps quarterly
earnings reports or the like, to realize what they've done.

I think Inventor is a great tool, and really want it to develop and succeed.
But I was also a real OS/2 fan as well.....

"LandPman" wrote in message
news:f17ad32.69@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Walt,
> I bet you're right. I can't imagine that they have been made fully aware
of the discontent over this situation. We should probably find out who is at
the top of the food chain and send them a few letters of concern. Afterall,
if you don't get satisfaction from the guy on the floor, you ask for his/her
supervisor. If this attitude, and approval of it, does really go all the way
to the top, we would at least know where we stand. A stamp is cheaper than
switching software. Does anyone have a name(s) and address(s)?
>

[Anonymous]

Your confused? I'm confused and curious, what
concern is it of yours why I'm using Inventor and why are you looking in on this
forum?

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"grundey" <
href="mailto:kgrundey@iowatelecom.net">kgrundey@iowatelecom.net> wrote
in message
href="news:f17ad32.73@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f17ad32.73@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

I
am not an Inventor user, but I do use a competing system (beat out Inventor in
a benchmark), and I am a bit confused. Inventor has always lagged woefully
behind both Solid Edge and Solid Works (that's why the company I'm with is not
using Inventor even though we were/still are a heavy AutoCAD user). Logic
would predict that even though Inventor appears to be coming up fast, they
will never catch up because the competing systems are hovering around a 6-8
month release cycle and move that much farther ahead of Inventor because they
are not standing still either (incidentally, that explains why Inventor can't
aford to fix all the bugs, they have too much catch up to do).

My question is, why did you decide to purchase Inventor instead of the
competing product that were (and still are) ahead of inventor? You didn't buy
into promises that a salesperson told you, did you?

In any case, engineering time is quite costly, and efficiency is
everything. If the need to switch is there, it is generally very easy to
justify the cost of the purchase and re-work to get to another system that is
much more efficient. Just do your homework next
time!!!

[Anonymous]

Actually, IF you renewed BEFORE the expiration date, and your reseller
charged you the full amount, you should be due a refund from the reseller.

Dennis

Ron Crain wrote:

>15% discount. Yeah right, like we are all already accepting of THAT one -
>like it ever really existed. .
>
>"Jimmy Carr" wrote in message
>news:0B5B3B55BA1B5E791EC3272204812B2E@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
>| I agree with this concept. maybe the $100 bucks might be negotiable since
>they have dropped the 15% discount previously offered, but still it seems
>the logical approach.
>
>
>
>

--
Dennis Jeffrey
Autodesk Product Consulting and Training
Center for Design Excellence
http://www.design-excellence.com
260-459-1311 ext 221 or 800-550-6070 ext 221

[Anonymous]

subscription holders to IVP with a reasonable increase in subscription cost.
Dump the "Professional" moniker. Keep AIS as the premier package and create
a "Lite" versioin.>

That has my vote also! (of course Adesk is laughing now; like my little puny
vote means anything anyway)

After all what difference will our 4 seats (or lack of them) make to such a
giant like Adesk anyway?

[cadsysmgr]

Don't forget all those door stops Albert.

[hi-lex]

That sounds like a good idea, you could count me in, if it actualy happened. Seeing how this is the "One Last AIS/AIP posting" I don't see Autodesk offering anything more on this subject than they already have. I guess we will have to wait for the corp. response on Friday to see if they have anymore to say on the subject or not.



Lets hope they do.