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 r&d efforts, we might see a different software landscape today. I said perhaps. Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 13:59:19 -0400 From: [email protected] To: [email protected] 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:
[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Graham Bell
Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 4:22 AM
To: [email protected]
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:
[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Sebastien Sterling
Sent: 16 October 2013 00:06
To: [email protected]
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 <[email protected]>
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:
[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Sven Constable
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:33
PM
To: [email protected]
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:
[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Daniel Brassard
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:16 PM
To: [email protected]
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 <[email protected]>
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
<[email protected]>
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.
<<inline: ATT00001>>
