I think it is a stretch by AutoCAD to say that they are doing this all because of trends of history. Yes, by all means, there have been companies that have failed to move forward that get trampled in the dust. And I won't go as far as to say that this is solely for money, but it cannot be denied that if a customer only updates its software every 7 years, AutoCAD earns less money than they do by requiring them to pay a rental fee yearly. If the company loses money, the board of directors and stockholders will take action.
But the flaw in the whole thing is that AutoCAD made these moves without inquiring into its own customers as to whether they see a need for these moves. If as AutoCAD has said, they are seeing these changes in the design industry, then their own customers should be able to speak aptly as to whether the proposed move by AutoCAD fits into how they are doing things or not. To my knowledge, this was not done or if it was, it was done with a poor sampling (proably on their biggest customers). But the biggest share of licenses are by small companies. Were they queried? I know I was not. But I only have 4 or 5 copies of LT. Who cares whether I see evolving trends in design?
The next observation is that simply put, AutoCAD is now a lemming. Rather than blaze a trail, it is now content to say that because others are doing it, so shall we. That AutoCAD has gone from a leader to a follower is sad. The elimination of the perpetual licenses was not necessary. It was always just what it was. A snapshot in time. It was never a promise of anything more. You buy it and you got what the program could do at the time of buying it. How does this prevent the future from happening? Simple answer is that it does not.
There has always been signs that AutoCAD is uncaring to its customers. The fact that AutoCAD LT had not network support was a big sign. Those who only need 2D have been like lent in a belly button. No one wants to touch them. The elimination of the perpetual licenses is another especially when claiming that not doing so makes the company fall behind the pack. Yes, by all means, look towards the future of having your license follow you to whatever device you want. That is wonderfuil. But does such innovation actually represent the majority the AutoCAD users and their needs? The simple answer is that it probably does not.
Now, a company has to protect itself. I do not intend to imply that a company should run itself out of business. But AutoCAD should not hide its motives. The elimination of the perpetual licenses does not prevent the future it sees. Desktop subscriptions could move on and those who want to use it could. Those who do not, would not have to.
Any accountant can tell you that more frequent and more predictable revenue payments is more desirable than infrequent payments. And one aspect of the elimination of the perpetual license is those more frequent revenue payments. Again, I do not want to say that it was the only reason, but any blunt inspection of the matter sees that it was not the future of design that was the drove to the elimination of the perpetual licenses. Design as we see it could have continued. Those who want multiple devices could have gone with the new subscriptions and those who see design staying where it is could have stayed with the perpetual licenses.
The big lie is that the perpetual license had to be removed for the sake of the future.
