pay 399 per month per license to access your data and functionality, and then pay another 399 a month later, and do it again and again :) sure... independents are catered to... :P
On 30 August 2014 00:32, Sergio Mucino <[email protected]> wrote: > It was just a matter of time until Autodesk figured out that software is > not where the value is, but in the data created with it. Going rental-only > has upsides and downsides, and the biggest downside I see is it becomes a > very effective way to hold your data hostage. You're forced to pay just go > access your data. In some cases, this may be irrelevant, in others, it > won't be. > > Another thing to consider is that sometimes, we forget to see these > maneuvers through Autodesk's eyes. Autodesk is much more than the M&E > division. Autodesk has figured that, like Adobe, it has the luxury of being > not only the standard, but pretty much a monopoly (other CAD products are > as much as an alternative to AutoCAD, as GIMP is an alternative to > Photoshop). So, there's little to fear there in terms of user migration. > Unfortunately for the M&E division, their products do have very viable > alternatives out there (many topics on this list are testament to that). I > guess we'll have to wait and see (it wouldn't be the first time either that > a given statement never comes to materialize itself). > > I don't think this would affect the big guys as it would the smaller shops > and freelancers. I can see those walking away definitively. Does Autodesk > care? I'm not really sure. They certainly didn't care for the entire user > base of an entire product (in terms of asking the users what they thought > if the idea). > > Anyway, don't wanna start the whole pain cycle all over again :-). It's > Friday, and I got better things to do than being online. Like... Fallout > 3!! :-D (maybe I can finish it in a few months... After... What? 4 years > playing it?). > > Sergio Muciño. > Sent from my iPad. > > On Aug 29, 2014, at 6:41 PM, Jason S <[email protected]> wrote: > > > From Si-Community, quoting 'jonmoore' at C4DCafe.com > > With *upgrades due to be eliminated early next year,* next up on > Autodesk's chopping block is the perpetual license. Here is the exchange > from a recent conference call with financial analysts (reproduced with > permission of Seeking Alpha): > > Matt Hedberg (RBC Capital Markets): Carl, I'm wondering, when might you > eliminate perpetual sales? > And maybe more generically, what is the framework for eventually pulling > this license option? > > Carl Bass (Autodesk): I'll ask you Matt, what do you think is a good > timeframe to do that? > > Matt Hedberg: I would certainly probably depend on the products, but the > market generally wants it-- seems to be wanting it sooner than later. > > Carl Bass: We’ve been looking at considering it seriously, and we’ll talk > again a little bit more about this in October [at Autodesk's annual > conference for financial analysts] what our plans are. Right now, we have a > fair amount of transition going on in the business with the elimination of > the upgrades and certainly inspiring people to action. But as we move into > next year, we’ll have more to say on that. > > _____________________________ > > << when might you eliminate perpetual sales? [...] the market generally > wants it-- seems to be wanting it sooner than later.>> > Now who the heck is this market? > > Is it a collection of users pressuring for this? (among other (wrong but > legal) things?) > > Matt Hedberg is no user (RBC Capital Markets), he speaks on behalf of > (all impersonal) investors and shareholders that each have stakes in the > ADSK title, as one of their eggs in their varied baskets of eggs, > all calling for one thing, -MORE- > (with quite noticably (and quite unsurprisingly) very little concern for > whatever implications to the end user if at all). > > Are there conference calls where users can say.. > hey Carl, users cant access their old scenes unless they they commit with > the "flexible" option. > So when would you expect that to change? We've been waiting for that. > > Carl may be a CEO, but it's not like he, along with other executives don't > answer to anyone. > > Responsibility is to shareholders first. > (who quite normally, predictably and constantly couldn't care less) > > > But here it's almost like their saying "it's time!" > time for what? well.. the hegemony of the company is at a point where it's > (yet) more complete, > enough to take advantage of the fact that users (further) don't have much > other choice other then to take what the company decides is good for them > (once more) > (which is actually only (very) 'good' for [ADSK].. and basically (very) > bad for anyone else) > > quote from Carl Bass: Three years from now it will be surprising to me > if anybody is really running very much perpetual desktop software. > > Another quote from Carl said that ideally everything would be on the > (controlled) cloud by around that time, being when most of everyone would > then essentially be had (by the balls) > > Three years from now, it will be surprising to me if anybody is really > running Autodesk software. > (unless the fairly high likelihood of everyone basically becoming screwed > (further) comes to pass) > > > > > > On 08/29/14 13:34, Perry Harovas wrote: > > Really no surprise here: > > > http://www.cgchannel.com/2014/08/autodesk-considering-ditching-software-licences/ > > > >
