topic Re: Solidworks and Me in Inventor Forum

Solidworks and Me

Cris-Ideas — Wed, 02 Jul 2025 06:53:02 GMT

Hi just want to share this

Some of you may know me from years I spent on this forum using AI since 2008.

I have been and still am active inventor user with quite high Inventor experience level, as I like to think of my self.

But lately I decided to buy (being sole trader) SolidWorks.

I have 13 years of legacy projects and libraries I have created on my own over this time in AI.

But Autodesk policy to switch to subscription only model made me finally to shift towards SW.

I will of course keep my AI 2021 perpetual license but I also expect that in some time I may fully switch to SW.

I am sure there are other users like me, and this should make Autodesk think about their decision to force subscription only model.

It is quite obvious that this will not change as this business model gives Autodesk great leverage over their users.

Cris.

Re: Solidworks and Me

CCarreiras — Wed, 02 Jul 2025 10:32:51 GMT

Hi @Cris-Ideas !

The thing is... i believe all the other CAD brands will move also to this kind of business (software as a service) as soon as they technically can.
The thing is, Autodesk was the first in the cad world, following Microsoft, Adobe, etc etc. It's the market evolving and nobody can do nothing about that.

Re: Solidworks and Me

karthur1 — Wed, 02 Jul 2025 12:53:01 GMT

We looked at Solidworks many years ago when we decided to move into 3D design. It came down between AD and SW. So the only experience I have with SW is from 20+ years ago looking at an evaluation copy. Then to me, it seemed like there was many more dialogs and clicks than it was in Inventor. May not be the case today.

I think it is interesting to have an Inventor guru now using SW. I feel like both have their strengths. Maybe you can share a few things you think is better with each package.

Stay in touch and good luck with the move!

Kirk

Re: Solidworks and Me

Cris-Ideas — Wed, 02 Jul 2025 13:36:09 GMT

I fundamentaly disagree with the point of view "nobody can do anything about that".

We have influence on reality around us individually and by various groups, like software users for example.

And I do not believe that every software supplier will switch to software as a service model, as at least some understand that this option is not something that users appreciate.

I had not so long time ago bought another software package, and selection I made was hugely impacted by the fact that this company is intending to keep "license + subscription" business model.

I must stress again that my, and others, position of refusing to accept subscription only software approach is not based on reluctance to pay some cost annually, but solely the fact that if I for any reason decide I do no longer need to maintain this software I also loose access to all my previous work that I did in this software.

This is the main problem.

I could even accept software model that is subscription only but with ability to access in view and export to open formats threw free fully functional viewer, something like Inventor in viewer only mode, but + option to save as in open formats.

There are a lot of options to open DWG, DOC,DOCX, XML,XLS, email archives and so on.

And there are also open source programs to open this files.

So it is not a problem with "subscription only model" for MS Office, and other such programs. Also they are much less expensive that Autodesk packages.

Therefore my expectations for Autodesk are also higher in regards to what they provide in the package and it's maintenance.

I fundamentaly can't, and will not accept software licensing scheme that de-facto holds my work as a hostage to get leverage over me.

In this scenario company can do whatever it wants in terms of pricing and de-facto users are powerless.

The sole idea of structuring licensing s heme that way by the software provider is indication of bad intentions in my view.

Therefore I prefer companies that do not do that and provide software on license + subscription basis. And I intend to pay subscription every year untill I decide I no longer need this software, because I am also interested in having up to date software.

So in principle it is not problem of cost, but rather problem of how client-company relationship is drawn in the licensing scheme.

As a result I am becoming SW user previously being AI user, and I was happy with this software.

Chris

Re: Solidworks and Me

hollypapp65 — Wed, 02 Jul 2025 14:20:18 GMT

SW put the "subscription" under maintenance.

Without it, you won't get support or update.

I'll see you in the SWYM.

Re: Solidworks and Me

MKE_Howard — Wed, 02 Jul 2025 17:49:26 GMT

''One day you'll own nothing and be happy''

Re: Solidworks and Me

SharkDesign — Thu, 03 Jul 2025 05:51:20 GMT

The world is based on subscriptions now, Autodesk aren't going to go back to the old model.

I'm with you though, I personally hate subscription/time bomb software and I've actively not bought products after they've switched to that model, because as a hobbiest in a lot of things like Adobe etc, there is a lot of time where I don't even launch it, so why should I be paying for it?

Re: Solidworks and Me

CCarreiras — Thu, 03 Jul 2025 09:12:47 GMT

@SharkDesign, Sooner or later (More sooner than later) you will pay as you go, just like you do now with electricity or water in your home...

Re: Solidworks and Me

Cris-Ideas — Sun, 06 Jul 2025 09:16:42 GMT

It is my point of view.

If users will actively select software they want to purchase and pay yearly maintenance fee, based on the licensing model those companies follow, and will openly state that reason for this decision was the licensing scheme, than companies that do offer particular licensing scheme will be more aware of the users preference.

And if such company will have a user pool that is mostly in favor of given licensing scheme they will be less likely to change.

Also I had conversations with some people from software providers for the packages I bought, and openly asked them about their views on licensing schemes.

From, some I got answers that they are not considering going to subscription only as they do not believe this is the right way in principle.

So there are people out there that share this view on licensing, and there are options for software purchase that comes with fair licensing scheme.

Cris.

Re: Solidworks and Me

Cris-Ideas — Sun, 06 Jul 2025 09:31:04 GMT

@CCarreiras

Comparing particular software package with water or electricity is rather far fetched.

When I change water or electricity provider they do not require me to replace all of my appliances to run on "their kind of water now".

Also infrastructure that runs water and electricity for all providers on given area (country for instance) is in most cases either directly owned buy the state or at least under strict control of the state.

So more fair comparison between pay-as-you-go schemes for software and water or electricity would be if all software was forced to use open file save format.

If all m software was using open file format, can be proprietary but open to the public, than this would be equivalent to water and electricity.

I would not be forced to replace all my appliances every time I decided my current supplier is trying to rip me off on price or quality and I decide to change.

I simply go with other software that, perhaps gives me different functionality for different price, but still I have access to all MY work that I did.

Currently more suitable comparison between software licensing and other aspect of life would be to compare it with service for luxury cars.

Say you buy BUGATI VEYRON, that want to charge you than 9500 EUR to replace 0,80 EUR VW part they use in their car.

But buying Engineering software I am not considering buying Luxury Car to show off but I consider buying a TOOL to do my work. So above comparison is for two very different type of thing.

Cris.

Re: Solidworks and Me

CCarreiras — Mon, 07 Jul 2025 10:53:43 GMT

@Cris-Ideas wrote:

@CCarreiras

Comparing particular software package with water or electricity is rather far fetched.

When I change water or electricity provider they do not require me to replace all of my appliances to run on "their kind of water now".

Cris.

Well.... in my case, I had to... I had to switch to a smart system, and some how directly or indirectly, I had to pay for it... 🙂

I'm not here to open a big discussion with you, I clearly understand your point, and a share most of it with you... what I was trying to say was that this will not get back, and the worst is, the others will follow this market trend very soon..

Cheers.

Re: Solidworks and Me

jletcher — Mon, 07 Jul 2025 12:48:15 GMT

I agree with you.

I am now looking at Solid Works and Solid Edge to change over to. I hate both but Inventor is getting just as bad as they are but don;t force you into an extortion fee. We are still on 2019 because they are not improving Inventor but making it worse.

If you look at Autodesk stock, they were not moving but after they told stock holders they will force an extortion fee the stock shot up.

We have years and years of files, Autodesk is counting on those files to get extortion money or lose years of data.

Pay or lose the right to use the software, and now with the new AI, they want you to log in to train their AI to take your job.

After talking to Solid Works sales team, they will keep both, subscription and the perpetual license because more and more Autcad users are switching, and now Inventor people are looking to switch.

Just wish more people would wake up and cancel their subscription with Autodesk, then they would listen to the end users more and not the stock holders.

Re: Solidworks and Me

mluterman — Mon, 07 Jul 2025 16:25:49 GMT

Hey, I don't like to digitally download my coupons (to the bleepin' phone app) at the supermarket either, but guess what I have to do?

Re: Solidworks and Me

hollypapp65 — Mon, 07 Jul 2025 20:10:54 GMT

@jletcher wrote:
After talking to Solid Works sales team, they will keep both, subscription and the perpetual license because more and more Autcad users are switching, and now Inventor people are looking to switch.

Just keeping all the fish in one net.

They're pushing everyone to the online version.

People jumping from one sinking boat to another.

Re: Solidworks and Me

CCarreiras — Tue, 08 Jul 2025 09:53:14 GMT

@hollypapp65 i agree with you... in my experience with dozens of customers... in the last years Dassault is doing more sketchy moves than Autodesk... but... I'm not here to evaluate each one decisions, but i believe that moving now is a waste of several years of work and knowledge... because the other boat (all the boats) are going in the same direction... sinking badly soon... in your opinion...

For those who are claiming years of work and a big database of work... if you want to open these files, Inventor read only will work... and for free.

If you need to rework them to sell your work, you can buy the software, buy tokens for a period of time, etc... Is this an ideal option? I don't know, but it's not so bad if you start looking for other boats.

Re: Solidworks and Me

jletcher — Tue, 08 Jul 2025 09:57:01 GMT

Don't be pushed, solved

Re: Solidworks and Me

hollypapp65 — Tue, 08 Jul 2025 19:20:22 GMT

I'm not the one paying, work company is.

They don't really care. It's another tool.

Subscription is good, 100% write off.

I can use both, just need to pay me more for SolidDoesn'tWork 🤑

About SW maintenance:

https://forum.cadmunity.com/t/is-maintenance-subscription-worth-it/5462

Re: Solidworks and Me

SharkDesign — Fri, 11 Jul 2025 05:54:39 GMT

Unfortunately we're all locked into using our software so it is very difficult to just switch to another CAD that doesn't have subs. You effectively lose all your legacy data, no matter how good they say their translation system is.