Keep perpetual licenses

[Anonymous]

Heres a great idea. Why don't we have software that you continue to own and be able to use even after you have paid for it?

Firstly I will say that I am a fan of Autodesk software and I do think they make some great products. I think desktop subscription is a great idea to allow it as an option and will no doubt help a good number of companies access CAD software where otherwise they would not.

That said, I am not a fan of having all new purchases forced onto desktop subscription. Our company is of the size where most of our licenses would be perpetual maintenance subscription purchases if we were given the choice.

Software is an asset to a business. Changing the licensing model is removing that asset. Once I stop paying I effectively have nothing.

The new licensing model is clearly designed by the Autodesk sales team as an effort to drive a consistent and dependant revenue stream. It gives them the power to raise the prices even higher and users will have to pay it or lose access to their software. I do not like being held to ranson and the new licensing model stinks of that.

One of the first things I did was look up FREE open source CAD software and for at least a small number of our users this is what I will be recommending at our next review meeting

[Anonymous]

DOJ Antitrust...interesting...fight fire with fire?

[pendean]

>>>...Autodesk is actually on the forefront of this licensing model,,,<<<
Adobe beat Autodesk to the subscription punch.

Read the article NO PAY NO PLAY
http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/

>>>...Vote with your wallet...<<<
That's the way to do it in a market economy, not some DOJ blah blah blah, that goes nowhere for 10-years then everyone settles and you get a $1 as your share of the payout.

[Anonymous]

I work for a major tech firm, and we have already begun our transition over to Solidworks as a direct result of Autodesk's discontinuation of perpetual licenses. Our go-forward policy is to use Solidoworks for all future design work. We just purchased 14 perpetual Solidworks licenses to get us started. We are keeping 4 Autodesk network licenses active until our transition to Solidworks is complete.

[borges33]

Even if you have older versions of autoCAD ex.  2012, 2014 or 2015...........   there is not so much of a deference.......who ever works wirh autoCAD don't really work with the new stuff anyway...

[mw111368]

I support a use base of 250 users, and although I took the opportunity to BUY a few more liceneses before the end of perpetuals, my next task will be to assesss what I replace AutoCAD with. In comparison with our 3D cad solution, AutoCAD is already overpriced, but this new pricing system is an absolute joke, and doesn't even warrant consideration.

[vincent_de_bruijn]

They're failing, and they know it.

"Autodesk plans to reduce staffing levels in the near-term by approximately 10%, or approximately 925 positions, and to consolidate certain leased facilities." http://investors.autodesk.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=117861&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=2135242

"It’s noteworthy that though the transition is still underway, the company has started seeing strong growth in new subscription additions, which represented more than half of the total new subscription additions in the quarter. However, in the near term, the company’s profitability will likely be affected by investments in cloud-based infrastructure and marketing initiatives."

I already had a phonecall from an Autodesk representative offering the new subscriptions. Bug off.

And it gets even worse. 

http://www.upfrontezine.com/2016/03/coming-october-1-autodesks-future-is-different.html

"A bland March-15th press release from Autodesk welcoming new directors to its board possibly marked the beginning of the end of the company as we know it. The new directors are three activist investors representing firms who each purchased 5% or more of ADSK shares. As per the way things are done, they've agreed to do nothing until after 30 September. According to Bloomberg, the usual time-of-peace lasts a year, and so these six months are usually short.

As of October 1, the three get to start swinging their battle axes, possibly with the assistance of other sympathetic directors on the board. (They will need help, as together the three control only 16% of shares; they need a majority of 51%.) We know their plan: they want to make "changes to management, operations, cost structure, and strategic plans" to drive up the ADSK price."

Once you're on board, they're going to drive prices skyhigh.

[vincent_de_bruijn]

Next up are the local CAD dealers.

I've been invited for an Autodesk survey. All questions related to how important the local dealer / salesman really is to us customers, and if we would be interested to buy our products online from Autodesk.

This worries me. 

[Anonymous]

It's all a moot point really, most of us are moving to other products. I've enjoyed the discussion with you all but will unsubscribe I disgust with Autodesk who really don't give a rats.
Cheers.

[felice.s]

Hi @vincent_de_bruijn, just FYI, I looked into the survey you refer to (I was curious myself) and found that we conduct an annual survey to understand trends in customer buying preferences.  The survey you recieved was one of these.  We ask questions about how customers like to buy as well as specifics about actual purchase experiences.  This time we focused on Autodesk.com to gain a better understanding about e-commerce preferences.  We found this year, as we have in prior years, that many customers love their partners and do not plan to change how they choose to purchase Autodesk offerings.

Regards,
Felice

[vincent_de_bruijn]

The survey by Illuminas hasn't even finished yet. I got a reminder yesterday to participate.

There's no way Autodesk has already made firm decisions on a pending survey.

The survey itself lacked quality bigtime. At least a dozen of the questions missed complete words, rendering them incomprehensible.

You would expect someone to check a survey before sending it out to customers.

There are two long standing Autodesk directors who HAVE made decisions. Read through the lines.

http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20160407006422/en/Autodesk-Directors-Dawson-Halvorson-Stand-Re...

Basically they are saying: good luck Carl.

I predict a carefully planned Adobe merger.

[brotherkennyh]

Whats happening on the board is possibly a reflection of certain directors real expectations.

Carl Bass seems completely resolved to push through the subscription only model and speaks out to silence any nay sayers on the board and between the shareholders. This change is a big gamble. In 12 months he may be celabrating the latest profit figures or he may be resigning.

A representative from Autodesk did call to ask how I felt about the changes and how I valued my reseller. I have nothing but good things to say and would rather use our reseller than go direct to Autodesk. They always give us a competitive price and I only get sales calls relevant to what we do!

The representative from autodesek seemed surprised and unsure how to react when I told him my views on the subscription model. Suffice to say that I did not hold back(I was polite though). I told him that we have already moved over to other products as a result.

We have completely removed AutoCAD LT and are using draftsight.

We do still use full AutoCAD, Inventor and Vault, we were much more commited to these when the changes were announced and we have active maintenance. If we could replace these easily then we would and will be looking into this as we need to expand our number of licenses.

I am personally looking into supporting the FreeCAD project. It certainly won't replace Inventor, but may fulfill the basic needs of a few designers in the concept stages of a project, thus reducing our dependance on greedy tyrants. IT also supports VR, which I will be giving a good test as soon as I can get my hands on a rift.

[pendean]

DraftSight Pro is not a lot of money but give you way more tools than the crippled free version (field test it, you'll see what's missing) if you decide to go that route.

Don't cripple your staff with the allure of "free": there is always a price to pay for 'free'.

[felice.s]

Thanks for your feedback, @vincent_de_bruijn, on the survey quality.  We are forwarding your comments to our survey and localization vendors.

 - just FYI.

[vincent_de_bruijn]

Q1 2017: Autodesk reported a net loss of $173 million compared to a positive net gain of $19.1 million a year earlier.

Autodesk CEO Carl Bass said the quarter overall was a transitional one, as customers acclimate to the company's subscription-based business model and cloud-based software.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Maybe he refers to acclimating to the concurrent offerings?

[pendean]

The real money starts rolling in next Feb 1, in the year 2017. Then we'll know for sure if this transition is a boom or bust for them.

Stay tuned.

[borges33]

          Until then we will continue to search out new cad programs that are assessable to greater majority.

I wonder if this Subscription Base is in line with Bernie Sanders ideology?

[DaveWortley]

I am extremely frustrated with Autodesk at the moment. On the one hand they enforce this subscription model which is going to increase our costs, increase their revenues and on the other hand they close the Shanghai office and badly hit the development of some of their biggest products.  So short-sited to just kill off entire development teams with an axe.  Years of knowledge and experience flushed down the drain. 

[j.ches]

I mainly want to express how upsetting this is not being able to buy perpetual licenses.  I was told yesterday I still have until July 31st but must buy a suite.  Hopefully my comments will be seen as constructive and not demeaning.  I am posting to this thread which has already been started because clearly others do not like the removal of perpetual licenses.  I'm in the position where an additional license would be helpful, but not necessary, and seeing that my options are limited I've already decided not to go the subscription route.

It used to be that software companies would release new versions because improvements were made. Users would WANT to buy the new software because of the obvious and desired upgrades. There hasn't been any significant advancement in your CAD software for quite some time. And now you FORCE your customer base into rentals to make up for lost money. Instead you should be improving your software so that we WANT to buy it and are not FORCED to buy it. The only thing you're doing is forcing me to look at AutoCAD alternatives.

You may be adding features to your software, but are they features the users want or need?  Focus more on improving your software.  If your product release cycle is every year, make significant changes that people want each year.  No one is telling you to make new versions each year.  That business model is gone.  The changes implemented do not warrant a release every year.  I cannot comment for all the software AutoDesk releases, but for AutoCAD I can do everything I need to do with an early 2000 version that I can do with the latest version.  That means, no added benefit to new software.  That means, no need to buy a new version.  I see one of the biggest flaws to this rental idea is AutoDesk thinking users desire the latest release.  Once again, make significant changes or improvements to your software so that we WANT to buy it. 

[pendean]

>>>...but for AutoCAD I can do everything I need to do with an early 2000 version that I can do with the latest version...<<<

So stick with it: this subscription model will never affect you. EVER!

[MikeDodd7782]

I have looked at this change financially and what it amounts to is that you are more than doubling the cost over 7 years.

I guess even if you lose customers, you'll be making more money.  Is that what this is really about?