That’s the big difference between Autodesk and adobe. For $49 you get everything that adobe makes. Most people can afford that. With Autodesk it’s more like having another car payment, which most people cannot afford.
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sebastien Sterling Sent: Friday, August 29, 2014 4:37 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Autodesk considering ditching perpetual licenses 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/
