Autodesk Stock Tanks On Guidance, Plans For Restructuring


#1

This news is already a few days old. I’m surprised that there hasn’t been any discussion about it here:

http://www.nasdaq.com/article/autodesk-stock-tumbles-on-guidance-plans-for-restructuring-cm883568

Choice quote:

Here’s hoping that they divest entirely from the CG content creation market and stick to AutoCAD and Inventor instead.


#2

Whoa, that’s pretty harsh. What did the A/E/C and CAD/CAM guys ever do to you to deserve that fate? It is better that they keep a diverse portfolio otherwise that much concentrated disappointment might be catastrophic.
They also had cancelled a 30% price increase for Enterprise Agreement contracts to switch from maintenance to multi-user access. Giving up that revenue boost in the short term probably didn’t make the real customers happy.


#3

Nothing. It’s just that those product lines are the only ones from Autodesk which don’t feel like a complete dumpster fire.

You are correct in that they will probably stick with a diverse portfolio, but I’ll be surprised if they don’t roll out some EOL announcements for some of their CG/VFX related packages in the coming months in order to placate their shareholders. Mudbox and 3dsmax EOL both seem likely at this point.


#4

Something tells me Array will be gone long before Autodesk…:rolleyes:


#5

Pay more for less and its not working. Golly gee wiz Batman! Who’d a thunk it?!
Answer : everybody but Autodesk apparently.
I think I’ll nominate my dog to take over the business. Everybody likes her!


#6

Who said anything about Autodesk going anywhere?


#7

Normally you diversify to mitigate losses, but Autodesk has no idea how to run the CG sector profitably and “Their” CAD tools are a bit of a joke with respect to cost and slow-development-rate. They seem to spend more time and money on the splash-screens.


#8

Autodesk has a unified development strategy and ACAD is in the same flaming dumpster. The complaints about weak releases, under-developed features, etc. apply to it as well.


#9

That’s disappointing to hear. Many years ago I used Autodesk Inventor and it was a joy to use compared to the current state that Maya is in.


#10

I’m still sad about Mudbox a bit, but that’s life. Maya has experienced some growth since its acquisition, but also a lot of instabilities and bugs that just don’t seem necessary. I haven’t even bothered with the newer versions since 2015 meets all my needs, but at this point it seems smarter just to learn another package alongside Maya.

Multinats inspire no confidence at all in their products, across the board. Look what Microsoft did to the glorious WinPhone - just terrible!


#11

Autodesk is the best company in 3D. Period. Their software is super innovative at all times, and includes cool innovations years before anybody realizes they need them. The software is stable as hell and never buggy when first released. Their rental-only model is fantastic for their customers. They brought real CHOICE to their customers that way. There are so many different ways to pay for AD DCC software as a result, that its almost too much to think about at times. And the best part is that their software needs to phone home periodically using the internet. That was the ONE thing CG software always needed but never had. CG artists have been asking for 3D software that needs to license check over the Internet since the 1920s, but nobody listened. Autodesk fixed that in record time. Kudos for that. As for Softimage XSI, Autodesk recognized that XSI was an EVIL 3D software used for Bjork videos with kissing robots and other nastiness, and killed it before it could hurt more people, animals and plantlife than it already had. 100 years from now humanity will look back and recognize that by killing XSI without warning, Autodesk’s management saved the future of humanity. Every country happiness index from Japan to Botswana went up at least 900% as a result of XSI not existing anymore. As for buying Arnold, Autodesk did a great, courageous thing there, too. There were all these EVIL GPU renderers around that rendered way too fast, like the diabolical Redshift for example. Autodesk recognized the considerable health and safety risks such too-fast renderers posed to their paying customers and the greater world, and promptly bought a CPU render engine that has no EVIL GPU rendering capabilities at all. By ensuring that Arnold develops as slowly as possible from this point on, Autodesk will nullify the risk that its paying customers will be hurt or injured by reckless GPU renderers that render MUCH TOO FAST, because GPUs now operate in the unsafe 12 - 15 TeraFLOP speed range, as opposed to CPUs, which are much slower and thus safer to drive.

My only disappointment with Autodesk is that the computers AD software runs on can be BOUGHT. That is a bad, bad thing for 3D artists. A much better model would be if computers running AD software went RENTAL ONLY as well.

But this is Autodesk we are talking about. A company that truly listens to its customers. I’m sure that we’ll get RENTAL ONLY CG workstations from AD soon. Give these guys some time. For rental only workstations to work, they will have to build a VERY complicated software solution that calculates how much rent you should pay for your RAM, Graphics Card, CPU, Motherboard, Wacom tablet and so forth. And of course, the software will also have to count the vertices in your 3D scene, so you can conveniently pay for your AD product by vertice count.

People think its easy to do that, but its not. But Autodesk has brilliant engineers that can solve such DIFFICULT problems.

I could write more about how much I love Autodesk, but I have to write an email complaint to the Nobel Prize Committee. They should have given the Nobel Peace Prize to Autodesk’s CEO when he killed XSI. But somehow, the prize went to less deserving persons.


#12

:love::love::love:


#13

:rolleyes:


#14

It is possible to edit quotations and so reduce them to a single line followed by “…”

I therefore :rolleyes: your :rolleyes:.


#15

Well… do you know what Autodesk recently decided to reinvest in Mudbox?
The dev which Maya team stole from Mudbox went back to Mudbox.

Autodesk CEO said they will devest the product which is not aligned with Autodesk’s goal and focus.
Let’s see… do you think Maya fits into Autodesk portfolio with other CAD product?
3dsMax covers both entertainment and CAD market which means it is ver well aligned with Autodesk’s focus.
Maya? M&E is less than 15% of Autodesk. Maya is less than half of that.

Hmm… I can clearly see what’s in danger.


#16

No you can’t. Autodesk has ADHD (Attention deficit hyper activity disorder) at the best of times. The whole company is a mess. They cant and wont rewrite 3ds max and at the moment they have killed-off its uptake.

Cue something about 3dsmax being the most distributed bit of software. So what if no one knows how to use it. Blender is catching up fast and in several areas actually overtakes maya and 3ds max.


#17

Rewriting any major DCC is a suicidal move. Autodesk is smarter than that.
Blender? good luck.
Oh… FYI, 3dsMax 2018 has had 3 PU with a lot of features.
What does Maya 2018 have so far?


#18

“3 PU” product updates? This may help keep existing renters. However, long-term, how and why does someone use 3ds max?
How and why would a young-person learn 3ds max over other software?


#19

Because it’s not overly complicated, gets the job done quickly, has tons of amazing plugins and is widely used in a huge number of companies, especially small-mid ones?


#20

How does someone learn the software in their spare time for free/little cost?