In this Article...
Autodesk has stopped selling the perpetual license for all products. It started earlier this year, so many of you probably already purchase the new subscription model.
I would like to hear your experience with the new licensing model. I understand that some customers might be happy with the new model, but the others might think it’s a bad idea. Share how you feel about the pricing, your experience in installing, activating and using the products. And any other experience that related to the new licensing model.
Please share your comment on the website, using this comment form so other readers can read it too. And probably, Autodesk employee read it too.
I would also like to share what I see and read.
No more perpetual license
You can’t purchase a perpetual license now. You need to pay for the subscription for a term basis.
Some customers prefer term basis because they can add licenses in a short term when required. And some of them prefer it for budgeting purpose. However, many customers prefer perpetual license.
I see some Autodesk competitors use this in their promotion. And I do find some users decided to use competitors product because they don’t want to pay annually. On the other hand, I haven’t found customers who finally decided to purchase Autodesk software because it’s now “affordable.”
Personally, I prefer to have choices. Autodesk should use both licensing models.
What do you think about the term basis license as your only choice?
No physical media delivery
Because Autodesk offers the license for monthly basis, it’s not profitable to send the physical media. All customers need to download the installer, or Electronic License Delivery (ELD). It might sound like not a big deal, but not all Autodesk customers have fast internet connection. And we all know that Autodesk installer is pretty large.
The default installation method is Install Now. This method is not as reliable as installing from local disk. It’s easy to find a thread about failed installation using this method in Autodesk Forum. I always download the full installer using browser download method before I run the installation. If you fail to install using Install Now method, I strongly suggest you download the media first.
I like the fact that I can get my media and install it without having to wait for my physical media. I can download it and use it in a few hours after my product is listed in my account.But I still want to get my physical media. Autodesk says that we can request the physical media from the Autodesk Account page. I tried it twice, and get the message they will reach me once the media is shipped. But I’ve never got it.
Granted that Autodesk needs to make the profit. But don’t the customers who purchase the product for a long term and many seats deserve to get the media?
What’s your experience with it?
Single User Access
Single user access is the change that I hate most. I don’t mind that it requires users to log in to check their permission to use the products. But I hate the fact that it is very buggy.
It’s not only once, but I found it happens several times. The issues I found are quite often are:
- The product is not added to the customer account after they purchase it.
- The contract managers fail to add users and assign licenses to users.
- The license server down and users can’t use their products.
- Some proxy or internet security settings prevent the client computer from connecting to Autodesk server.
Because now it’s a term basis, customers will want they can use their products seamlessly from day 1. Imagine if you pay to use it for a month and you need a few days until it fixed. Autodesk support used to be good and responded in reasonable time frame. But lately, their respond is quite slow.
If you a new customer, I strongly suggest you purchase from a reseller. If you purchase it online from Autodesk Store, you are on your own. If the system fails, you will not see your product in your account. You will not be able to create a support case because Autodesk thinks you are not a customer yet. Your reseller should be able to help you to create a case for you.
Multi-user access is the same as network license, so it’s still as good as it used to be.
I don’t understand why Autodesk decided to use this system. Why not just activate the license and allow the user to use it until their contract expires? The named user license means only the user can use it. If someone log in with different Windows Account, he can’t use it. Some companies don’t allow the computer to connect to the internet for security reason. I don’t see the benefit of this system but definitely need more work.
To me, it’s a nightmare. What about your experience? If you think this system is better than the old one, I want to hear your experience.
So what’s your experience?
I found that this Autodesk new licensing model is not better than the old one. Sure, having an alternative is good. But if it’s the only choice, I don’t see why it’s better. But it can be different in a certain scenario.
So let’s hear what you think about this licensing model.
I wrote a whole thing and realized how much anger I have at what a total rip-off it is for small practitioners. If you do the math, and I did with my local supplier, I would spend every 3 years in rental what it cost to buy a perpetual license seat with an annual subscription. Additionally, because AD refused to allow customization of suites according to practice needs, you very likely were/are stuck with more programs and higher subscription costs than you needed to incur. If you own a perpetual license like I do, I cannot spend all day working simultaneously on multiple programs but I am charged as if, I am. Adobe, on the other hand, made it so reasonable and desirable both with cost and support, that it made no sense to own, and everyone ported over. AD just broke our arms and picked our pockets. The hubris of the C-Level fools who pre-determined what software belonged in an industry labeled suite, covering vast swathes of design specialists, by fiat, should be lined up with the AD C-Level soothsayer marketers and chained to some drafting tables for a few months, before being allowed to talk again. Oh well, I guess some vitriol snuck back in after all. I suppose, just like a pre-uber NYC cabbie, the first 8 hrs of a 12 hr day pay the rental, the last 4hrs + tips pay the driver. I wonder how they are managing to do even that, today?
Of course, the only way one could derive any benefit from your still existing, older licenses on record was to apply them to the rental price. AD didn’t allow you to apply it to any last shot purchase of upgrading your perpetual license suite, or a reduction of your annual subscription costs, only to that which you patently had no need of…. I guess their soothsayers saw a maturing of their perpetual license revenue stream and decided that breaking a few arms to create a ball and chain was a service of some sort.
As a small business in Norway having to pay USD 3.500, / 12 month subscription fee is crazy. As im trying to build my new practice in not at all interested in using half crippled Revit LT as they are trying to push on me. The 10 houses i design this year will cost med USD 350,-/each in SW. They are really pissing people off here.
While I see some benefits for the subscription model for the client, I think the biggest benefit is to the vendor, in this case AutoDesk. It creates a more consistent revenue stream for them rather than the big bump they may receive from a perpetual license purchase and then smaller revenue from the renewals.
As the client, if you only plan to use the product for a short time (up to a couple of years). However, if you are a long-term user of the software, the perpetual model is more cost-effective.
I haven’t look at the terms for the subscription model since we’re on the perpetual license, but I know with Adobe, you pay a premium if you want to go month-to-month versus a year-long subscription. That eliminates a lot of the benefit of just getting it when you need it for a short-term increase in license needs.
As far as the lack of physical media, I don’t see that as much of an issue as long as I can download the full installers and build local deployments. If I have to download for each install, I will not be happy since we do some customization to our installations.
Overall, I think the changes that AutoDesk has made to licensing is more to benefit them than their customers. I think subscription has its place but I would like to still see the perpetual license option. I’m very concerned that they will make our current perpetual licensing of Building Design Suite effectively obsolete so that we are driven over to the subscription model. The recent changes to the suites gives me the impression that this will happen in the next couple of years.
I understand the convenience factor of short-term licensing but to me it is a slap in the face of long-term clients who typically hold their licenses for long periods of time. I’ve done the math. During year three the new desktop subscription model costs the user more than the old “maintenance” subscription model. And at year ten the total outlay is twice as much.
As I said, I understand the benefit of the short-term licensing, but I think AutoDesk could and SHOULD offer both solutions. Maintenance Subscriptions for long-term use and desktop subscription for meeting short-term needs. I understand that there are users that fit the “new” mold, I wish AutoDesk also understood that there are people who don’t, that still fit in the “old” model.
I’ve said as much to our reseller (as they should have more sway than I) and during the online AutoDesk dog and pony shows about the changes in licensing.
And regarding the physical media, you can still get it on a USB drive (for, I think, $30). I do that as well as a backup against online downloading and licensing snafus.
I agree. We should have choices, not forced to purchased the subscription license (they simply call it subscription now, not desktop subscription).
I think the resellers are also not happy with the new model, as their revenue will decrease significantly. The profit is too small compared to the expense for sales activity and providing support. Certainly, customers will have to purchase regularly. But customers can change reseller or purchase the new license online.
I tried to request physical media twice, but I’ve never got it.
2015 offered nothing, 2016 got a revised colour scheme, 2017 looks set to have a feature which has been available for free on the web for years…
As a CAD Manager for a robotics company we push the limits with what can be done, so Autodesk’s releases have become an inhouse joke and we liken them to ENCOM from the film Tron.
“…this year we put a twelve on the box”
There are plenty of room for improvements, obviously. I don’t know when it starts, but the development is very slow now. Probably when Autodesk starts to think they need to acquire more solutions and now they don’t have enough resources to develop all of them.
There are plenty of “exciting” new services (the cloud), but I don’t think people are ready yet. We need the desktop app to be better, not having to use the cloud service for more capabilities. But as you probably know already, we will need to pay more when utilizing cloud service because the free credit that comes with the subscription is limited.
Get the most newest version turbocad for $1500 u can do all u can do with AUTOCAD and not and its your . If you decide to upgrade you can upgrade this subscription is for millionaires
I am self employed draftsman with a small client base. My problem is that my work load is spotty. I can log min. 120 hours to 600 hours a year. At 40 hours a week, that is 16 weeks. And that can be spread over 12 months. Using a yearly subscription is expensive. If I have to log on to activate my subscription then why can I not pay by an hourly rate of use. Or even in weekly blocks. That could work for smaller companies as well whose work load is seasonal
Our company has invested large amounts of money in purchasing the software and keeping up with maintenance. We currently have upwards of 117 licenses. The new subscription model will cost us much more over time than we currently spend even figuring in the initial cost of the software plus the maintenance. Autodesk will have to lower the “rental” rates before we ever consider making the switch. We already pay the annual maintenance which is similar to the subscription but the cost difference is crazy, nearly triple the annual rate to move to subscription. Stop taking cues from Adobe!
I point blank refuse to buy into any subscription model. I only want to buy the software and upgrade when I want to. This is clearly only a money-making exercise for Autodesk and nothing whatsoever to do with “listening to customers”. AutoCAD was always expensive to start with, especially here in the UK. And now having to pay perpetually for it is a joke.
It could be almost bearable if say after a minimum of 3 year’s subscription, you could stop the subscription and be allowed to use the software you last subscribed to. But, that won’t ever happen.
I now only use AutoCAD LT and the last “Big” improvement was in 2007 I think? when you could create and edit dynamic blocks. I am on 2014 now and this is where I will stay. This version is “very” buggy and no updates were released to fix any of them. So no customers were listened to that year!
I know of one consultant who still uses AutoCAD 2000 to this day. Because it does exactly the same as 2017 does, minus a few bells and whistles. So why pay every year for it?
Once I find an alternative CAD that I can create and edit dynamic blocks with, then I will be away from AutoCAD.
have you looked at datacad or spirit?
also
plusspec for sketch up looks to be doing some good things too.
http://plusspec.com/architecture-design-software/
for this you need sketchup pro as well.
we are doing the same research as yourself now.
cheers geoff
I am familiar with Plusspec from its very early start days. It was being pushed as a purchase because the owner/developer “hated” subscription software. It was going to cost around £300-400 to buy. Then in an overnight move, it all changed to annual subscription only, and at DOUBLE the price. A plugin for SketchUp which cost twice the price of SketchUp “every year” is not going to happen. This is currently £600 per annum or $750 US.
I have just checked out Datacad. Looks uninspiring, and they need help with the website UI. No mention of dynamic blocks? Spirit looks OK (new learning curve) but it looks expensive. No purchase prices anywhere, you have to ask them for a personal quote or consultation. Not a good start.
BricsCAD Classic (2D) is $550, BricsCAD Pro (3D) is $680, both for a perpetual license without annual fees. And, we now have dynamic block creation and editing functionality (with a different name).
The main issue with the new subscription model is that this model is much more expensive to the end user in a long term. Recently Autodesk provided the price comparison of perpetual license and subscription based on the 4-year term for AutoCAD license. Perpetual license ($4200) plus 4 ears of maintenance subscription ($2180) equals to total of $6380 for 4-year term. Compared to the annual subscription for the same AutoCAD ($1680) times 4 years, equals to total of $6720. Looks fair, right? But in a long term, let’s say 10 years, we would have total $9650 for perpetual license compared to $16800 of annual subscription model. Now you feel the difference?
I have not had a single bit of trouble with the new licensing model. In fact, I like it because I’m a one-man CAD business. I find it very helpful that if my subscription bill is coming up and I don’t have a lot of work logged I can temporarily cancel until I have enough work come up to justify the cost. During that time I can continue to use AutoCAD. There are no licensing hassles. When I return to activate the subscription there’s no fuss. I’m probably the exception here but seriously, no issues!
Indeed, you are very lucky. I see about a half contract manager fail to assign the license to their users. Probably because you are the contract manager, so Autodesk directly assign the license to you by default.
Good to see that the licensing method works for some customers.