Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
well then don’t make it a marketing blurb about Maya, but about the entertainment suites, showing you can combine Maya and Softimage in a single production! See that was not so hard to do? From: Luc-Eric Rousseau Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 1:41 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model It's a video and it's in Spanish, but I think it's modeling and rendering that was done in Maya Le 2013-10-17 19:02, Bradley Gabe witha...@gmail.com a écrit : The least you guys could do is issue forth a correction. One way would be to color correct (darken) and composite the Maya logo into the interface. If that proves too difficult, you could always have the client go back and redo the work in Maya. ;-) On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 5:33 PM, Maurice Patel maurice.pa...@autodesk.com wrote: You are right, but experts are not infallible either. I have been in the industry since the early 90s first as a trainer then as a product designer and now in Marketing and I still make mistakes :(. We actually do have teams of experts in Marketing but we also have interns and we empower the latter because we find it helps us see who is going to make a great future employee versus who is not. If you don't let your staff risk failure how can they really succeed? It is amusing though and someone is going to be a little embarrassed here. Maurice Patel Autodesk : Tél: 514 954-7134recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary.
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
With this rate soon people will be pre-ordering ideas and empty promises They already do. www.kickstarter.com Back on topic I can't imagine any large facility to be able to operate without support, so yes it's used and it's needed. Most if not all of bugfixes are usually implemented in major releases afterwards, so everyone benefits in the end. On 16 October 2013 19:46, Mirko Jankovic mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com wrote: As I recall salesman is supposed to attract customer to gain their trust and support. Now it is other way around??? Customers should give their total support and money in order to be treated like customers?? Actually there is something similar happening with buying games as well... Before there was always demo to show potential audience what is offered so they can decide whether to buy. Now it is all up to buy before seeing pre-purchase policy. Is consumer market, both games and software that much brained washed??? With this rate soon people will be pre-ordering ideas and empty promises. Oh wait that is already happening.. subscription? paying upfront for something that you maybe will receive.. someday.. maybe? On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 8:25 PM, jim bough jimbo...@hotmail.com wrote: Isn't that the point? They are trying to increase income, this is their plan, they are being forthright about it, now it's up to users to decide whether that investment is worth it. Perhaps, if more people were on the Softimage subscription model, paying into rd efforts, we might see a different software landscape today. I said perhaps. -- Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 13:59:19 -0400 From: digim...@digimata.com To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model I agreed with with Matt, we are still using 7.01, since we didn't upgrade from 7.01 to 7.5 when Autodesk bought Softimage from Avid now, we can't upgrade even if we want to. We would have been paying a lot over these years. Leoung On 10/16/2013 1:35 PM, Matt Lind wrote: I dispute it’s better to stay on subscription. Case in point being the fact we were stuck on Softimage 7.5 for nearly 5 years, not because we didn’t want to upgrade, but because there were no releases without technical issues preventing our upgrade. Being forced into subscription would be more expensive than the perpetual license model as we’d have to continue paying AD with no return to show for it. Under the perpetual license model we wouldn’t be obligated to pay anything. Matt *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [ mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.comsoftimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Graham Bell *Sent:* Wednesday, October 16, 2013 4:22 AM *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* RE: Autodesk´s Sales model Regarding the announcements made at the investor day, I posted this on another forum as part of an ongoing thread…. I think there's a lot of crossed wires here over his news and just assuming that Autodesk are following Adobe literally to the letter. Yes, there are Suites and now we have rental options (you can still buy perpetual), but this news is really just about Autodesk discontinuing their upgrade model. As of Feb 1st 2015 (still over a year away), users will be unable to upgrade old versions to the current version. Regarding upgrades and what the term actually means, this is the ability to upgrade an Autodesk product from a previous version to the current version. So for example, someone has purchased a product and they may have stopped their subscription (if they bought it) for a period of time, and they then wish to upgrade to the most current version of their software. Autodesk currently allow customer to upgrade their software to the current version, for a fee. Until this year, there were different upgrade pricing depending on how old the software version was, that someone wanted to upgrade from. Also, (if I recall) there was no limit to how old a version of software was, that someone wanted to upgrade. As of this year, the upgrade policy was changed and basically simplified. Only the previous 6 versions will remain upgradeable. Owners of older software versions who wanted the current version would need to purchase entirely new licenses. If you did have a version eligible for upgrading, a single pricing structure was put in place. User upgrading to the current version, would have to pay 70% of the new license price for an upgrade. Essentially, the idea of staying on an old version of software and then just paying to upgrade to the current version when you thought it was necessary, becomes detrimental to actually just keeping on subscription. To keep up to date and have previous version usage, it actually makes more sense to remain on subscription. G *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [ mailto:softimage-boun
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
Yees Kickstarter did come across my mind when I wrote but there is one big difference... some of those guys at Kickstarter actually still got some passion about what they do or at least we wanna believe that :) On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Michal Doniec doni...@gmail.com wrote: With this rate soon people will be pre-ordering ideas and empty promises They already do. www.kickstarter.com Back on topic I can't imagine any large facility to be able to operate without support, so yes it's used and it's needed. Most if not all of bugfixes are usually implemented in major releases afterwards, so everyone benefits in the end. On 16 October 2013 19:46, Mirko Jankovic mirkoj.anima...@gmail.comwrote: As I recall salesman is supposed to attract customer to gain their trust and support. Now it is other way around??? Customers should give their total support and money in order to be treated like customers?? Actually there is something similar happening with buying games as well... Before there was always demo to show potential audience what is offered so they can decide whether to buy. Now it is all up to buy before seeing pre-purchase policy. Is consumer market, both games and software that much brained washed??? With this rate soon people will be pre-ordering ideas and empty promises. Oh wait that is already happening.. subscription? paying upfront for something that you maybe will receive.. someday.. maybe? On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 8:25 PM, jim bough jimbo...@hotmail.com wrote: Isn't that the point? They are trying to increase income, this is their plan, they are being forthright about it, now it's up to users to decide whether that investment is worth it. Perhaps, if more people were on the Softimage subscription model, paying into rd efforts, we might see a different software landscape today. I said perhaps. -- Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 13:59:19 -0400 From: digim...@digimata.com To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model I agreed with with Matt, we are still using 7.01, since we didn't upgrade from 7.01 to 7.5 when Autodesk bought Softimage from Avid now, we can't upgrade even if we want to. We would have been paying a lot over these years. Leoung On 10/16/2013 1:35 PM, Matt Lind wrote: I dispute it’s better to stay on subscription. Case in point being the fact we were stuck on Softimage 7.5 for nearly 5 years, not because we didn’t want to upgrade, but because there were no releases without technical issues preventing our upgrade. Being forced into subscription would be more expensive than the perpetual license model as we’d have to continue paying AD with no return to show for it. Under the perpetual license model we wouldn’t be obligated to pay anything. Matt *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [ mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.comsoftimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Graham Bell *Sent:* Wednesday, October 16, 2013 4:22 AM *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* RE: Autodesk´s Sales model Regarding the announcements made at the investor day, I posted this on another forum as part of an ongoing thread…. I think there's a lot of crossed wires here over his news and just assuming that Autodesk are following Adobe literally to the letter. Yes, there are Suites and now we have rental options (you can still buy perpetual), but this news is really just about Autodesk discontinuing their upgrade model. As of Feb 1st 2015 (still over a year away), users will be unable to upgrade old versions to the current version. Regarding upgrades and what the term actually means, this is the ability to upgrade an Autodesk product from a previous version to the current version. So for example, someone has purchased a product and they may have stopped their subscription (if they bought it) for a period of time, and they then wish to upgrade to the most current version of their software. Autodesk currently allow customer to upgrade their software to the current version, for a fee. Until this year, there were different upgrade pricing depending on how old the software version was, that someone wanted to upgrade from. Also, (if I recall) there was no limit to how old a version of software was, that someone wanted to upgrade. As of this year, the upgrade policy was changed and basically simplified. Only the previous 6 versions will remain upgradeable. Owners of older software versions who wanted the current version would need to purchase entirely new licenses. If you did have a version eligible for upgrading, a single pricing structure was put in place. User upgrading to the current version, would have to pay 70% of the new license price for an upgrade. Essentially, the idea of staying on an old version of software and then just paying to upgrade to the current version when you thought
RE: Autodesk´s Sales model
I like The Foundry. I don't know if their business model will stay like this but it's straight forward and you know you're not going to be disappointed when the new version comes out. From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Angus Davidson Sent: 16 octobre 2013 23:37 To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: RE: Autodesk´s Sales model I have nothing against a subscription model. if done well it can work really well. However subscription only works well if you have the following. a) Getting value for money (percieved or actual) b) There is an openness about what is coming up in future releases Without that there is zero incentive for people to put money down on something that is a big unknown. An easy way to fix point a) is to have more releases a year. There is no reason you cant have two or even three releases a year. Currently you have one and its pretty much a crap-shoot as to whether you get anything worthwhile. Well the way to fix point b is pretty obvious. When you have a subscription model you cant hide behind we are a listed company bullshit anymore. Its a very different thing to having people buy something they know about, to making your customers take all the risk of putting money down in the vague hope of getting something useful. If you want subscription to work you have to have a roadmap its simply a non negotiable thing. From: Mirko Jankovic [mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com] Sent: 17 October 2013 12:16 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model Actually no-one as I'm aware of ever mentioned problem with price of subscription but subscription it self. Tool that is worth thousands but earns you even more than that is good investment. An $1 screwdriver that you will never ever use is waste of money and bad investment. Throwing any kind of $$$ at subscription and not getting anything back .. what basked does that goes for? On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Raffaele Fragapane raffsxsil...@googlemail.commailto:raffsxsil...@googlemail.com wrote: This pretty much hits the nail on the head IMO. A number of factors converging has made it so that people have been slowly conditioned to think DCC software and its sales and updates right now are OK to be as cheap as they are on the frontload expenditure (a couple to three and half grands for software with some of the largest and most varied and complex sets of functionalities ever), and something worth subscribing to. The truth is subscription, in any sane world, would require a vibrant, lively and worthy eco-system of user base, community and software support. At present time subscription means you get the occasional SP/ext, which is usually borked beyond repair and will take another couple fixes to be fixed, or will be fixed in the next major (Maya 2014 ext had a bucketload of features but turned out unusably broken due to a ridiculously nasty shapes bug). At one point upgrading becomes a game of what bugs you can live with, the old ones you know, or the new ones introduced elsewhere while fixing those. Solid releases exist, of course, at least within restricted domains of functionalities one might be interested in, and that's why often times people stick to a release for five years. It's not that they don't want to upgrad, it's that it's the ONE safe spot in a bloody mine field of bugs and disasters that are behind you (older versions that didn't work), and around you (new versions that break a different piece every time). There is no community support worth mentioning, the Area is a wasteland of despair where the only noise is that of noob souls wailing in despair, the app shop useless (the few contributors are all giving up on it when it takes weeks to months for AD to clear a free minor update to their stuff). There is no such thing as a quick fix, let alone weekly or forthnightly builds. The support itself is useless to anybody but the most superficial user. Training/educational content of any depth is scarce to unavailable (a few smatterings of superficial stuff again, at best), and there is no effort in sight to change that. Lastly, being on subscription provides with no added network or interaction at all. There IS a thriving eco-system around some of the softwares, but all of it, and I literally mean ALL of it, is down to your social network, reputation, and putting in the hard miles to connect and keep track of who's who and what websites to follow. Beta testing, friends on the inside, the right blogs and websites, third party software and training providers... those often work and work to levels you simply wouldn't expect a completely anarchic system to, and they are free, and usually absolutely unsupported by AD, which instead keeps throwing money or hours at the big studios that steer their main horse the most
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
I really don't think you'll EVER get point B in your list from Autodesk. The best you can do to sort of extrapolate into something similar is keep an eye on whatever's going on at Autodesk Labs. That's it. Anyone who believes they can convince, beg, or coerce AD to reveal their roadmaps to the public has clearly never had to deal with AD's legal department. :-) On 16/10/2013 11:37 PM, Angus Davidson wrote: I have nothing against a subscription model. if done well it can work really well. However subscription only works well if you have the following. a) Getting value for money (percieved or actual) b) There is an openness about what is coming up in future releases Without that there is zero incentive for people to put money down on something that is a big unknown. An easy way to fix point a) is to have more releases a year. There is no reason you cant have two or even three releases a year. Currently you have one and its pretty much a crap-shoot as to whether you get anything worthwhile. Well the way to fix point b is pretty obvious. When you have a subscription model you cant hide behind we are a listed company bullshit anymore. Its a very different thing to having people buy something they know about, to making your customers take all the risk of putting money down in the vague hope of getting something useful. If you want subscription to work you have to have a roadmap its simply a non negotiable thing. From: Mirko Jankovic [mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com] Sent: 17 October 2013 12:16 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model Actually no-one as I'm aware of ever mentioned problem with price of subscription but subscription it self. Tool that is worth thousands but earns you even more than that is good investment. An $1 screwdriver that you will never ever use is waste of money and bad investment. Throwing any kind of $$$ at subscription and not getting anything back .. what basked does that goes for? On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Raffaele Fragapane raffsxsil...@googlemail.com wrote: This pretty much hits the nail on the head IMO. A number of factors converging has made it so that people have been slowly conditioned to think DCC software and its sales and updates right now are OK to be as cheap as they are on the frontload expenditure (a couple to three and half grands for software with some of the largest and most varied and complex sets of functionalities ever), and something worth "subscribing" to. The truth is subscription, in any sane world, would require a vibrant, lively and worthy eco-system of user base, community and software support. At present time subscription means you get the occasional SP/ext, which is usually borked beyond repair and will take another couple fixes to be fixed, or will be fixed in the next major (Maya 2014 ext had a bucketload of features but turned out unusably broken due to a ridiculously nasty shapes bug). At one point upgrading becomes a game of what bugs you can live with, the old ones you know, or the new ones introduced elsewhere while fixing those. Solid releases exist, of course, at least within restricted domains of functionalities one might be interested in, and that's why often times people stick to a release for five years. It's not that they don't want to up
RE: Autodesk´s Sales model
Oh I am fairly sure We will never get point b. It just means their subscription model will fail. The worlds economy is in too poor a place for people to continue throwing money at something and hoping for the best. From: Sergio Mucino [sergio.muc...@modusfx.com] Sent: 17 October 2013 04:42 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model I really don't think you'll EVER get point B in your list from Autodesk. The best you can do to sort of extrapolate into something similar is keep an eye on whatever's going on at Autodesk Labs. That's it. Anyone who believes they can convince, beg, or coerce AD to reveal their roadmaps to the public has clearly never had to deal with AD's legal department. :-) [cid:part1.07030808.09010002@modusfx.com] On 16/10/2013 11:37 PM, Angus Davidson wrote: I have nothing against a subscription model. if done well it can work really well. However subscription only works well if you have the following. a) Getting value for money (percieved or actual) b) There is an openness about what is coming up in future releases Without that there is zero incentive for people to put money down on something that is a big unknown. An easy way to fix point a) is to have more releases a year. There is no reason you cant have two or even three releases a year. Currently you have one and its pretty much a crap-shoot as to whether you get anything worthwhile. Well the way to fix point b is pretty obvious. When you have a subscription model you cant hide behind we are a listed company bullshit anymore. Its a very different thing to having people buy something they know about, to making your customers take all the risk of putting money down in the vague hope of getting something useful. If you want subscription to work you have to have a roadmap its simply a non negotiable thing. From: Mirko Jankovic [mirkoj.anima...@gmail.commailto:mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com] Sent: 17 October 2013 12:16 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model Actually no-one as I'm aware of ever mentioned problem with price of subscription but subscription it self. Tool that is worth thousands but earns you even more than that is good investment. An $1 screwdriver that you will never ever use is waste of money and bad investment. Throwing any kind of $$$ at subscription and not getting anything back .. what basked does that goes for? On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Raffaele Fragapane raffsxsil...@googlemail.commailto:raffsxsil...@googlemail.com wrote: This pretty much hits the nail on the head IMO. A number of factors converging has made it so that people have been slowly conditioned to think DCC software and its sales and updates right now are OK to be as cheap as they are on the frontload expenditure (a couple to three and half grands for software with some of the largest and most varied and complex sets of functionalities ever), and something worth subscribing to. The truth is subscription, in any sane world, would require a vibrant, lively and worthy eco-system of user base, community and software support. At present time subscription means you get the occasional SP/ext, which is usually borked beyond repair and will take another couple fixes to be fixed, or will be fixed in the next major (Maya 2014 ext had a bucketload of features but turned out unusably broken due to a ridiculously nasty shapes bug). At one point upgrading becomes a game of what bugs you can live with, the old ones you know, or the new ones introduced elsewhere while fixing those. Solid releases exist, of course, at least within restricted domains of functionalities one might be interested in, and that's why often times people stick to a release for five years. It's not that they don't want to upgrad, it's that it's the ONE safe spot in a bloody mine field of bugs and disasters that are behind you (older versions that didn't work), and around you (new versions that break a different piece every time). There is no community support worth mentioning, the Area is a wasteland of despair where the only noise is that of noob souls wailing in despair, the app shop useless (the few contributors are all giving up on it when it takes weeks to months for AD to clear a free minor update to their stuff). There is no such thing as a quick fix, let alone weekly or forthnightly builds. The support itself is useless to anybody but the most superficial user. Training/educational content of any depth is scarce to unavailable (a few smatterings of superficial stuff again, at best), and there is no effort in sight to change that. Lastly, being on subscription provides with no added network or interaction at all. There IS a thriving eco-system around some of the softwares, but all of it, and I literally mean ALL of it, is down to your social network, reputation
RE: Autodesk´s Sales model
Sarbanes Oxley... -- Joey Ponthieux __ Opinions stated here-in are strictly those of the author and do not represent the opinions of NASA or any other party. From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Mirko Jankovic Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 11:15 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model and then someone is wondering why people are thinking worse and creating all sort of conspiracy theories... it doesnt need to be like detailed road map but where software as such is going at all.. or is it being ripped apart by Maya vultures and left to rot or they will keep it on life at least with artificial breathing machines...OR try to build an nice strong guy to stay with us for looong time... On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Angus Davidson angus.david...@wits.ac.zamailto:angus.david...@wits.ac.za wrote: Oh I am fairly sure We will never get point b. It just means their subscription model will fail. The worlds economy is in too poor a place for people to continue throwing money at something and hoping for the best. From: Sergio Mucino [sergio.muc...@modusfx.commailto:sergio.muc...@modusfx.com] Sent: 17 October 2013 04:42 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model I really don't think you'll EVER get point B in your list from Autodesk. The best you can do to sort of extrapolate into something similar is keep an eye on whatever's going on at Autodesk Labs. That's it. Anyone who believes they can convince, beg, or coerce AD to reveal their roadmaps to the public has clearly never had to deal with AD's legal department. :-) [cid:image001.gif@01CECB35.A8C60CE0] On 16/10/2013 11:37 PM, Angus Davidson wrote: I have nothing against a subscription model. if done well it can work really well. However subscription only works well if you have the following. a) Getting value for money (percieved or actual) b) There is an openness about what is coming up in future releases Without that there is zero incentive for people to put money down on something that is a big unknown. An easy way to fix point a) is to have more releases a year. There is no reason you cant have two or even three releases a year. Currently you have one and its pretty much a crap-shoot as to whether you get anything worthwhile. Well the way to fix point b is pretty obvious. When you have a subscription model you cant hide behind we are a listed company bullshit anymore. Its a very different thing to having people buy something they know about, to making your customers take all the risk of putting money down in the vague hope of getting something useful. If you want subscription to work you have to have a roadmap its simply a non negotiable thing. From: Mirko Jankovic [mirkoj.anima...@gmail.commailto:mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com] Sent: 17 October 2013 12:16 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model Actually no-one as I'm aware of ever mentioned problem with price of subscription but subscription it self. Tool that is worth thousands but earns you even more than that is good investment. An $1 screwdriver that you will never ever use is waste of money and bad investment. Throwing any kind of $$$ at subscription and not getting anything back .. what basked does that goes for? On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Raffaele Fragapane raffsxsil...@googlemail.commailto:raffsxsil...@googlemail.com wrote: This pretty much hits the nail on the head IMO. A number of factors converging has made it so that people have been slowly conditioned to think DCC software and its sales and updates right now are OK to be as cheap as they are on the frontload expenditure (a couple to three and half grands for software with some of the largest and most varied and complex sets of functionalities ever), and something worth subscribing to. The truth is subscription, in any sane world, would require a vibrant, lively and worthy eco-system of user base, community and software support. At present time subscription means you get the occasional SP/ext, which is usually borked beyond repair and will take another couple fixes to be fixed, or will be fixed in the next major (Maya 2014 ext had a bucketload of features but turned out unusably broken due to a ridiculously nasty shapes bug). At one point upgrading becomes a game of what bugs you can live with, the old ones you know, or the new ones introduced elsewhere while fixing those. Solid releases exist, of course, at least within restricted domains of functionalities one might be interested in, and that's why often times people stick to a release for five years. It's not that they don't want to upgrad, it's that it's the ONE safe
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
Sharing a broad overview of where they see the individual products heading isn’t an issue either as long as it’s done on the level. unfortunately, that's not the case. Because plans can change, so where a product is heading can change too. And those change will screw up the booking of maintenance revenue, because customers did not get the product they thought they paid for in advance. This is what sarbane oxley was looking at: dotcom companies that book revenue for product they never delivered. Avid is presently on the border of getting delisted from NASDAQ because of this exact reason. They are reviewing and preparing to re-state their revenue of the last few years; they're juggling a few related class action lawsuits from investors. It's a problem specific to prepaid upgrades maintenance plans. It only affects public companies, of course, since it's a revenue reporting issue. On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Matt Lind ml...@carbinestudios.com wrote: That’s for financial reporting with regards to accuracy and disclosure of accounting practices for sake of accountability to investors and the SEC. A company can provide NDAs and discuss plans of various natures without running into problems. They can also give glimpses publicly as demonstrated at the Siggraph user group where they showed forward looking technologies related to Maya. They can do the same with the other products and not run afoul of the SEC. Sharing a broad overview of where they see the individual products heading isn’t an issue either as long as it’s done on the level. Other companies of heavier weight and broader visibility have been more open than Autodesk. It is Autodesk that has chosen to be opaque creating a sense of distrust amongst their customers. In the long run that will be Autodesk’s undoing as they’re serving a market which doesn’t have a lot of loyalty.
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
I can't speak for everyone, but I don't think many people expect marketing to be experts. At bare minimum, perhaps knowing what their software looks like at a glance is a reasonable expectation? Either way, I don't care if you vet or not. It's still amusing. Freelance 3D and VFX animator http://vimeopro.com/user7979713/3d-work On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Maurice Patel maurice.pa...@autodesk.comwrote: Hi Eric, I do. Typically we always credit all software used on facebook even when it is competitors which is why you will see product like Z-Brush mentioned on our pages. A lot of staff post under the Autodesk account. I cannot vet it all personally and I don't think Social Media should all be vetted. Some mistakes happen. And for sure not everyone on the Marketing teams are Softimage or even ME experts. The mistake was almost certainly unintentional Maurice Maurice Patel Autodesk : Tél: 514 954-7134 From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Eric Lampi Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 4:38 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model Speaking of marketing, the other day on Facebook they had a link posted to an article about a short that was being made, with the tagline, See how Maya was used for all of the modeling and rigging with a picture of an artist at his workstation using a SoftImage rig to animate. Freelance 3D and VFX animator http://vimeopro.com/user7979713/3d-work On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Leoung O'Young digim...@digimata.com mailto:digim...@digimata.com wrote: Who actually looks after their marketing/public relations? Is the Softimage/XSI user base so small, they don't give a hoot! What a way to run a business. On 10/17/2013 1:55 PM, Matt Lind wrote: That's for financial reporting with regards to accuracy and disclosure of accounting practices for sake of accountability to investors and the SEC. A company can provide NDAs and discuss plans of various natures without running into problems. They can also give glimpses publicly as demonstrated at the Siggraph user group where they showed forward looking technologies related to Maya. They can do the same with the other products and not run afoul of the SEC. Sharing a broad overview of where they see the individual products heading isn't an issue either as long as it's done on the level. Other companies of heavier weight and broader visibility have been more open than Autodesk. It is Autodesk that has chosen to be opaque creating a sense of distrust amongst their customers. In the long run that will be Autodesk's undoing as they're serving a market which doesn't have a lot of loyalty. Matt From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Ponthieux, Joseph G. (LARC-E1A)[LITES] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 9:38 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: RE: Autodesk´s Sales model Sarbanes Oxley... -- Joey Ponthieux __ Opinions stated here-in are strictly those of the author and do not represent the opinions of NASA or any other party. From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Mirko Jankovic Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 11:15 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model and then someone is wondering why people are thinking worse and creating all sort of conspiracy theories... it doesnt need to be like detailed road map but where software as such is going at all.. or is it being ripped apart by Maya vultures and left to rot or they will keep it on life at least with artificial breathing machines...OR try to build an nice strong guy to stay with us for looong time... On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Angus Davidson angus.david...@wits.ac.za mailto:angus.david...@wits.ac.za wrote: Oh I am fairly sure We will never get point b. It just means their subscription model will fail. The worlds economy is in too poor a place for people to continue throwing money at something and hoping for the best. From: Sergio Mucino [sergio.muc...@modusfx.commailto: sergio.muc...@modusfx.com] Sent: 17 October 2013 04:42 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model I really don't think you'll EVER get point B in your list from Autodesk. The best you can do to sort of extrapolate into something similar is keep an eye on whatever's going on at Autodesk Labs. That's it. Anyone who believes they can convince, beg, or coerce AD to reveal their roadmaps to the public
RE: Autodesk´s Sales model
You are right, but experts are not infallible either. I have been in the industry since the early 90s first as a trainer then as a product designer and now in Marketing and I still make mistakes :(. We actually do have teams of experts in Marketing but we also have interns and we empower the latter because we find it helps us see who is going to make a great future employee versus who is not. If you don't let your staff risk failure how can they really succeed? It is amusing though and someone is going to be a little embarrassed here. Maurice Patel Autodesk : Tél: 514 954-7134 From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Eric Lampi Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 6:19 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model I can't speak for everyone, but I don't think many people expect marketing to be experts. At bare minimum, perhaps knowing what their software looks like at a glance is a reasonable expectation? Either way, I don't care if you vet or not. It's still amusing. [https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/885206_10152012261084363_1169330897_o.png] Freelance 3D and VFX animator http://vimeopro.com/user7979713/3d-work On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Maurice Patel maurice.pa...@autodesk.commailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com wrote: Hi Eric, I do. Typically we always credit all software used on facebook even when it is competitors which is why you will see product like Z-Brush mentioned on our pages. A lot of staff post under the Autodesk account. I cannot vet it all personally and I don't think Social Media should all be vetted. Some mistakes happen. And for sure not everyone on the Marketing teams are Softimage or even ME experts. The mistake was almost certainly unintentional Maurice Maurice Patel Autodesk : Tél: 514 954-7134tel:514%20954-7134 From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Eric Lampi Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 4:38 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model Speaking of marketing, the other day on Facebook they had a link posted to an article about a short that was being made, with the tagline, See how Maya was used for all of the modeling and rigging with a picture of an artist at his workstation using a SoftImage rig to animate. Freelance 3D and VFX animator http://vimeopro.com/user7979713/3d-work On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Leoung O'Young digim...@digimata.commailto:digim...@digimata.commailto:digim...@digimata.commailto:digim...@digimata.com wrote: Who actually looks after their marketing/public relations? Is the Softimage/XSI user base so small, they don't give a hoot! What a way to run a business. On 10/17/2013 1:55 PM, Matt Lind wrote: That's for financial reporting with regards to accuracy and disclosure of accounting practices for sake of accountability to investors and the SEC. A company can provide NDAs and discuss plans of various natures without running into problems. They can also give glimpses publicly as demonstrated at the Siggraph user group where they showed forward looking technologies related to Maya. They can do the same with the other products and not run afoul of the SEC. Sharing a broad overview of where they see the individual products heading isn't an issue either as long as it's done on the level. Other companies of heavier weight and broader visibility have been more open than Autodesk. It is Autodesk that has chosen to be opaque creating a sense of distrust amongst their customers. In the long run that will be Autodesk's undoing as they're serving a market which doesn't have a lot of loyalty. Matt From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Ponthieux, Joseph G. (LARC-E1A)[LITES] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 9:38 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: RE: Autodesk´s Sales model Sarbanes Oxley... -- Joey Ponthieux __ Opinions stated here-in are strictly those of the author and do not represent the opinions of NASA or any other party. From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Mirko
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
The least you guys could do is issue forth a correction. One way would be to color correct (darken) and composite the Maya logo into the interface. If that proves too difficult, you could always have the client go back and redo the work in Maya. ;-) On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 5:33 PM, Maurice Patel maurice.pa...@autodesk.comwrote: You are right, but experts are not infallible either. I have been in the industry since the early 90s first as a trainer then as a product designer and now in Marketing and I still make mistakes :(. We actually do have teams of experts in Marketing but we also have interns and we empower the latter because we find it helps us see who is going to make a great future employee versus who is not. If you don't let your staff risk failure how can they really succeed? It is amusing though and someone is going to be a little embarrassed here. Maurice Patel Autodesk : Tél: 514 954-7134recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary.
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
It's a video and it's in Spanish, but I think it's modeling and rendering that was done in Maya Le 2013-10-17 19:02, Bradley Gabe witha...@gmail.com a écrit : The least you guys could do is issue forth a correction. One way would be to color correct (darken) and composite the Maya logo into the interface. If that proves too difficult, you could always have the client go back and redo the work in Maya. ;-) On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 5:33 PM, Maurice Patel maurice.pa...@autodesk.com wrote: You are right, but experts are not infallible either. I have been in the industry since the early 90s first as a trainer then as a product designer and now in Marketing and I still make mistakes :(. We actually do have teams of experts in Marketing but we also have interns and we empower the latter because we find it helps us see who is going to make a great future employee versus who is not. If you don't let your staff risk failure how can they really succeed? It is amusing though and someone is going to be a little embarrassed here. Maurice Patel Autodesk : Tél: 514 954-7134recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary.
RE: Autodesk´s Sales model
What I've described below is the current upgrade model, which (as it reads to me), will be discontinued from Feb 1st 2015. Which, yes, would mean that after that date, its Subs only or buy a new license if you have dropped off Subs and wish to upgrade to the current version. Sorry, I don't have any precise details at this time, so I can't absolutely confirm anything, but that's how it would read to me. G From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Mirko Jankovic Sent: 16 October 2013 12:41 To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model So everyone that really saw no need to upgrade only like once in 3-5 years due to low or non version differences are getting spit in face? AD is killing option to buy Softimage 2014 now.. and then to upgrade to Softimage 2017 later on. So even if there is absolutely no need to be on subscription and paying for 2015 and 2016 due to lack of any useful deference between versions they are forcing people to keep paying all those years or to buy whole new suite later? Sorry if I got it wrong as I'm not really sure now if there will still be option to upgrade if you are 6 versions back or that option is killed completely so it is only subscription or new licence. On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Graham Bell graham.b...@autodesk.commailto:graham.b...@autodesk.com wrote: Regarding the announcements made at the investor day, I posted this on another forum as part of an ongoing thread I think there's a lot of crossed wires here over his news and just assuming that Autodesk are following Adobe literally to the letter. Yes, there are Suites and now we have rental options (you can still buy perpetual), but this news is really just about Autodesk discontinuing their upgrade model. As of Feb 1st 2015 (still over a year away), users will be unable to upgrade old versions to the current version. Regarding upgrades and what the term actually means, this is the ability to upgrade an Autodesk product from a previous version to the current version. So for example, someone has purchased a product and they may have stopped their subscription (if they bought it) for a period of time, and they then wish to upgrade to the most current version of their software. Autodesk currently allow customer to upgrade their software to the current version, for a fee. Until this year, there were different upgrade pricing depending on how old the software version was, that someone wanted to upgrade from. Also, (if I recall) there was no limit to how old a version of software was, that someone wanted to upgrade. As of this year, the upgrade policy was changed and basically simplified. Only the previous 6 versions will remain upgradeable. Owners of older software versions who wanted the current version would need to purchase entirely new licenses. If you did have a version eligible for upgrading, a single pricing structure was put in place. User upgrading to the current version, would have to pay 70% of the new license price for an upgrade. Essentially, the idea of staying on an old version of software and then just paying to upgrade to the current version when you thought it was necessary, becomes detrimental to actually just keeping on subscription. To keep up to date and have previous version usage, it actually makes more sense to remain on subscription. G From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sebastien Sterling Sent: 16 October 2013 00:06 To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model is this it for maya ? http://www.autodesk.com/products/autodesk-maya/buy On 15 October 2013 23:48, Sergio Mucino sergio.muc...@modusfx.commailto:sergio.muc...@modusfx.commailto:sergio.muc...@modusfx.commailto:sergio.muc...@modusfx.com wrote: Autodesk is for some reason following Adobe's footsteps quite accurately. Adobe started selling suites... Adesk did. Adobe goes rental... Adesk follows. I really can't tell how positive or not the change will be, and what it will mean for the future of the tools... I guess we'll have to wait and see. The reactions to these decisions have been varied (some people are not happy at all, some are quite happy). [cid:image001.gif@01CECA6A.53B2BD50] On 15/10/2013 4:52 PM, Sven Constable wrote: Of course I meant one third of the costs for every tool, not three. And I used thirds as a term incorrectly. It was lost in translation. Sorry about that. sven From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
ugh complicates things a bit..well simplifies for AD but... As a matter of fact I'm right now in process of starting new studio but having suites and subscription shoveled by force.. doesn't feel good. Pushing suites when someone have absolutely no need for anything else from AD house... best option actually seems to be get latest one while there is still chance and then just keep using it for years. If any of new version at all ever get any meaningful update worth of buying (ie camera sequencer and current state of HQV is not something like that) then even getting whole new lics is better then being forced into subscriptions for years. On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Graham Bell graham.b...@autodesk.comwrote: What I've described below is the current upgrade model, which (as it reads to me), will be discontinued from Feb 1st 2015. Which, yes, would mean that after that date, its Subs only or buy a new license if you have dropped off Subs and wish to upgrade to the current version. Sorry, I don't have any precise details at this time, so I can't absolutely confirm anything, but that's how it would read to me. G From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Mirko Jankovic Sent: 16 October 2013 12:41 To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model So everyone that really saw no need to upgrade only like once in 3-5 years due to low or non version differences are getting spit in face? AD is killing option to buy Softimage 2014 now.. and then to upgrade to Softimage 2017 later on. So even if there is absolutely no need to be on subscription and paying for 2015 and 2016 due to lack of any useful deference between versions they are forcing people to keep paying all those years or to buy whole new suite later? Sorry if I got it wrong as I'm not really sure now if there will still be option to upgrade if you are 6 versions back or that option is killed completely so it is only subscription or new licence. On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Graham Bell graham.b...@autodesk.com mailto:graham.b...@autodesk.com wrote: Regarding the announcements made at the investor day, I posted this on another forum as part of an ongoing thread I think there's a lot of crossed wires here over his news and just assuming that Autodesk are following Adobe literally to the letter. Yes, there are Suites and now we have rental options (you can still buy perpetual), but this news is really just about Autodesk discontinuing their upgrade model. As of Feb 1st 2015 (still over a year away), users will be unable to upgrade old versions to the current version. Regarding upgrades and what the term actually means, this is the ability to upgrade an Autodesk product from a previous version to the current version. So for example, someone has purchased a product and they may have stopped their subscription (if they bought it) for a period of time, and they then wish to upgrade to the most current version of their software. Autodesk currently allow customer to upgrade their software to the current version, for a fee. Until this year, there were different upgrade pricing depending on how old the software version was, that someone wanted to upgrade from. Also, (if I recall) there was no limit to how old a version of software was, that someone wanted to upgrade. As of this year, the upgrade policy was changed and basically simplified. Only the previous 6 versions will remain upgradeable. Owners of older software versions who wanted the current version would need to purchase entirely new licenses. If you did have a version eligible for upgrading, a single pricing structure was put in place. User upgrading to the current version, would have to pay 70% of the new license price for an upgrade. Essentially, the idea of staying on an old version of software and then just paying to upgrade to the current version when you thought it was necessary, becomes detrimental to actually just keeping on subscription. To keep up to date and have previous version usage, it actually makes more sense to remain on subscription. G From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sebastien Sterling Sent: 16 October 2013 00:06 To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model is this it for maya ? http://www.autodesk.com/products/autodesk-maya/buy On 15 October 2013 23:48, Sergio Mucino sergio.muc...@modusfx.commailto: sergio.muc...@modusfx.commailto:sergio.muc...@modusfx.commailto: sergio.muc...@modusfx.com wrote: Autodesk is for some reason following Adobe's footsteps quite accurately. Adobe started selling suites... Adesk did. Adobe goes rental... Adesk follows. I really can't tell
RE: Autodesk´s Sales model
What about support? Not worth the subscription cost either? From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Mirko Jankovic Sent: 16 October 2013 14:11 To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model ugh complicates things a bit..well simplifies for AD but... As a matter of fact I'm right now in process of starting new studio but having suites and subscription shoveled by force.. doesn't feel good. Pushing suites when someone have absolutely no need for anything else from AD house... best option actually seems to be get latest one while there is still chance and then just keep using it for years. If any of new version at all ever get any meaningful update worth of buying (ie camera sequencer and current state of HQV is not something like that) then even getting whole new lics is better then being forced into subscriptions for years. On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Graham Bell graham.b...@autodesk.commailto:graham.b...@autodesk.com wrote: What I've described below is the current upgrade model, which (as it reads to me), will be discontinued from Feb 1st 2015. Which, yes, would mean that after that date, its Subs only or buy a new license if you have dropped off Subs and wish to upgrade to the current version. Sorry, I don't have any precise details at this time, so I can't absolutely confirm anything, but that's how it would read to me. G From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Mirko Jankovic Sent: 16 October 2013 12:41 To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model So everyone that really saw no need to upgrade only like once in 3-5 years due to low or non version differences are getting spit in face? AD is killing option to buy Softimage 2014 now.. and then to upgrade to Softimage 2017 later on. So even if there is absolutely no need to be on subscription and paying for 2015 and 2016 due to lack of any useful deference between versions they are forcing people to keep paying all those years or to buy whole new suite later? Sorry if I got it wrong as I'm not really sure now if there will still be option to upgrade if you are 6 versions back or that option is killed completely so it is only subscription or new licence. On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Graham Bell graham.b...@autodesk.commailto:graham.b...@autodesk.commailto:graham.b...@autodesk.commailto:graham.b...@autodesk.com wrote: Regarding the announcements made at the investor day, I posted this on another forum as part of an ongoing thread I think there's a lot of crossed wires here over his news and just assuming that Autodesk are following Adobe literally to the letter. Yes, there are Suites and now we have rental options (you can still buy perpetual), but this news is really just about Autodesk discontinuing their upgrade model. As of Feb 1st 2015 (still over a year away), users will be unable to upgrade old versions to the current version. Regarding upgrades and what the term actually means, this is the ability to upgrade an Autodesk product from a previous version to the current version. So for example, someone has purchased a product and they may have stopped their subscription (if they bought it) for a period of time, and they then wish to upgrade to the most current version of their software. Autodesk currently allow customer to upgrade their software to the current version, for a fee. Until this year, there were different upgrade pricing depending on how old the software version was, that someone wanted to upgrade from. Also, (if I recall) there was no limit to how old a version of software was, that someone wanted to upgrade. As of this year, the upgrade policy was changed and basically simplified. Only the previous 6 versions will remain upgradeable. Owners of older software versions who wanted the current version would need to purchase entirely new licenses. If you did have a version eligible for upgrading, a single pricing structure was put in place. User upgrading to the current version, would have to pay 70% of the new license price for an upgrade. Essentially, the idea of staying on an old version of software and then just paying to upgrade to the current version when you thought it was necessary, becomes detrimental to actually just keeping on subscription. To keep up to date and have previous version usage, it actually makes more sense to remain on subscription. G From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
Is it? would be interesting pool how many of guys used support. Most of the people, maybe I'm wrong but got that impression, are first coming to list and forums for any help. Could be mistaken. I guess support is more important on larger systems, trying to install on different OS and need some expert advice but on small environments and studios.. not much problems there? :) Again could be mistaken.. but someone else recently mentioned never ever needed support but also looking first in forums On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Fabrice Altman fabr...@studioaka.co.ukwrote: What about support? Not worth the subscription cost either? ** ** *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Mirko Jankovic *Sent:* 16 October 2013 14:11 *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* Re: Autodesk´s Sales model ** ** ugh complicates things a bit..well simplifies for AD but... As a matter of fact I'm right now in process of starting new studio but having suites and subscription shoveled by force.. doesn't feel good. Pushing suites when someone have absolutely no need for anything else from AD house... best option actually seems to be get latest one while there is still chance and then just keep using it for years. If any of new version at all ever get any meaningful update worth of buying (ie camera sequencer and current state of HQV is not something like that) then even getting whole new lics is better then being forced into subscriptions for years. ** ** ** ** On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Graham Bell graham.b...@autodesk.com wrote: What I've described below is the current upgrade model, which (as it reads to me), will be discontinued from Feb 1st 2015. Which, yes, would mean that after that date, its Subs only or buy a new license if you have dropped off Subs and wish to upgrade to the current version. Sorry, I don't have any precise details at this time, so I can't absolutely confirm anything, but that's how it would read to me. G From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Mirko Jankovic Sent: 16 October 2013 12:41 To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model So everyone that really saw no need to upgrade only like once in 3-5 years due to low or non version differences are getting spit in face? AD is killing option to buy Softimage 2014 now.. and then to upgrade to Softimage 2017 later on. So even if there is absolutely no need to be on subscription and paying for 2015 and 2016 due to lack of any useful deference between versions they are forcing people to keep paying all those years or to buy whole new suite later? Sorry if I got it wrong as I'm not really sure now if there will still be option to upgrade if you are 6 versions back or that option is killed completely so it is only subscription or new licence. On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Graham Bell graham.b...@autodesk.com mailto:graham.b...@autodesk.com wrote: Regarding the announcements made at the investor day, I posted this on another forum as part of an ongoing thread I think there's a lot of crossed wires here over his news and just assuming that Autodesk are following Adobe literally to the letter. Yes, there are Suites and now we have rental options (you can still buy perpetual), but this news is really just about Autodesk discontinuing their upgrade model. As of Feb 1st 2015 (still over a year away), users will be unable to upgrade old versions to the current version. Regarding upgrades and what the term actually means, this is the ability to upgrade an Autodesk product from a previous version to the current version. So for example, someone has purchased a product and they may have stopped their subscription (if they bought it) for a period of time, and they then wish to upgrade to the most current version of their software. Autodesk currently allow customer to upgrade their software to the current version, for a fee. Until this year, there were different upgrade pricing depending on how old the software version was, that someone wanted to upgrade from. Also, (if I recall) there was no limit to how old a version of software was, that someone wanted to upgrade. As of this year, the upgrade policy was changed and basically simplified. Only the previous 6 versions will remain upgradeable. Owners of older software versions who wanted the current version would need to purchase entirely new licenses. If you did have a version eligible for upgrading, a single pricing structure was put in place. User upgrading to the current version, would have to pay 70% of the new license price for an upgrade. Essentially, the idea of staying on an old version of software and then just paying to upgrade to the current version when you thought it was necessary
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
Support was worth it when Stephen Blair was there. :) To be fair, the support was worth it to get bugs confirmed and have them provide workarounds if possible or QFEs if available to fix those issues. At larger studios the AD Consulting is worth it when you can get it when you're in the trenches and need bugs fixed asap that are blocking. Eric T. On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 9:59:28 AM, Mirko Jankovic wrote: Is it? would be interesting pool how many of guys used support. Most of the people, maybe I'm wrong but got that impression, are first coming to list and forums for any help. Could be mistaken. I guess support is more important on larger systems, trying to install on different OS and need some expert advice but on small environments and studios.. not much problems there? :) Again could be mistaken.. but someone else recently mentioned never ever needed support but also looking first in forums
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
I think there's a separate argument about how much support should actually cost for Softimage, given the amount of work being done on the AD side. Provided the support price is in line with the support being provided, I can see where getting rid of upgrades simplifies things a lot. So, I'm not opposed to the idea, but I think it would help the pill go down easier if the support price were lowered some to reflect the efficiencies being gained by AD by getting rid of upgrades. Thinking as a collective of users, we also gain more from people staying on the latest version and keeping the new stuff well-tested. I know there are all kinds of production considerations concerning stability, etc, which still apply, but if every place has access to the latest stuff, it will likely still go into use sooner, regardless of how conservative a studio chooses to be with running new versions. And I agree, the price of support should have dropped to at least half as soon as Stephen left the building. On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Eric Thivierge ethivie...@hybride.com wrote: Support was worth it when Stephen Blair was there. :) To be fair, the support was worth it to get bugs confirmed and have them provide workarounds if possible or QFEs if available to fix those issues. At larger studios the AD Consulting is worth it when you can get it when you're in the trenches and need bugs fixed asap that are blocking. Eric T. On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 9:59:28 AM, Mirko Jankovic wrote: Is it? would be interesting pool how many of guys used support. Most of the people, maybe I'm wrong but got that impression, are first coming to list and forums for any help. Could be mistaken. I guess support is more important on larger systems, trying to install on different OS and need some expert advice but on small environments and studios.. not much problems there? :) Again could be mistaken.. but someone else recently mentioned never ever needed support but also looking first in forums
RE: Autodesk´s Sales model
I dispute it's better to stay on subscription. Case in point being the fact we were stuck on Softimage 7.5 for nearly 5 years, not because we didn't want to upgrade, but because there were no releases without technical issues preventing our upgrade. Being forced into subscription would be more expensive than the perpetual license model as we'd have to continue paying AD with no return to show for it. Under the perpetual license model we wouldn't be obligated to pay anything. Matt From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Graham Bell Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 4:22 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: RE: Autodesk´s Sales model Regarding the announcements made at the investor day, I posted this on another forum as part of an ongoing thread I think there's a lot of crossed wires here over his news and just assuming that Autodesk are following Adobe literally to the letter. Yes, there are Suites and now we have rental options (you can still buy perpetual), but this news is really just about Autodesk discontinuing their upgrade model. As of Feb 1st 2015 (still over a year away), users will be unable to upgrade old versions to the current version. Regarding upgrades and what the term actually means, this is the ability to upgrade an Autodesk product from a previous version to the current version. So for example, someone has purchased a product and they may have stopped their subscription (if they bought it) for a period of time, and they then wish to upgrade to the most current version of their software. Autodesk currently allow customer to upgrade their software to the current version, for a fee. Until this year, there were different upgrade pricing depending on how old the software version was, that someone wanted to upgrade from. Also, (if I recall) there was no limit to how old a version of software was, that someone wanted to upgrade. As of this year, the upgrade policy was changed and basically simplified. Only the previous 6 versions will remain upgradeable. Owners of older software versions who wanted the current version would need to purchase entirely new licenses. If you did have a version eligible for upgrading, a single pricing structure was put in place. User upgrading to the current version, would have to pay 70% of the new license price for an upgrade. Essentially, the idea of staying on an old version of software and then just paying to upgrade to the current version when you thought it was necessary, becomes detrimental to actually just keeping on subscription. To keep up to date and have previous version usage, it actually makes more sense to remain on subscription. G From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sebastien Sterling Sent: 16 October 2013 00:06 To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model is this it for maya ? http://www.autodesk.com/products/autodesk-maya/buy On 15 October 2013 23:48, Sergio Mucino sergio.muc...@modusfx.commailto:sergio.muc...@modusfx.com wrote: Autodesk is for some reason following Adobe's footsteps quite accurately. Adobe started selling suites... Adesk did. Adobe goes rental... Adesk follows. I really can't tell how positive or not the change will be, and what it will mean for the future of the tools... I guess we'll have to wait and see. The reactions to these decisions have been varied (some people are not happy at all, some are quite happy). [cid:image001.gif@01CECA5B.7D150F90] On 15/10/2013 4:52 PM, Sven Constable wrote: Of course I meant one third of the costs for every tool, not three. And I used thirds as a term incorrectly. It was lost in translation. Sorry about that. sven From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sven Constable Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:33 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: RE: Autodesk´s Sales model uhm, isn't he idea behind this model to cut any development costs by three thirds in particular and sell all three as one package for a higher price? And make it sound a good deal because costumers will get three tools instead of one even they don't need one or two of them? Maybe I do not comprehend here. From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Brassard Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:16 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model It is this article and the current Softimage cross-grade offer that make me decide to take the jump to the Ultimate
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
What about paying for the fancy *AD consulting* to get some QFEs for those showstoppers? Was that considered or attempted? On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Matt Lind ml...@carbinestudios.com wrote: I dispute it’s better to stay on subscription. ** ** Case in point being the fact we were stuck on Softimage 7.5 for nearly 5 years, not because we didn’t want to upgrade, but because there were no releases without technical issues preventing our upgrade. Being forced into subscription would be more expensive than the perpetual license model as we’d have to continue paying AD with no return to show for it. Under the perpetual license model we wouldn’t be obligated to pay anything. ** ** ** ** Matt ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Graham Bell *Sent:* Wednesday, October 16, 2013 4:22 AM *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* RE: Autodesk´s Sales model ** ** Regarding the announcements made at the investor day, I posted this on another forum as part of an ongoing thread…. ** ** I think there's a lot of crossed wires here over his news and just assuming that Autodesk are following Adobe literally to the letter. Yes, there are Suites and now we have rental options (you can still buy perpetual), but this news is really just about Autodesk discontinuing their upgrade model. As of Feb 1st 2015 (still over a year away), users will be unable to upgrade old versions to the current version. ** ** Regarding upgrades and what the term actually means, this is the ability to upgrade an Autodesk product from a previous version to the current version. So for example, someone has purchased a product and they may have stopped their subscription (if they bought it) for a period of time, and they then wish to upgrade to the most current version of their software.** ** ** ** Autodesk currently allow customer to upgrade their software to the current version, for a fee. Until this year, there were different upgrade pricing depending on how old the software version was, that someone wanted to upgrade from. Also, (if I recall) there was no limit to how old a version of software was, that someone wanted to upgrade. ** ** As of this year, the upgrade policy was changed and basically simplified. Only the previous 6 versions will remain upgradeable. Owners of older software versions who wanted the current version would need to purchase entirely new licenses. ** ** If you did have a version eligible for upgrading, a single pricing structure was put in place. User upgrading to the current version, would have to pay 70% of the new license price for an upgrade. ** ** Essentially, the idea of staying on an old version of software and then just paying to upgrade to the current version when you thought it was necessary, becomes detrimental to actually just keeping on subscription. To keep up to date and have previous version usage, it actually makes more sense to remain on subscription. ** ** ** ** G ** ** ** ** ** ** *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [ mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.comsoftimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Sebastien Sterling *Sent:* 16 October 2013 00:06 *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* Re: Autodesk´s Sales model ** ** is this it for maya ? http://www.autodesk.com/products/autodesk-maya/buy ** ** On 15 October 2013 23:48, Sergio Mucino sergio.muc...@modusfx.com wrote: Autodesk is for some reason following Adobe's footsteps quite accurately. Adobe started selling suites... Adesk did. Adobe goes rental... Adesk follows. I really can't tell how positive or not the change will be, and what it will mean for the future of the tools... I guess we'll have to wait and see. The reactions to these decisions have been varied (some people are not happy at all, some are quite happy). On 15/10/2013 4:52 PM, Sven Constable wrote: Of course I meant one third of the costs for every tool, not three. And I used thirds as a term incorrectly. It was lost in translation. Sorry about that. sven *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [ mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.comsoftimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Sven Constable *Sent:* Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:33 PM *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* RE: Autodesk´s Sales model uhm, isn't he idea behind this model to cut any development costs by three thirds in particular and sell all three as one package for a higher price? And make it sound a good deal because costumers will get three tools instead of one even they don't need one or two of them? Maybe I do not comprehend here. *From:* softimage-boun
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
I agreed with with Matt, we are still using 7.01, since we didn't upgrade from 7.01 to 7.5 when Autodesk bought Softimage from Avid now, we can't upgrade even if we want to. We would have been paying a lot over these years. Leoung On 10/16/2013 1:35 PM, Matt Lind wrote: I dispute its better to stay on subscription. Case in point being the fact we were stuck on Softimage 7.5 for nearly 5 years, not because we didnt want to upgrade, but because there were no releases without technical issues preventing our upgrade. Being forced into subscription would be more expensive than the perpetual license model as wed have to continue paying AD with no return to show for it. Under the perpetual license model we wouldnt be obligated to pay anything. Matt From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Graham Bell Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 4:22 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: RE: Autodesks Sales model Regarding the announcements made at the investor day, I posted this on another forum as part of an ongoing thread. I think there's a lot of crossed wires here over his news and just assuming that Autodesk are following Adobe literally to the letter. Yes, there are Suites and now we have rental options (you can still buy perpetual), but this news is really just about Autodesk discontinuing their upgrade model. As of Feb 1st 2015 (still over a year away), users will be unable to upgrade old versions to the current version. Regarding upgrades and what the term actually means, this is the ability to upgrade an Autodesk product from a previous version to the current version. So for example, someone has purchased a product and they may have stopped their subscription (if they bought it) for a period of time, and they then wish to upgrade to the most current version of their software. Autodesk currently allow customer to upgrade their software to the current version, for a fee. Until this year, there were different upgrade pricing depending on how old the software version was, that someone wanted to upgrade from. Also, (if I recall) there was no limit to how old a version of software was, that someone wanted to upgrade. As of this year, the upgrade policy was changed and basically simplified. Only the previous 6 versions will remain upgradeable. Owners of older software versions who wanted the current version would need to purchase entirely new licenses. If you did have a version eligible for upgrading, a single pricing structure was put in place. User upgrading to the current version, would have to pay 70% of the new license price for an upgrade. Essentially, the idea of staying on an old version of software and then just paying to upgrade to the current version when you thought it was necessary, becomes detrimental to actually just keeping on subscription. To keep up to date and have previous version usage, it actually makes more sense to remain on subscription. G From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sebastien Sterling Sent: 16 October 2013 00:06 To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesks Sales model is this it for maya ? http://www.autodesk.com/products/autodesk-maya/buy On 15 October 2013 23:48, Sergio Mucino sergio.muc...@modusfx.com wrote: Autodesk is for some reason following Adobe's footsteps quite accurately. Adobe started selling suites... Adesk did. Adobe goes rental... Adesk follows. I really can't tell how positive or not the change will be, and what it will mean for the future of the tools... I guess we'll
RE: Autodesk´s Sales model
You haven't been paying attention all these years, have you? All were attempted. Matt From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Alan Fregtman Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 10:52 AM To: XSI Mailing List Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model What about paying for the fancy AD consulting to get some QFEs for those showstoppers? Was that considered or attempted? On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Matt Lind ml...@carbinestudios.commailto:ml...@carbinestudios.com wrote: I dispute it's better to stay on subscription. Case in point being the fact we were stuck on Softimage 7.5 for nearly 5 years, not because we didn't want to upgrade, but because there were no releases without technical issues preventing our upgrade. Being forced into subscription would be more expensive than the perpetual license model as we'd have to continue paying AD with no return to show for it. Under the perpetual license model we wouldn't be obligated to pay anything. Matt From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Graham Bell Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 4:22 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: RE: Autodesk´s Sales model Regarding the announcements made at the investor day, I posted this on another forum as part of an ongoing thread I think there's a lot of crossed wires here over his news and just assuming that Autodesk are following Adobe literally to the letter. Yes, there are Suites and now we have rental options (you can still buy perpetual), but this news is really just about Autodesk discontinuing their upgrade model. As of Feb 1st 2015 (still over a year away), users will be unable to upgrade old versions to the current version. Regarding upgrades and what the term actually means, this is the ability to upgrade an Autodesk product from a previous version to the current version. So for example, someone has purchased a product and they may have stopped their subscription (if they bought it) for a period of time, and they then wish to upgrade to the most current version of their software. Autodesk currently allow customer to upgrade their software to the current version, for a fee. Until this year, there were different upgrade pricing depending on how old the software version was, that someone wanted to upgrade from. Also, (if I recall) there was no limit to how old a version of software was, that someone wanted to upgrade. As of this year, the upgrade policy was changed and basically simplified. Only the previous 6 versions will remain upgradeable. Owners of older software versions who wanted the current version would need to purchase entirely new licenses. If you did have a version eligible for upgrading, a single pricing structure was put in place. User upgrading to the current version, would have to pay 70% of the new license price for an upgrade. Essentially, the idea of staying on an old version of software and then just paying to upgrade to the current version when you thought it was necessary, becomes detrimental to actually just keeping on subscription. To keep up to date and have previous version usage, it actually makes more sense to remain on subscription. G From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sebastien Sterling Sent: 16 October 2013 00:06 To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model is this it for maya ? http://www.autodesk.com/products/autodesk-maya/buy On 15 October 2013 23:48, Sergio Mucino sergio.muc...@modusfx.commailto:sergio.muc...@modusfx.com wrote: Autodesk is for some reason following Adobe's footsteps quite accurately. Adobe started selling suites... Adesk did. Adobe goes rental... Adesk follows. I really can't tell how positive or not the change will be, and what it will mean for the future of the tools... I guess we'll have to wait and see. The reactions to these decisions have been varied (some people are not happy at all, some are quite happy). [cid:image001.gif@01CECA5E.BB4EC000] On 15/10/2013 4:52 PM, Sven Constable wrote: Of course I meant one third of the costs for every tool, not three. And I used thirds as a term incorrectly. It was lost in translation. Sorry about that. sven From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sven Constable Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:33 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: RE: Autodesk´s Sales model uhm, isn't he idea behind this model to cut any development costs
RE: Autodesk´s Sales model
Isn't that the point? They are trying to increase income, this is their plan, they are being forthright about it, now it's up to users to decide whether that investment is worth it. Perhaps, if more people were on the Softimage subscription model, paying into rd efforts, we might see a different software landscape today. I said perhaps. Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 13:59:19 -0400 From: digim...@digimata.com To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model I agreed with with Matt, we are still using 7.01, since we didn't upgrade from 7.01 to 7.5 when Autodesk bought Softimage from Avid now, we can't upgrade even if we want to. We would have been paying a lot over these years. Leoung On 10/16/2013 1:35 PM, Matt Lind wrote: I dispute it’s better to stay on subscription. Case in point being the fact we were stuck on Softimage 7.5 for nearly 5 years, not because we didn’t want to upgrade, but because there were no releases without technical issues preventing our upgrade. Being forced into subscription would be more expensive than the perpetual license model as we’d have to continue paying AD with no return to show for it. Under the perpetual license model we wouldn’t be obligated to pay anything. Matt From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Graham Bell Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 4:22 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: RE: Autodesk´s Sales model Regarding the announcements made at the investor day, I posted this on another forum as part of an ongoing thread…. I think there's a lot of crossed wires here over his news and just assuming that Autodesk are following Adobe literally to the letter. Yes, there are Suites and now we have rental options (you can still buy perpetual), but this news is really just about Autodesk discontinuing their upgrade model. As of Feb 1st 2015 (still over a year away), users will be unable to upgrade old versions to the current version. Regarding upgrades and what the term actually means, this is the ability to upgrade an Autodesk product from a previous version to the current version. So for example, someone has purchased a product and they may have stopped their subscription (if they bought it) for a period of time, and they then wish to upgrade to the most current version of their software. Autodesk currently allow customer to upgrade their software to the current version, for a fee. Until this year, there were different upgrade pricing depending on how old the software version was, that someone wanted to upgrade from. Also, (if I recall) there was no limit to how old a version of software was, that someone wanted to upgrade. As of this year, the upgrade policy was changed and basically simplified. Only the previous 6 versions will remain upgradeable. Owners of older software versions who wanted the current version would need to purchase entirely new licenses. If you did have a version eligible for upgrading, a single pricing structure was put in place. User upgrading to the current version, would have to pay 70% of the new license price for an upgrade. Essentially, the idea of staying on an old version of software and then just paying to upgrade to the current version when you thought it was necessary, becomes detrimental to actually just keeping on subscription. To keep up to date and have previous version usage, it actually makes more sense to remain on subscription. G From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sebastien Sterling Sent: 16 October 2013 00:06 To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model is this it for maya ? http://www.autodesk.com/products/autodesk-maya/buy
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
As I recall salesman is supposed to attract customer to gain their trust and support. Now it is other way around??? Customers should give their total support and money in order to be treated like customers?? Actually there is something similar happening with buying games as well... Before there was always demo to show potential audience what is offered so they can decide whether to buy. Now it is all up to buy before seeing pre-purchase policy. Is consumer market, both games and software that much brained washed??? With this rate soon people will be pre-ordering ideas and empty promises. Oh wait that is already happening.. subscription? paying upfront for something that you maybe will receive.. someday.. maybe? On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 8:25 PM, jim bough jimbo...@hotmail.com wrote: Isn't that the point? They are trying to increase income, this is their plan, they are being forthright about it, now it's up to users to decide whether that investment is worth it. Perhaps, if more people were on the Softimage subscription model, paying into rd efforts, we might see a different software landscape today. I said perhaps. -- Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 13:59:19 -0400 From: digim...@digimata.com To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model I agreed with with Matt, we are still using 7.01, since we didn't upgrade from 7.01 to 7.5 when Autodesk bought Softimage from Avid now, we can't upgrade even if we want to. We would have been paying a lot over these years. Leoung On 10/16/2013 1:35 PM, Matt Lind wrote: I dispute it’s better to stay on subscription. Case in point being the fact we were stuck on Softimage 7.5 for nearly 5 years, not because we didn’t want to upgrade, but because there were no releases without technical issues preventing our upgrade. Being forced into subscription would be more expensive than the perpetual license model as we’d have to continue paying AD with no return to show for it. Under the perpetual license model we wouldn’t be obligated to pay anything. Matt *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [ mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.comsoftimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Graham Bell *Sent:* Wednesday, October 16, 2013 4:22 AM *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* RE: Autodesk´s Sales model Regarding the announcements made at the investor day, I posted this on another forum as part of an ongoing thread…. I think there's a lot of crossed wires here over his news and just assuming that Autodesk are following Adobe literally to the letter. Yes, there are Suites and now we have rental options (you can still buy perpetual), but this news is really just about Autodesk discontinuing their upgrade model. As of Feb 1st 2015 (still over a year away), users will be unable to upgrade old versions to the current version. Regarding upgrades and what the term actually means, this is the ability to upgrade an Autodesk product from a previous version to the current version. So for example, someone has purchased a product and they may have stopped their subscription (if they bought it) for a period of time, and they then wish to upgrade to the most current version of their software. Autodesk currently allow customer to upgrade their software to the current version, for a fee. Until this year, there were different upgrade pricing depending on how old the software version was, that someone wanted to upgrade from. Also, (if I recall) there was no limit to how old a version of software was, that someone wanted to upgrade. As of this year, the upgrade policy was changed and basically simplified. Only the previous 6 versions will remain upgradeable. Owners of older software versions who wanted the current version would need to purchase entirely new licenses. If you did have a version eligible for upgrading, a single pricing structure was put in place. User upgrading to the current version, would have to pay 70% of the new license price for an upgrade. Essentially, the idea of staying on an old version of software and then just paying to upgrade to the current version when you thought it was necessary, becomes detrimental to actually just keeping on subscription. To keep up to date and have previous version usage, it actually makes more sense to remain on subscription. G *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [ mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.comsoftimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Sebastien Sterling *Sent:* 16 October 2013 00:06 *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* Re: Autodesk´s Sales model is this it for maya ? http://www.autodesk.com/products/autodesk-maya/buy On 15 October 2013 23:48, Sergio Mucino sergio.muc...@modusfx.com wrote: Autodesk is for some reason following Adobe's footsteps quite accurately. Adobe started
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Mirko Jankovic mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com wrote: As I recall salesman is supposed to attract customer to gain their trust and support. Now it is other way around??? Customers should give their total support and money in order to be treated like customers?? Actually there is something similar happening with buying games as well... Before there was always demo to show potential audience what is offered so they can decide whether to buy. Now it is all up to buy before seeing pre-purchase policy. Is consumer market, both games and software that much brained washed??? With this rate soon people will be pre-ordering ideas and empty promises. Oh wait that is already happening.. subscription? paying upfront for something that you maybe will receive.. someday.. maybe? In theory, it shouldn't be your problem to fund the development, but it has ended up kind of that way. The reason is that the market is low volume and difficult to address. So now, instead of paying 12k$ or more for softimage, you pay 3,500$ plus 850$ a year. (Note: people also paid thousands for the yearly maintenance plan when it was 12k$) In my opinion, it's best for your inner peace to consider this kind of software as enterprise, low-volume, software, or as a service, like electricity, rent, employee salaries, and not a one time purchase like consumer goods which work on high volume. Subscription has always been critical to Softimage. The user base is rather small and static, so it's difficult to count on new seats and upgrades.
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
This is a chicken/egg thing imo. I'd agree with you if for a second I thought that subscriptions fell off before development did but I really doubt that's the case here. Instead I bet there's a pretty solid correlation between AD purchasing Softimage and a erosion of the user base due to reduced and poorly directed development. AD is a big company with a LOT of products that cover a massive range, they do not and cannot take the same development risks that teams take with isolated products that are fighting for market share. People bought licenses of Softimage, they were happy, AD bought Soft and satisfaction has decreased fairly linearly over time. It's really simple, people stopped investing because they felt they weren't getting a good enough return. Why keep shoving money into a product that hasn't offered you anything new or useful for your pipeline over several years? We're all running businesses here. On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 1:57 PM, jim bough jimbo...@hotmail.com wrote: I agree with you 100%. That is the case now. I do however feel that people using older versions, did not invest in the future of Softimage. Of course, there are many other considerations, SDK, core, etc. But with the investment, perhaps many of these wouldn't be the factor they are now either. And, not to rail against businesses that chose this path in the past, business is business. But, I do feel software has become too cheap for the rd requirement of users expectations. Yes, there is Blender, but I prefer to invest in my software.. it really is a minimal investment compared to what I make from it.
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
Point taken, but I would kinda dispute, your dispute :-) Your technical issues aside for a moment, just purely from the financial point of view, it really does make more sense. Prior to this year, I think you could get away with dropping off subs for maybe a year or two, because the upgrade price (for 3 versions back) was only 50% of the price of a new seat. Some were prepared to swallow that cost. Now that has changed and all upgrades are currently 70%, it's a far bigger hit. The trick is to do your sums. Of course it's peoples prerogative as to whether they want to be on Subscription, or feel it's worth it. But if you always want to be current, then being on Subs is a better option. Plus you get previous versions rights. G From: Matt Lind ml...@carbinestudios.commailto:ml...@carbinestudios.com Reply-To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 17:35:52 + To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: RE: Autodesk´s Sales model I dispute it’s better to stay on subscription. Case in point being the fact we were stuck on Softimage 7.5 for nearly 5 years, not because we didn’t want to upgrade, but because there were no releases without technical issues preventing our upgrade. Being forced into subscription would be more expensive than the perpetual license model as we’d have to continue paying AD with no return to show for it. Under the perpetual license model we wouldn’t be obligated to pay anything. Matt From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Graham Bell Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 4:22 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: RE: Autodesk´s Sales model Regarding the announcements made at the investor day, I posted this on another forum as part of an ongoing thread…. I think there's a lot of crossed wires here over his news and just assuming that Autodesk are following Adobe literally to the letter. Yes, there are Suites and now we have rental options (you can still buy perpetual), but this news is really just about Autodesk discontinuing their upgrade model. As of Feb 1st 2015 (still over a year away), users will be unable to upgrade old versions to the current version. Regarding upgrades and what the term actually means, this is the ability to upgrade an Autodesk product from a previous version to the current version. So for example, someone has purchased a product and they may have stopped their subscription (if they bought it) for a period of time, and they then wish to upgrade to the most current version of their software. Autodesk currently allow customer to upgrade their software to the current version, for a fee. Until this year, there were different upgrade pricing depending on how old the software version was, that someone wanted to upgrade from. Also, (if I recall) there was no limit to how old a version of software was, that someone wanted to upgrade. As of this year, the upgrade policy was changed and basically simplified. Only the previous 6 versions will remain upgradeable. Owners of older software versions who wanted the current version would need to purchase entirely new licenses. If you did have a version eligible for upgrading, a single pricing structure was put in place. User upgrading to the current version, would have to pay 70% of the new license price for an upgrade. Essentially, the idea of staying on an old version of software and then just paying to upgrade to the current version when you thought it was necessary, becomes detrimental to actually just keeping on subscription. To keep up to date and have previous version usage, it actually makes more sense to remain on subscription. G From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sebastien Sterling Sent: 16 October 2013 00:06 To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model is this it for maya ? http://www.autodesk.com/products/autodesk-maya/buy On 15 October 2013 23:48, Sergio Mucino sergio.muc...@modusfx.commailto:sergio.muc...@modusfx.com wrote: Autodesk is for some reason following Adobe's footsteps quite accurately. Adobe started selling suites... Adesk did. Adobe goes rental... Adesk follows. I really can't tell how positive or not the change will be, and what it will mean for the future of the tools... I guess we'll have to wait and see. The reactions to these decisions have been varied (some people are not happy at all, some are quite happy). [cid:image001.gif@01CECA5B.7D150F90] On 15/10
RE: Autodesk´s Sales model
Technical issues cannot be put aside, that is part of my point. Although we upgraded to 2013 SP1 earlier this year, 80% of our inventory is still in 7.5 format and many of those scenes and models contain references to old RTS2 realtime shaders which are no longer supported in the current versions - softimage crashes on load. 6 versions back of support is not far enough back for a project like I am currently working on. We have assets that were last touched in XSI v3.5 or XSI v4.0 but haven't touched them largely because of the lack of migration path available. The old SI Particle system was ripped out in v7.x, so any file that used those particles are kind of orphaned. We either rebuild it from scratch or leave it as is and hope it lasts. We haven't had the time/resources available to update those assets, so we're crossing our fingers really tight we don't have to touch them. Value is defined by the customer, not the seller. For us in particular, subscription provides no additional benefits than the older annual upgrade model, but costs more per our needs. When I hear the word 'subscription', I think of magazine subscription where content is provided on a regular and continuing basis like a stream and it's the customer's prerogative to jump into the stream or bail out. Applied to the case of software, I would intuitively expect builds and point releases provided on a regular intervals throughout the year. A download manager would be able to 'diff' what you have with what's available and patch your install appropriately. New builds should be available weekly or bi-weekly or monthly at worst case, and perhaps a point release every 8-10 weeks, with a major release once per year. The current model of getting one release per year and maybe a service pack or two later does not qualify as a subscription in my book. Service packs are damn, we screwed up. Here are the fixes to our mistakes and the things we didn't finish. The fact I have to download a service pack should be viewed as an inconvenience to the customer and avoided at all costs, not the customer pining for relief saying, thank god I can now get work done and go home at a decent hour. Yes, as stated in earlier posts, the logic and business mindset has been conditioned to be topsy-turvy. Matt From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Graham Bell Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 2:13 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model Point taken, but I would kinda dispute, your dispute :-) Your technical issues aside for a moment, just purely from the financial point of view, it really does make more sense. Prior to this year, I think you could get away with dropping off subs for maybe a year or two, because the upgrade price (for 3 versions back) was only 50% of the price of a new seat. Some were prepared to swallow that cost. Now that has changed and all upgrades are currently 70%, it's a far bigger hit. The trick is to do your sums. Of course it's peoples prerogative as to whether they want to be on Subscription, or feel it's worth it. But if you always want to be current, then being on Subs is a better option. Plus you get previous versions rights. G From: Matt Lind ml...@carbinestudios.commailto:ml...@carbinestudios.com Reply-To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 17:35:52 + To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: RE: Autodesk´s Sales model I dispute it's better to stay on subscription. Case in point being the fact we were stuck on Softimage 7.5 for nearly 5 years, not because we didn't want to upgrade, but because there were no releases without technical issues preventing our upgrade. Being forced into subscription would be more expensive than the perpetual license model as we'd have to continue paying AD with no return to show for it. Under the perpetual license model we wouldn't be obligated to pay anything. Matt From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Graham Bell Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 4:22 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: RE: Autodesk´s Sales model Regarding the announcements made at the investor day, I posted this on another forum as part of an ongoing thread I think there's a lot of crossed wires here over his news and just assuming that Autodesk are following Adobe literally to the letter. Yes, there are Suites and now we have rental options (you can still buy perpetual), but this news is really just about Autodesk discontinuing their upgrade
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
This pretty much hits the nail on the head IMO. A number of factors converging has made it so that people have been slowly conditioned to think DCC software and its sales and updates right now are OK to be as cheap as they are on the frontload expenditure (a couple to three and half grands for software with some of the largest and most varied and complex sets of functionalities ever), and something worth subscribing to. The truth is subscription, in any sane world, would require a vibrant, lively and worthy eco-system of user base, community and software support. At present time subscription means you get the occasional SP/ext, which is usually borked beyond repair and will take another couple fixes to be fixed, or will be fixed in the next major (Maya 2014 ext had a bucketload of features but turned out unusably broken due to a ridiculously nasty shapes bug). At one point upgrading becomes a game of what bugs you can live with, the old ones you know, or the new ones introduced elsewhere while fixing those. Solid releases exist, of course, at least within restricted domains of functionalities one might be interested in, and that's why often times people stick to a release for five years. It's not that they don't want to upgrad, it's that it's the ONE safe spot in a bloody mine field of bugs and disasters that are behind you (older versions that didn't work), and around you (new versions that break a different piece every time). There is no community support worth mentioning, the Area is a wasteland of despair where the only noise is that of noob souls wailing in despair, the app shop useless (the few contributors are all giving up on it when it takes weeks to months for AD to clear a free minor update to their stuff). There is no such thing as a quick fix, let alone weekly or forthnightly builds. The support itself is useless to anybody but the most superficial user. Training/educational content of any depth is scarce to unavailable (a few smatterings of superficial stuff again, at best), and there is no effort in sight to change that. Lastly, being on subscription provides with no added network or interaction at all. There IS a thriving eco-system around some of the softwares, but all of it, and I literally mean ALL of it, is down to your social network, reputation, and putting in the hard miles to connect and keep track of who's who and what websites to follow. Beta testing, friends on the inside, the right blogs and websites, third party software and training providers... those often work and work to levels you simply wouldn't expect a completely anarchic system to, and they are free, and usually absolutely unsupported by AD, which instead keeps throwing money or hours at the big studios that steer their main horse the most. This isn't bad, and I'm not having a go at AD, my current situation is actually quite alright in fact, but I find that when I really look at it from a distance there is simply no incentive for me to wish to pay money on a regular basis to AD. The best is all free, or user driven, or both. I'm not against subscription model, not at all actually, but AD and Adobe are putting the cart before the horses, changing their business model well before they are anywhere within a light year of being able to foster and support the eco-system , sales and dev models that such business model requires for users to be treated fairly. Right now it's a lose/lose situation AFAIC, and a huge demand on my trust ahead of time when track record past is diametrically opposite to what one would consider encouraging. On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 8:31 AM, Matt Lind ml...@carbinestudios.com wrote: When I hear the word ‘subscription’, I think of magazine subscription where content is provided on a regular and continuing basis like a stream and it’s the customer’s prerogative to jump into the stream or bail out. Applied to the case of software, I would intuitively expect builds and point releases provided on a regular intervals throughout the year. A download manager would be able to ‘diff’ what you have with what’s available and patch your install appropriately. New builds should be available weekly or bi-weekly or monthly at worst case, and perhaps a point release every 8-10 weeks, with a major release once per year. The current model of getting one release per year and maybe a service pack or two later does not qualify as a subscription in my book. Service packs are “damn, we screwed up. Here are the fixes to our mistakes and the things we didn’t finish”. The fact I have to download a service pack should be viewed as an inconvenience to the customer and avoided at all costs, not the customer pining for relief saying, “thank god I can now get work done and go home at a decent hour”. ** ** Yes, as stated in earlier posts, the logic and business mindset has been conditioned to be topsy-turvy.
RE: Autodesk´s Sales model
I have nothing against a subscription model. if done well it can work really well. However subscription only works well if you have the following. a) Getting value for money (percieved or actual) b) There is an openness about what is coming up in future releases Without that there is zero incentive for people to put money down on something that is a big unknown. An easy way to fix point a) is to have more releases a year. There is no reason you cant have two or even three releases a year. Currently you have one and its pretty much a crap-shoot as to whether you get anything worthwhile. Well the way to fix point b is pretty obvious. When you have a subscription model you cant hide behind we are a listed company bullshit anymore. Its a very different thing to having people buy something they know about, to making your customers take all the risk of putting money down in the vague hope of getting something useful. If you want subscription to work you have to have a roadmap its simply a non negotiable thing. From: Mirko Jankovic [mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com] Sent: 17 October 2013 12:16 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model Actually no-one as I'm aware of ever mentioned problem with price of subscription but subscription it self. Tool that is worth thousands but earns you even more than that is good investment. An $1 screwdriver that you will never ever use is waste of money and bad investment. Throwing any kind of $$$ at subscription and not getting anything back .. what basked does that goes for? On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Raffaele Fragapane raffsxsil...@googlemail.commailto:raffsxsil...@googlemail.com wrote: This pretty much hits the nail on the head IMO. A number of factors converging has made it so that people have been slowly conditioned to think DCC software and its sales and updates right now are OK to be as cheap as they are on the frontload expenditure (a couple to three and half grands for software with some of the largest and most varied and complex sets of functionalities ever), and something worth subscribing to. The truth is subscription, in any sane world, would require a vibrant, lively and worthy eco-system of user base, community and software support. At present time subscription means you get the occasional SP/ext, which is usually borked beyond repair and will take another couple fixes to be fixed, or will be fixed in the next major (Maya 2014 ext had a bucketload of features but turned out unusably broken due to a ridiculously nasty shapes bug). At one point upgrading becomes a game of what bugs you can live with, the old ones you know, or the new ones introduced elsewhere while fixing those. Solid releases exist, of course, at least within restricted domains of functionalities one might be interested in, and that's why often times people stick to a release for five years. It's not that they don't want to upgrad, it's that it's the ONE safe spot in a bloody mine field of bugs and disasters that are behind you (older versions that didn't work), and around you (new versions that break a different piece every time). There is no community support worth mentioning, the Area is a wasteland of despair where the only noise is that of noob souls wailing in despair, the app shop useless (the few contributors are all giving up on it when it takes weeks to months for AD to clear a free minor update to their stuff). There is no such thing as a quick fix, let alone weekly or forthnightly builds. The support itself is useless to anybody but the most superficial user. Training/educational content of any depth is scarce to unavailable (a few smatterings of superficial stuff again, at best), and there is no effort in sight to change that. Lastly, being on subscription provides with no added network or interaction at all. There IS a thriving eco-system around some of the softwares, but all of it, and I literally mean ALL of it, is down to your social network, reputation, and putting in the hard miles to connect and keep track of who's who and what websites to follow. Beta testing, friends on the inside, the right blogs and websites, third party software and training providers... those often work and work to levels you simply wouldn't expect a completely anarchic system to, and they are free, and usually absolutely unsupported by AD, which instead keeps throwing money or hours at the big studios that steer their main horse the most. This isn't bad, and I'm not having a go at AD, my current situation is actually quite alright in fact, but I find that when I really look at it from a distance there is simply no incentive for me to wish to pay money on a regular basis to AD. The best is all free, or user driven, or both. I'm not against subscription model, not at all actually, but AD and Adobe are putting the cart before the horses, changing their business model well before
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
Did you read the whole thing? From the article: *The plan is to shift customers away from single product purchases toward suites, and to move from buying perpetual licenses to acquiring software on long-term subscription or short-term rental.* On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 1:56 PM, David Rivera activemotionpictu...@yahoo.com wrote: I came across this link: http://gfxspeak.com/2013/10/02/autodesk-sales-strategy-includes-discontinuing-upgrade-purchases/ So what happened to the rental sales model? David R.
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
It is this article and the current Softimage cross-grade offer that make me decide to take the jump to the Ultimate Suite. I am glad I did, I can now test plugins and shaders on the three platforms and do other things as well. And enough money left for some nice plugins or apps too. AD may have a smart thing going here, let's see what the future bring. On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Alan Fregtman alan.fregt...@gmail.comwrote: Did you read the whole thing? From the article: *The plan is to shift customers away from single product purchases toward suites, and to move from buying perpetual licenses to acquiring software on long-term subscription or short-term rental.* On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 1:56 PM, David Rivera activemotionpictu...@yahoo.com wrote: I came across this link: http://gfxspeak.com/2013/10/02/autodesk-sales-strategy-includes-discontinuing-upgrade-purchases/ So what happened to the rental sales model? David R.
RE: Autodesk´s Sales model
uhm, isn't he idea behind this model to cut any development costs by three thirds in particular and sell all three as one package for a higher price? And make it sound a good deal because costumers will get three tools instead of one even they don't need one or two of them? Maybe I do not comprehend here. From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Brassard Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:16 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model It is this article and the current Softimage cross-grade offer that make me decide to take the jump to the Ultimate Suite. I am glad I did, I can now test plugins and shaders on the three platforms and do other things as well. And enough money left for some nice plugins or apps too. AD may have a smart thing going here, let's see what the future bring. On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Alan Fregtman alan.fregt...@gmail.com wrote: Did you read the whole thing? From the article: The plan is to shift customers away from single product purchases toward suites, and to move from buying perpetual licenses to acquiring software on long-term subscription or short-term rental. On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 1:56 PM, David Rivera activemotionpictu...@yahoo.com wrote: I came across this link: http://gfxspeak.com/2013/10/02/autodesk-sales-strategy-includes-discontinuin g-upgrade-purchases/ So what happened to the rental sales model? David R.
RE: Autodesk´s Sales model
Of course I meant one third of the costs for every tool, not three. And I used thirds as a term incorrectly. It was lost in translation. Sorry about that. sven From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sven Constable Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:33 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: RE: Autodesk´s Sales model uhm, isn't he idea behind this model to cut any development costs by three thirds in particular and sell all three as one package for a higher price? And make it sound a good deal because costumers will get three tools instead of one even they don't need one or two of them? Maybe I do not comprehend here. From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Brassard Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:16 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model It is this article and the current Softimage cross-grade offer that make me decide to take the jump to the Ultimate Suite. I am glad I did, I can now test plugins and shaders on the three platforms and do other things as well. And enough money left for some nice plugins or apps too. AD may have a smart thing going here, let's see what the future bring. On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Alan Fregtman alan.fregt...@gmail.com wrote: Did you read the whole thing? From the article: The plan is to shift customers away from single product purchases toward suites, and to move from buying perpetual licenses to acquiring software on long-term subscription or short-term rental. On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 1:56 PM, David Rivera activemotionpictu...@yahoo.com wrote: I came across this link: http://gfxspeak.com/2013/10/02/autodesk-sales-strategy-includes-discontinuin g-upgrade-purchases/ So what happened to the rental sales model? David R.
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
it also seems to be selling a lot of insider shares recently whilst buying 0 - with Carl Bass (the boss) shedding 40,000 recently.. not that I am a markets speculator - but I wonder what that means if anything? http://seekingalpha.com/article/1746722-insiders-are-selling-autodesk?source=email_rt_article_readmore On 15 October 2013 21:52, Sven Constable sixsi_l...@imagefront.de wrote: Of course I meant one third of the costs for every tool, not three. And I used thirds as a term incorrectly. It was lost in translation. Sorry about that. ** ** sven ** ** *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Sven Constable *Sent:* Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:33 PM *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* RE: Autodesk´s Sales model ** ** uhm, isn't he idea behind this model to cut any development costs by three thirds in particular and sell all three as one package for a higher price? And make it sound a good deal because costumers will get three tools instead of one even they don't need one or two of them? Maybe I do not comprehend here. *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Daniel Brassard *Sent:* Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:16 PM *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* Re: Autodesk´s Sales model ** ** It is this article and the current Softimage cross-grade offer that make me decide to take the jump to the Ultimate Suite. I am glad I did, I can now test plugins and shaders on the three platforms and do other things as well. And enough money left for some nice plugins or apps too. ** ** AD may have a smart thing going here, let's see what the future bring. ** ** On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Alan Fregtman alan.fregt...@gmail.com wrote: Did you read the whole thing? ** ** From the article: *The plan is to shift customers away from single product purchases toward suites, and to move from buying perpetual licenses to acquiring software on long-term subscription or short-term rental.* ** ** ** ** On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 1:56 PM, David Rivera activemotionpictu...@yahoo.com wrote: I came across this link: http://gfxspeak.com/2013/10/02/autodesk-sales-strategy-includes-discontinuing-upgrade-purchases/ ** ** So what happened to the rental sales model? ** ** David R. ** ** ** **
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
I see the feature list year by year and well… I am very disappointed on Autodesk's way of handling quite a few products, starting from Softimage, Motion Builder, Mudbox, etc… my 2 cents Jordi Bares jordiba...@gmail.com On 15 Oct 2013, at 21:33, Sven Constable sixsi_l...@imagefront.de wrote: uhm, isn't he idea behind this model to cut any development costs by three thirds in particular and sell all three as one package for a higher price? And make it sound a good deal because costumers will get three tools instead of one even they don't need one or two of them? Maybe I do not comprehend here. From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Brassard Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:16 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesk´s Sales model It is this article and the current Softimage cross-grade offer that make me decide to take the jump to the Ultimate Suite. I am glad I did, I can now test plugins and shaders on the three platforms and do other things as well. And enough money left for some nice plugins or apps too. AD may have a smart thing going here, let's see what the future bring. On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Alan Fregtman alan.fregt...@gmail.com wrote: Did you read the whole thing? From the article: The plan is to shift customers away from single product purchases toward suites, and to move from buying perpetual licenses to acquiring software on long-term subscription or short-term rental. On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 1:56 PM, David Rivera activemotionpictu...@yahoo.com wrote: I came across this link: http://gfxspeak.com/2013/10/02/autodesk-sales-strategy-includes-discontinuing-upgrade-purchases/ So what happened to the rental sales model? David R.
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
Autodesk is for some reason following Adobe's footsteps quite accurately. Adobe started selling suites... Adesk did. Adobe goes rental... Adesk follows. I really can't tell how positive or not the change will be, and what it will mean for the future of the tools... I guess we'll have to wait and see. The reactions to these decisions have been varied (some people are not happy at all, some are quite happy). On 15/10/2013 4:52 PM, Sven Constable wrote: Of course I meant one third of the costs for every tool, not three. And I used "thirds" as a term incorrectly. It was lost in translation. Sorry about that. sven From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sven Constable Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:33 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: RE: Autodesks Sales model uhm, isn't he idea behind this model to cut any development costs by three thirds in particular and sell all three as one package for a higher price? And make it sound a good deal because costumers will get three tools instead of one even they don't need one or two of them? Maybe I do not comprehend here. From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Brassard Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:16 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Autodesks Sales model It is this article and the current Softimage cross-grade offer that make me decide to take the jump to the Ultimate Suite. I am glad I did, I can now test plugins and shaders on the three platforms and do other things as well. And enough money left for some nice plugins or apps too. AD may have a smart thing going here, let's see what the future bring. On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Alan Fregtman alan.fregt...@gmail.com wrote: Did you read the whole thing? From the article: "The plan is to shift customers away from single product purchases toward suites, and to move from buying perpetual licenses to acquiring software on long-term subscriptionor short-term rental." On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 1:56 PM, David Rivera activemotionpictu...@yahoo.com wrote: I came across this link: http://gfxspeak.com/2013/10/02/autodesk-sales-strategy-includes-discontinuing-upgrade-purchases/ So what happened to the "rental" sales model? David R.
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
is this it for maya ? http://www.autodesk.com/products/autodesk-maya/buy On 15 October 2013 23:48, Sergio Mucino sergio.muc...@modusfx.com wrote: Autodesk is for some reason following Adobe's footsteps quite accurately. Adobe started selling suites... Adesk did. Adobe goes rental... Adesk follows. I really can't tell how positive or not the change will be, and what it will mean for the future of the tools... I guess we'll have to wait and see. The reactions to these decisions have been varied (some people are not happy at all, some are quite happy). On 15/10/2013 4:52 PM, Sven Constable wrote: Of course I meant one third of the costs for every tool, not three. And I used thirds as a term incorrectly. It was lost in translation. Sorry about that. ** ** sven ** ** *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [ mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.comsoftimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Sven Constable *Sent:* Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:33 PM *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* RE: Autodesk´s Sales model ** ** uhm, isn't he idea behind this model to cut any development costs by three thirds in particular and sell all three as one package for a higher price? And make it sound a good deal because costumers will get three tools instead of one even they don't need one or two of them? Maybe I do not comprehend here. *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [ mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.comsoftimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Daniel Brassard *Sent:* Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:16 PM *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* Re: Autodesk´s Sales model ** ** It is this article and the current Softimage cross-grade offer that make me decide to take the jump to the Ultimate Suite. I am glad I did, I can now test plugins and shaders on the three platforms and do other things as well. And enough money left for some nice plugins or apps too. ** ** AD may have a smart thing going here, let's see what the future bring. ** ** On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Alan Fregtman alan.fregt...@gmail.com wrote: Did you read the whole thing? ** ** From the article: *The plan is to shift customers away from single product purchases toward suites, and to move from buying perpetual licenses to acquiring software on long-term subscription or short-term rental.* ** ** ** ** On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 1:56 PM, David Rivera activemotionpictu...@yahoo.com wrote: I came across this link: http://gfxspeak.com/2013/10/02/autodesk-sales-strategy-includes-discontinuing-upgrade-purchases/ ** ** So what happened to the rental sales model? ** ** David R. ** ** ** ** Sergio Mucino_Signature_email.gif
Re: Autodesk´s Sales model
When people start to wonder why ADSK is doing something in a particular way, I always think of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkJ-Uy5dt5g I find it sadly illuminating, if also illustrative of the challenges they've set themselves. On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Sebastien Sterling sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com wrote: is this it for maya ? http://www.autodesk.com/products/autodesk-maya/buy On 15 October 2013 23:48, Sergio Mucino sergio.muc...@modusfx.com wrote: Autodesk is for some reason following Adobe's footsteps quite accurately. Adobe started selling suites... Adesk did. Adobe goes rental... Adesk follows. I really can't tell how positive or not the change will be, and what it will mean for the future of the tools... I guess we'll have to wait and see. The reactions to these decisions have been varied (some people are not happy at all, some are quite happy). On 15/10/2013 4:52 PM, Sven Constable wrote: Of course I meant one third of the costs for every tool, not three. And I used thirds as a term incorrectly. It was lost in translation. Sorry about that. ** ** sven ** ** *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [ mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.comsoftimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Sven Constable *Sent:* Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:33 PM *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* RE: Autodesk´s Sales model ** ** uhm, isn't he idea behind this model to cut any development costs by three thirds in particular and sell all three as one package for a higher price? And make it sound a good deal because costumers will get three tools instead of one even they don't need one or two of them? Maybe I do not comprehend here. *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [ mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.comsoftimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Daniel Brassard *Sent:* Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:16 PM *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* Re: Autodesk´s Sales model ** ** It is this article and the current Softimage cross-grade offer that make me decide to take the jump to the Ultimate Suite. I am glad I did, I can now test plugins and shaders on the three platforms and do other things as well. And enough money left for some nice plugins or apps too. ** ** AD may have a smart thing going here, let's see what the future bring.*** * ** ** On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Alan Fregtman alan.fregt...@gmail.com wrote: Did you read the whole thing? ** ** From the article: *The plan is to shift customers away from single product purchases toward suites, and to move from buying perpetual licenses to acquiring software on long-term subscription or short-term rental.* ** ** ** ** On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 1:56 PM, David Rivera activemotionpictu...@yahoo.com wrote: I came across this link: http://gfxspeak.com/2013/10/02/autodesk-sales-strategy-includes-discontinuing-upgrade-purchases/ ** ** So what happened to the rental sales model? ** ** David R. ** ** ** ** Sergio Mucino_Signature_email.gif
