It's quite frustrating to imagine that the only way to operate software that I legally bought and own is to do so illegally.
Zoidberg, post: 419450, member: 8841 wrote: It's quite frustrating to imagine that the only way to operate software that I legally bought and own is to do so illegally.
I wouldn't be surprised to find that somewhere deep in the EULA where less than .01% of users have ever laid eyes, there's a provision that gives them the right to limit the number or time-span of re-installs. If not, their lawyers would twist some part of the EULA to give them that right/power.
Zoidberg, post: 419336, member: 8841 wrote: Just an FYI: I had a system go down with LDD05 on it. When re-installing to the new computer Autodesk informed me that they will never again issue authorization codes for LDD. Ever. It's gone and even though we paid full price and bought a real seat of it we can never install it again, according to the Autodesk rep that I dealt with. Anyone experience anything similar very recently? I'd love to have a way to re-install and get it running again. The old computer is cooked.
Zoidberg,
I'm running a subscription so they have no problem giving me new authorization codes. On one of my Windows 10 machines I have to reactivate every couple of months.
FL/GA PLS., post: 419311, member: 379 wrote: [USER=11959]@Squirltech[/USER]
Heck, I still use LDD 2006 and C3D 2010. They work fine on the same computer. Until I can find something less expensive than any AUTODESK product (ie: BricsCAD, MicroSurvey or Traverse PC) I'll use them until they are extinct. If anyone could suggest another less expensive alternative than any AUTODESK product it would be appreciated. 😎
As a caveat, i work for an autodesk reseller. That said, the software is VERY inexpensive now. For one seat of civil 3d, it's 2100/yr subscription (or 5600/3yr upfront). We're actually loosing money as Autodesk is also offering a huge discount for those with a valid license on maintenance to switch to the subscription license. I'm not clear on why the pricing is less or if there are other costs i am unaware of. But at least call your reseller and ask the question. The other side of this is when you need an extra license for a rush project or temp employee, you can get a seat on a monthly basis for around 300.
The idea is this, with an annual price, it moves the cost of software from a capital expense to an operating expense from a business perspective. electricity, internet, overhead, etc. would now include the software tools.
Project files in older versions are easily moved forward. In those older projects, i'm curious, how much is just autocad edits versus cogo point/linework changes?
Kevin Spear PE, post: 420091, member: 12598 wrote: The idea is this, with an annual price, it moves the cost of software from a capital expense to an operating expense from a business perspective. electricity, internet, overhead, etc. would now include the software tools.
I understand the accounting aspects perfectly. And the numbers do not work, at least in my business world.
You said:
ÛÏFor one seat of civil 3d, it's 2100/yr subscription (or 5600/3yr upfront).Û No thanks
ThatÛªs three seats of ÛÏBricsCADÛ or two seats of ÛÏMicroSurvey embedded CadÛ.
ÛÏyou can get a seat on a monthly basis for around 300.Û No thanks.
Small businesses cannot afford the outrageous prices Autodesk is demanding. Hopefully Autodesk will continue to dig their financial grave.
😎
I get that every business has to make their own determination regarding the cost benefit and return on investment for a particular choice of the brand of software to accomplish the jobs with which they are routinely faced. And I also get that for many that doesn't lead them to choose Autodesk products in general and Civil 3d specifically. What I don't get is labeling the Autodesk pricing structure outrageous, or for that matter particularly high given the amount of research and development involved in providing the relatively stable and dependable product that they provide. I don't get that surveyors can't seem to understand that when you "purchase" software you are not buying a physical object like an instrument or work truck, but that you are leasing a license to a piece of intellectual property. These two things are not the same. In our industry/profession I hear constant complaints about "lowballers", surveyors who do not value their product as highly as the surveyor doing the complaining. The fact is that if there weren't a market for these inexpensive surveys then these guys would be out of business, same is true of the "high dollar" surveyor, no market, no surveyor. This holds true for the surveying software industry as well. There is a market for both the VW Beetles and the Cadillacs of surveying software. Don't be jealous because you have Cadillac taste and a VW budget. And speaking of budget, how exactly is it that a $2000 annual expense is a deal breaker for a "small business" surveying firm? We are willing to shell out 40 grand or more for a truck whose useful lifespan will be 10 years at best. I'm not saying that surveyors shouldn't be using and singing the praises of software alternatives that they find more cost efficient and or user friendly than Civil 3d, but why must that always be accompanied by disparaging comments about Autodesk. The fact is far from digging their own financial grave they are doing quite well.
I've been laying low for a while, but this post brought me out of hiding. Bravo, Randy, for an excellent post!
Thank you Randy for shedding a different perspective on my derogatory comments concerning Autodesk products. Although you and I are on a different financial page I appreciate your response. 😎
Kevin Spear PE, post: 420091, member: 12598 wrote: ....That said, the software is VERY inexpensive now. For one seat of civil 3d, it's 2100/yr subscription (or 5600/3yr upfront). .....
Are you serious? Not sure about you, but where I'm from $2,100 a YEAR is not inexpensive for CAD software.This subscription model is purely for the benefit of the software company. Oh, and moving it from a capital expense to an operating expense is just playing with numbers. Try this: make a graph of the cumulative cost of the subscription model over 10 year versus purchasing the software. It all becomes clear why AutoDESK, Adobe, et al are pushing this business model. They end up with a very predictable (large) revenue stream.
Edward Reading, post: 420304, member: 132 wrote: They end up with a very predictable (large) revenue stream.
Isn't that why we are in business? While we do not have any Autodesk software, I don't see $2100 dollars being all that expensive, let's assume you do 120 jobs a year, only ten a month, that's less than $20 dollars a job devoted to the CAD software.
No, I don't think that we are in business to give AutoDESK a large, predictable revenue stream. You need to ask :why are they switching to this model? What is the benefit of this model over the previous " purchase" model. For you, and for them.
I don't like the subscription model because I think it takes away the incentive for them to update the software. That business model reminds me of the Bell telephone companies or any of the cable companies with effective monopolies prior to competition. Prices were high and innovation/updates were glacial.
Edward, I think that you intentionally misstated Jones's meaning there Edward. He obviously meant that just like we are in business to maximize our revenue stream so is Autodesk. In fact since Autodesk is a publicly traded corporate entity they are bound by law to the fiduciary responsibility to maximize shareholder profit. And since you are licensing the use of their intellectual property not purchasing a tangible product from them they have a right to set the terms and price of that licensing, just like you have a right to set the fees that you charge for your work product.
No Randy, I intentionally made a joke that you obviously didn't get.:) Of course Autodesk can set the terms of their "licensing". And people can choose to buy other software.
I still have an XP laptop running LDD 2004 without any problems.
You have to hand it to Autodesk, with all the various flavors of Intellicad out there, Autocad products still feel superior. I can't put my hand on it but
their software on a capable laptop runs smoothly compared to it's Intellicad counterpart.
Zoidberg, post: 419450, member: 8841 wrote: It's quite frustrating to imagine that the only way to operate software that I legally bought and own is to do so illegally.
It's not news that software from autodesk and bentley is not owned but licensed to be used by you. While you can operate it indefinitely, it wont be supported indefinitely. Why would you have that expectation? Sure, you can drive your car for 30 years, but at some point, the "service" comes from 3rd party vendors who make "parts" to keep it running.
Stephen Ward, post: 420314, member: 1206 wrote: I don't like the subscription model because I think it takes away the incentive for them to update the software. That business model reminds me of the Bell telephone companies or any of the cable companies with effective monopolies prior to competition. Prices were high and innovation/updates were glacial.
Having been in both private industry as well as with an autodesk reseller, the historical viewpoint was feature improvement happened every 3-4 years. It simply was too much for almost everyone to consume and keep the "production" rolling. Fast forward, those feature update cycles have now shortened to basically every 3-4 months with smaller bit size chunks. Only, firms consider the upgrades every 2-3 years requiring the same massive effort to move forward.
Truthfully, we're so busy being busy, we don't take time to keep our "machines" oiled and lubed for production. I'm typing this at 11:40 pm when i should have been exercising in the hotel gym. It's all choices. We rarely make the right ones. In fact, PE's and RPS's are required in some states to have continuing education credits to stay current (slightly different topic). But the issue of not looking after ourselves professionally is still the root.
Edward Reading, post: 420304, member: 132 wrote: Are you serious? Not sure about you, but where I'm from $2,100 a YEAR is not inexpensive for CAD software.This subscription model is purely for the benefit of the software company. Oh, and moving it from a capital expense to an operating expense is just playing with numbers. Try this: make a graph of the cumulative cost of the subscription model over 10 year versus purchasing the software. It all becomes clear why AutoDESK, Adobe, et al are pushing this business model. They end up with a very predictable (large) revenue stream.
I wouldn't extrapolate any pricing that far out in the software industry. It's just too volatile. For instance, all education facilities used to pay for all licenses even those in teaching labs. About 3 years ago, autodesk stopped charging for educational licenses. The only licenses education pays for is when facilities mgmt uses CAD or other apps to manage their infrastructure, aka not educational purposes.
This model is driven also because of piracy worldwide. perpetual licensing was vulnerable to being cracked. This subscription is like 2 factor security at your bank. Is it fool proof? For now it is, as license validation is not on your premises but Autodesk's.
how much is your company's lease on your office space? How much do they pay for your overhead. All of the costs are relative. The subscription model is what we have now and probably the near term. I can't tell you how to run your business, but i would suggest asking questions to management or owners about the rest of the business model. You might be surprised at what owners consider "expensive" vs pocket change. At one company i've work with, every designer had a 40"+ "monitor" and new computers every 2 years. For them, 2k per user per year feels like nickels compared to other costs.
Lastly, accounting is all about moving the numbers around for affordability/profitability. Here are 2 articles, one recent and one from 2013. See what you think...
2013:
http://web.esna.com/blog/bid/177126/Understanding-Software-Pricing-Models
2016:
https://blog.intelex.com/2016/03/01/the-difference-between-capex-and-opex-software-purchases/