PDA

View Full Version : Autodesk's new Simplified Upgrade Pricing


jipe
08-22-2009, 05:05 PM
Just stumbled across this (http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?id=7176852&siteID=123112) on Autodesk's site:

Autodesk is introducing a new, streamlined upgrade pricing model on March 16, 2010. Under our current upgrade pricing model, the price of your upgrade depends on which product release you own. After March 15, 2010, your upgrade from any of the three previous software releases will cost 50 percent of the price of a new license, no matter which release you own.

It definitely simplifies the upgrade process. I suppose everyone who purchases yearly upgrades is better off with the yearly subscription (e.g., $595 for the subscription versus $1750 for an upgrade to Maya 2011). It'll end up being slightly cheaper to purchase the 50% upgrade every 3 years, but that's a long time to go without updates.

tonytrout
08-22-2009, 05:54 PM
Well thats nice. It means I can skip the odd upgrade if the contents not worth it without being penalised.

DuttyFoot
08-22-2009, 06:22 PM
thanks for that bit of info. i think i really like what i am hearing.

It'll end up being slightly cheaper to purchase the 50% upgrade every 3 years, but that's a long time to go without updates.

that does seem pretty long but maybe between releases they might put out service packs.

imashination
08-22-2009, 09:00 PM
Well thats nice. It means I can skip the odd upgrade if the contents not worth it without being penalised.

Thats a funny way to look at it no? Absolute best case scenario, you only upgrade once after 3 years, you pay $1750, the same as the guy on subscription, except in that time he got 3 new versions while you got only 1.

Worst case, they put out 3 upgrades you want. The subscription still pays $1750 or so, but youve shelled out $5250.

Of course the subscription is going to be cheaper in the long term if you want all the new versions like most people, but isnt 3x more expensive a tad excessive? So no matter what you do, or dont skip, youre 100% guaranteed to be worse off.

jipe
08-22-2009, 09:37 PM
...you pay $1750, the same as the guy on subscription, except in that time he got 3 new versions while you got only 1.

But you're still receiving the feature updates and bug fixes from those first two versions, so in effect you're still getting 3 updates for a very similar price... except you're getting them all at the same time, rather than on a yearly basis, and you get to make your purchase decision after reviewing the updates' quality. It seems pretty fair to me.

The only way you can screw yourself is if you don't subscribe yet purchase an upgrade every 1 or 2 years, and in that scenario I don't think you can blame Autodesk for a poor customer decision (subscribing and paying the back-subscription would make more sense if you decide to update after 1-2 years). I'm a pretty skeptical person but I can't see any evil scheming here. More choice and less confusing options seem like a plus for all of us in the long run...

beaker
08-23-2009, 12:37 AM
At least you don't have to pay for back support. It was lame that after 2-3 version back support cost more then buying Maya from scratch.

deepcgi
08-23-2009, 05:42 AM
I upgrade every year without support. It costs me about 850 dollars a year. It was the minimum cost for an upgrade for Complete - the preferred Maya package for game development. Now my cost per year is twice that. THAT is a huge price hike. Deflationary Recession...yeah, right! Welcome to the 1970's times ten. Oh and I noticed there are two fewer ounces in the same size bottle of Ragu, three fewer ounces of corn flakes in the same size box, and Four fewer ounces in a box of Banquet chicken. You know, I have given thlotslot of thought. I will not be upgrading this year or probably next year. I will have better things to do with 3500 dollars in 24 months, like buying one ounce of gold.

Bucket
08-23-2009, 06:30 AM
Thats a funny way to look at it no? Absolute best case scenario, you only upgrade once after 3 years, you pay $1750, the same as the guy on subscription, except in that time he got 3 new versions while you got only 1.

Worst case, they put out 3 upgrades you want. The subscription still pays $1750 or so, but youve shelled out $5250.

Of course the subscription is going to be cheaper in the long term is you want all the new versions like most people, but isnt 3x more expensive a tad excessive? So no matter what you do, or dont skip, youre 100% guaranteed to be worse off.'


You're merely highlighting the risks of taking either road. It's a gamble.


I upgrade every year without support. It costs me about 850 dollars a year. It was the minimum cost for an upgrade for Complete - the preferred Maya package for game development. Now my cost per year is twice that. THAT is a huge price hike. Deflationary Recession...yeah, right! Welcome to the 1970's times ten. Oh and I noticed there are two fewer ounces in the same size bottle of Ragu, three fewer ounces of corn flakes in the same size box, and Four fewer ounces in a box of Banquet chicken. You know, I have given thlotslot of thought. I will not be upgrading this year or probably next year. I will have better things to do with 3500 dollars in 24 months, like buying one ounce of gold.

True, the value of gold isn't traveling south like the value of currency. But if things ever get really bad, bullets are going to be worth quite a bit. :hmm:

lo
08-23-2009, 06:49 AM
So by simplified they actually mean screw you over again. Yay Autodesk.

ZacD
08-23-2009, 07:46 AM
So how far back does that count for XSI versions?

imashination
08-23-2009, 07:56 AM
The gist of my comment was a response to the idea that you can vote with your wallet, if you find an upgrade to be not worth it, you can show your disapproval by not buying it... The only way you can possibly vote with your wallet and still remain an AD customer is if you only upgrade once every 7 or more years!

Absolutely every other action will involve you giving them *more* money and receiving even less.

robodesign
08-23-2009, 09:20 AM
is Autodesk worse than Microsft? As it seems, yes. Correct me if I am wrong.

erilaz
08-23-2009, 10:14 AM
is Autodesk worse than Microsft? As it seems, yes. Correct me if I am wrong.

Microsoft is not relevant to the present topic unless you actually wanted to discuss Autodesk's upgrade paths in comparison to Windows or Office.

Did you want to discuss that, or were you trying to make some other point?

danielmd
08-23-2009, 10:52 AM
Well AD wants to sell subscriptions, that much is clear. To them it's a steady stream of revenue, so it makes sense, there is less of a risk factor in a multi-year product release schedule. Any license holder can still upgrade to AD at a latter time, but pay a premium for it.

I find it funny that a company that wants to make money is considered evil. If you want to share part of the profits become AD shareholders, they may start to pay dividends soon.

Everyone wants to make money, they are not forcing anyone into buying their products, if you find their products expensive then switch products, there are still a few alternatives out there. AD was smart enough to buy the top packages so that it can pretty much control the market, don't blame them, blame the anti-monopoly regulators that failed to regulate.

bryitis
08-23-2009, 12:46 PM
i'm sorry, but i blame them. they know full well what what they are doing, and they continue to play the 'it's just business' card with that certain clip of naivety on their shoulder. if we all just roll over and take it then before long the stock holders will control everything... and we all know where that leads.

edit: and i know they aren't alone in this... its a peculiarly American way of doing business. they are just following suit because that's what they have to do to please the stockholders. my problem is that its all based on a system that has too many flaws, and the customers are usually the ones that get shafted. it's no accident, it's by design.

bisenberger
08-23-2009, 12:59 PM
their marketing stinks no matter how they slice it

jasonio
08-23-2009, 02:41 PM
Considering that AD now name their products after the year following their release and that there have consistently been 2008, 2009 & 2010 versions its pretty obvious that subscription is essentially paying in advance for the next upgrade.
You still have to back date subscription if you buy it late by the way, and if you leave it more than 1 year you can only upgrade.
so subscription is the only way to go if you want to fork out hundreds instead of thousands. Basically, you should have switched to xsi while you had the chance! (at least you got point releases on subscription from Softimage) :P

Cheesestraws
08-23-2009, 03:03 PM
(at least you got point releases on subscription from Softimage) :P

You get them under subscription with Autodesk. :surprised

BigPixolin
08-23-2009, 03:05 PM
Your gonna have a hard time convincing me that getting the latest and greatest software which I make a good living on for $50/month is a bad deal. I just can't see it when that software could make me back 100x what it cost each month.
Do you people know how much mechanics, plumbers, carpenters and other tradesman pay for their tools?

jasonio
08-23-2009, 04:05 PM
You get them under subscription with Autodesk. :surprised

I didn't think you got any interim feature upgrades with autodesk, just bug fixes. I've NEVER seen a .5 release of max or maya (since it entered the year naming system) with new features added. I guess you misunderstood my meaning.

Cheesestraws
08-23-2009, 04:08 PM
No, I understand perfectly. They are called extensions not 0.5 releases though.

Maya 2008 had two, 3dsmax just got one a week ago.

jasonio
08-23-2009, 04:40 PM
No, I understand perfectly. They are called extensions not 0.5 releases though.

Maya 2008 had two, 3dsmax just got one a week ago.

Ok, well that bodes well for us Softimage users then. :) Thanks for the heads up.

I guess I was asking the question - "why didn't you switch to XSI" - because all people do here is winge about AD charging money for "not much". Its about 90+% hating on these boards. You had a good "independent" alternative. You didn't take it. Now you are hostages. Thats all I'm saying.

Although, personally, my experience with Autodesk subscription has been good so far. Its seems the Softimage team have been given enough freedom to keep their current customers happy by taking the product forward in the direction it was already going. Whether this continues, I don't know.

Anyway, I don't know why people can't just take the easy option and buy subscription. Doing anything else is pretty dumb.

What is unfair is that AD have set up a system where they cannot even determine their own customers satisfaction or dissatifaction via the money they recieve because the cheapest way to buy the software is to keep paying no matter what, whether you are happy or not. You can complain in writing directly to autodesk but most people just winge here, so how can you expect advance?

beaker
08-23-2009, 06:25 PM
I upgrade every year without support. It costs me about 850 dollars a year. It was the minimum cost for an upgrade for Complete - the preferred Maya package for game development. Now my cost per year is twice that. THAT is a huge price hike. upgrade subscription is only $595, so I dont get what the big deal is.

tonytrout
08-23-2009, 06:47 PM
I have bought maya on subscription, but mudbox for that I have just upgraded, its just a choice thing if I think its worth it.

The4thAggie
08-23-2009, 07:20 PM
As a hobbyist (a poor one at that), either way is expensive. I like knowing that I can wait for 2011 or 2012 releases and just pay 50% a new license. I'd go for the upgrade subscription, but I've heard horror stories of people getting Cease-and-desist letters at the end of their subscriptions (even for the previous versions they bought new and without subscriptions).

My question is: if I go with the upgrade subscription, do I have to worry about being told that I can no longer use my product at the end of the term?

bmwolf
08-23-2009, 07:33 PM
Your gonna have a hard time convincing me that getting the latest and greatest software which I make a good living on for $50/month is a bad deal. I just can't see it when that software could make me back 100x what it cost each month.
Do you people know how much mechanics, plumbers, carpenters and other tradesman pay for their tools?

While in some ways I agree with what you're saying, the comparison is flawed in many ways. Tradesmen/women buy a tool knowing they will be able to use it for many many years. There is depreciation calculated for taxes and should the business fail or an upgrade be needed they are able to sell the tool to recoup some costs. Those physical tools are also considered ownership equity/assets in the calculation of the business worth. If your DCC business fails as a freelancer or business, the software,as far as a i know, is worthless because the license(s) cannot be sold or transfered.

What if a tradesman decides they don't like their tool? They can sell it or give it to someone else to use "legally". Software is licensed to a single person/business, I don't think it is technically legal to allow your friend to use the software to make money.

I see the subscription model much like leasing a work vehicle, only instead of a small down payment you are required to purchase the whole vehicle just for the right to "lease" it... Which is also a failed comparison. So in the end the only similarity between physical hardware and software is the use of the term "tool".

I personally feel they should do a simple 75, 50, 25% value towards an upgrade. I really think it's pretty disgusting what they have done to Softimage customers(of which I am one); 3 versions in one year! The math just doesn't work in that situation.

bmwolf
08-23-2009, 07:47 PM
...

What is unfair is that AD have set up a system where they cannot even determine their own customers satisfaction or dissatifaction via the money they recieve because the cheapest way to buy the software is to keep paying no matter what, whether you are happy or not. You can complain in writing directly to autodesk but most people just winge here, so how can you expect advance?

Totally agree! I understand the want/need of a steady predictable income, but it can promote laziness. Autodesk hasn't done anything to make me believe this is what's gonna happen yet, but I don't like feeling there is only one logical economic choice; subscription.

deepcgi
08-24-2009, 12:58 AM
upgrade subscription is only $595, so I dont get what the big deal is.

No, it's only cheap if you were on support before or are a new user. Otherwise you would buy the upgrade and then add 595 PLUS back support. But they had to do something to earn it. They had to innovate. But now, Autodesk is the Holy One. Cue the choir. Bow down and kiss their ring. They will do almost nothing to upgrade the software each year, re-taylor the apps to hit their predefined target markets and charge whatever they want...and you'll like it. Good luck making a living in our business from now on without their "blessing" and say good bye to innovation.

This is the single most uninspiring upgrade I've ever seen - and that is saying something. My first version was Alias Power Animator version 4.0. I think the List price on it was 35,000 with a yearly upgrade price of about 5000 (not to mention the SGI workstation to run it). I bought two licenses...and those prices were worth it. This is not. Why is it only a bug fix with added apps to turn it into a film-specialty application? Because they are now the Holy One. Oh, i've said something heretical. Where's my self-flagellation whip?

Actually, though. It's just the beginnings of inflation. We'll see it in everything. Not just here. Their competitors are in deep trouble.

bryitis
08-24-2009, 02:33 AM
Do you people know how much mechanics, plumbers, carpenters and other tradesman pay for their tools?

I do, i used to be one, (and still am when the need arises). i paid about $8000 for all my tools initially. most of those have lasted over 10 years while undergoing continual abuse. i've had to replace about $800 due to wear (and mostly just 'losing' them).

I would take THAT deal for all my CG needs ANY day. and our pay is usually worse, and riskier.

edit: i should point out that of my HVAC service tools... none of them are considered 'outdated' or 'irrelevant' or even 'less efficient' by today's standards for that field.

TopherMartini
08-24-2009, 03:17 AM
As a hobbyist (a poor one at that), either way is expensive. I like knowing that I can wait for 2011 or 2012 releases and just pay 50% a new license. I'd go for the upgrade subscription, but I've heard horror stories of people getting Cease-and-desist letters at the end of their subscriptions (even for the previous versions they bought new and without subscriptions).

My question is: if I go with the upgrade subscription, do I have to worry about being told that I can no longer use my product at the end of the term?
As a hobbyist the bigger question is if a multi-thousand dollar software package is the best way to build foundation skills when you don't receive any direct or indirect revenue through that software. Food for thought, it's a tough choice for any hobbyist…

When you purchase a subscription through ADSK it needs to be done at the same time as a new license or version upgrade to an existing license. They offer subscription with and without support, which was not an option for Maya Unlimited 2009 and earlier.

If you begin a subscription at version v1 and end a subscription at version v3 your license is legally valid for v3 but not v1. You only paid for one license so technically speaking if you have v1 and v3 running at the same time that would be two licenses, not one. While on subscription there is the option of running previous versions of your license concurrently, but ending subscription revokes this option.

Investing thousands of dollars into a software package is a huge commitment for a hobbyist, so ~$600/year for update / upgrade protection is definitely something to factor into that equation.

Good luck! :thumbsup:

Sniffet
08-24-2009, 10:50 AM
For the people, looking to do upgrades every 3rd year.. Forget it. Read under the "retired" column. It seems Autdesk feels perfectly fine with kicking those who already are on their knees (part-time artists, hobbyist etc) who can't afford subscribtions, or upgrades every year. If your software is too old, we take you down. We don't want you as a customer anymore, and will treat you like a new customer when you come crawling back to us. You'll pay fullprice, just so you know it!

Why don't Autodesk just hire out their licenses on a montly basis from the start? They are forcing us into subscription policy anyway :(

Cheesestraws
08-24-2009, 11:04 AM
For the people, looking to do upgrades every 3rd year.. Forget it. Read under the "retired" column.

Those releases listed there are over 3 releases old. :curious:

beaker
08-24-2009, 04:00 PM
For the people, looking to do upgrades every 3rd year.. Forget it. Read under the "retired" column. It seems Autdesk feels perfectly fine with kicking those who already are on their knees (part-time artists, hobbyist etc) who can't afford subscribtions, or upgrades every year.That is way better then the previous Alias, AW, etc... way of giving you a quote on back support that was far higher then the cost of a new copy of Maya and then was confused when you didn't want the upgrade.

John-S
08-24-2009, 04:58 PM
So my platinum membership ran out at maya 8.5 unlimited. Sorry for being off topic slightly but what would I currently have to pay to get the latest software via subscription or upgrade?

March 2010 seems a bit far off for this announcement?!?!

bisenberger
08-24-2009, 08:58 PM
Those releases listed there are over 3 releases old. :curious:

3 releases about 3 years...that use to be about how long it took for an upgrade (during the course of those 3 years they would release patches)

they also use to fix stuff in the old upgrades and when they finally came out they had tangible innovations

seems that a lot of their R&D these days goes into marketing strategies

beaker
08-24-2009, 10:05 PM
3 releases about 3 years...that use to be about how long it took for an upgrade (during the course of those 3 years they would release patches)I'm really not trying to keep defending AD but people keep posting incorrect information. Autodesk, Alias, Alias Wavefront, etc.. have always released a new full version every 12-15 months since version 1.0 except between 4, 4.5 and 5.0 which was 2 years. Back when I used Alias Power Animator they also released about the same.

bisenberger
08-25-2009, 12:26 AM
I'm really not trying to keep defending AD but people keep posting incorrect information. Autodesk, Alias, Alias Wavefront, etc.. have always released a new full version every 12-15 months since version 1.0 except between 4, 4.5 and 5.0 which was 2 years. Back when I used Alias Power Animator they also released about the same.

beaker...have you ever heard of AutoShade?

beaker
08-25-2009, 01:32 AM
I have heard of it but that was before my time. I didn't start using 3d till Alias PA/Studio 6, Softimage 3d 3.5, 3dstudio 4.0 days

CGTalk Moderation
08-25-2009, 01:32 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.