Jump to content

Vectorworks abandoning perpetual licences


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Christiaan said:

Well it's a chicken and egg thing in that respect. All I can do is speak from experience and I've experienced what it's like to submit bug reports and be told that it'll have to wait until a major release because engineering resources have been moved on to the next major release. And I've already experienced positive changes in way engineering resources are allocated in anticipation of the subscription model.

 

I think the impression from the marketing, like the graphic @MarcelP102 posted above and your much earlier comment that @Art V responded to, was that the subscription model equated to continuous development, or that it might “bring forward” new features in a more timely and continuous manner. But the annual cycle will effectively remain as it currently does, it’s just that the new features scheduled for a particular release will no longer arrive as they have previously (mostly in SP0). They will instead be spread out and/or delayed throughout the cycle of future releases, until they're ready and stable for a service pack. The Chief Revenue Officer (ndavison) put paid to the earlier concept in this post . . . 

 

 

On 8/11/2022 at 11:09 PM, ndavison said:
  • increase the number of updates we provide annually allowing us to take some of the pressure off of delivering as many updates in the initial version release each year so that we are able to focus on quality and stability for each new feature released and provide them once they are ready during the version cycle. 

 

Edited by M5d
Link to comment
50 minutes ago, M5d said:

But the annual cycle will effectively remain as it currently does, it’s just that the new features scheduled for a particular release will no longer arrive as they have previously (mostly in SP0). They will instead be spread out and/or delayed throughout the cycle of future releases, until they're ready and stable for a service pack.

If a feature is ready and doesn't require a file format change then it will be released in a service pack. If a feature is ready and requires a file format change it will be released in the annual major release. There might be exceptions, but I believe that's the gist of things.

Edited by Christiaan
Link to comment
4 hours ago, Christiaan said:

Well it's a chicken and egg thing in that respect. All I can do is speak from experience and I've experienced what it's like to submit bug reports and be told that it'll have to wait until a major release because engineering resources have been moved on to the next major release. And I've already experienced positive changes in way engineering resources are allocated in anticipation of the subscription model.

 

Why are these positive changes taking place only now that a subscription model is being anticipated?

 

Well, I can see that they are important if you want to introduce a subscription model, for the reasons @M5d mentions above. You can no longer get away with releasing the first few SPs of a major release full of bugs, because the subscription customers expect whatever version they dip into to be stable.

 

So, fine.

 

The next question is why do you then have to remove the option for traditional perpetual licences? Does the change in allocation of engineering resources somehow degrade the product that you can offer to the people who want to continue following that model? No, it does not - it should in fact improve it.

 

Does continuing to offer perpetual licences preclude improving the stability of the product? If you ignore the possibility of revenue being undermined, then no of course it does not.

 

If revenue is part of the picture, and of course it is, then maybe continuing to offer perpetual licences does preclude improving the stability of the product, because it might reduce revenue and you need the revenue to pay for those additional engineering resources. That's the only plausible explanation I can see.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
20 hours ago, MarcelP102 said:

Here is a screenshot of the new, more frequent, update cycle as showed in the last Vectorworks Design Day:

 

Screenshot_2022-10-06-23-17-08-626_com.google.android.youtube.thumb.jpg.90b84c100368ea86d8abd7edc0b78f82.jpg

The way it's been talked about I though it would be monthly not bi-monthly. it's only really 1 maybe 2 more than current and doesn't say anything about rolling feature updates over year so they get better testing. 

 

calling them service packs seems more of just the same system of slamming the test team with a full year of features and expecting good coverage. 

Link to comment
6 hours ago, Matt Overton said:

The way it's been talked about I though it would be monthly not bi-monthly.

I had also expected a few more and perhaps not so structured. I had inferred that "when it's ready" meant when the features are ready, this is still saving features for a wider release; if a new feature is ready in the second week of January it won't be released until March.

 

This is still a big improvement however on waiting until September, but I guess I was a little underwhelmed having gotten carried away with the notion of having a very quickly evolving software and you feel that change is implemented quickly rather than having things rattle around the forum for years before anything happens. A software that updates every week might drive me insane - but it does reinforce the idea that it's being constantly improved.

 

Again though, hopefully a big improvement and I will wait and see what Vectorworks come out with in the near future (SP1 should be out today if that graphic is correct!)

Link to comment
20 minutes ago, _James said:

if a new feature is ready in the second week of January it won't be released until March.

 

This is still a big improvement however on waiting until September,

 

Under the old/current regime, if a feature is stable & ready in January, it will quite possibly have been released in the previous September, in a not entirely stable state.

 

Can't speak for everyone of course, but to me, the fixing of existing dysfunctional features/tools is much much higher priority than the introduction of new ones.

 

When important things haven't been fixed for years I honestly don't get why anyone (who is a serious day-to-day user) is getting excited about the idea that new things will appear a few months earlier than they in theory would have otherwise.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment

I've been using Onshape since November 2017 so nearly 6 years.

(I have 2 seats and pay $3000 total)

 

In those 6 years I have experience no crashes...there were some refresh issues back then but no crashes.  I have found a few bugs over the years but nothing major.  

 

They just released a structural simulator to their product.  This simulator now eliminates the need to get a $5000/year add on simulator package.  I did not have to worry if my hardware could handle this simulator.  Did not spend any time on the tech board asking about graphics cards...etc.  One second you don't have it then pow its now available.

 

Going to the cloud is more that just "going to the cloud".  All these old paradigms of AEC CAD would need to rethink things from the ground up.  That is why the people who developed Onshape left Solidworks.

Just porting something to the cloud with some universal translator would be problematic.

 

I do have a few ideas on where I would start with an AEC cloud system. So if there is a "Robert Noyce" in the audience then give me a call. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by digitalcarbon
  • Like 1
Link to comment
11 hours ago, Matt Overton said:

it's only really 1 maybe 2 more than current and doesn't say anything about rolling feature updates over year so they get better testing. 

Yes, but Biplap addresses this in his address:

https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxaJ2miPWyol2rAI4nt6FidlqrztF-1Srx

 

I'll repeat what I said above and somebody at VW can correct me if I'm wrong:

 

If a feature/fix is ready and doesn't require a file format change then it will be released in a monthly service pack. If a feature/fix is ready and requires a file format change it will be released in an annual major release. With, I'm sure, the odd exception.

Edited by Christiaan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
3 hours ago, Christiaan said:

Yes, but Biplap addresses this in his address:

https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxaJ2miPWyol2rAI4nt6FidlqrztF-1Srx

 

I'll repeat what I said above and somebody at VW can correct me if I'm wrong:

 

If a feature/fix is ready and doesn't require a file format change then it will be released in a monthly service pack. If a feature/fix is ready and requires a file format change it will be released in an annual major release. With, I'm sure, the odd exception.

 

 

If that works, it is all fine.

 

Unfortunately,

starting with VW 2014, until at least VW 2021, my experience

was that there came new features that were nice to have

although not ready (e.g. Structural Members), together with

longstanding questionable existing design decisions

(Stories+Levels, open Polylines with a Fill !?, ...) and real Bugs

(VW Cameras losing their location) that nevertheless would

not have fixed or improved over these 8 years.

 

So why should that change now and only by subscription ?

 

Only VW 2022 and following, so far, showed a willingness

to fix some legacy tool designs (screen plane and such),

improve legacy roots fundamentally (Apple ARM and DirectX)

or now in VW 2023 (vertical faces, overlapping and touching

Modifiers in DTMs, ...)

 

In my opinion not really related to subscription or any other

license issues .... could have happened since VW 9 or so.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
17 hours ago, zoomer said:

So why should that change now and only by subscription ?

Because there's less incentive to cram big features into a major release, fix some bugs, and then move onto the next release. And more incentive to release features as and when they're fully baked; or to release them and them keep working on them to finish them off.

 

I think Wall Closures is an example of the later. They released it knowing they had improvements to make but have continued to make those improvements in service packs and the latest major release. This happened before the change to subscription only, but I think it's part of a culture change in anticipation of the subscription model.

Edited by Christiaan
Link to comment

I haven't seen anybody at VW say it's necessary to fix longstanding issues. They've said it will help enable more frequent updates and consistency.

 

The obvious reasons, for me, being more predictable revenue and a reduction in the importance of big splashy major releases. It's also notable that subscriptions—at least monthly subscriptions—have already been growing at a significant rate.

 

Link to comment

My opinion, and nothing moI'm not sure why the discussion.  The change to the subscription model is being done to increase revenue.  Hopefully, it will have some side effects that are positive.  I cannot speak to other industries, but in the entertainment industry, it will drive some, perhaps many, to less capable alternatives, but alternatives that can get their version of the job done.  Others, will complain but soldier on; I did.  The cost of getting the job, most jobs, done is going up.  Why and how much depends on the job.  Can lighting designers and production electricians charge more just because their drafting costs have gone up?  Probably not, but maybe.  I'm sure there will be a bunch of things that marketing will point to as to why this change is a good thing.  The things are actual things, but mentioning them is just marketing.  If you want to try and shame Vectorworks/Nemetschek into changing their mind, you will find a world of frustration, and I wouldn't bother.  Does the cost of gasoline have to be as high as it is.  No.  So, are you going to stop driving and flying and start walking instead?  Some are, but are you?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
On 10/13/2022 at 1:29 AM, Christiaan said:

Yes, but Biplap addresses this in his address:

https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxaJ2miPWyol2rAI4nt6FidlqrztF-1Srx

 

I'll repeat what I said above and somebody at VW can correct me if I'm wrong:

 

If a feature/fix is ready and doesn't require a file format change then it will be released in a monthly service pack. If a feature/fix is ready and requires a file format change it will be released in an annual major release. With, I'm sure, the odd exception.

Shame the video sound doesn't seem to be working for me but "Ready" implies there isn't a structured plan to spread features just let them slide if they become problems. "ready" does nothing to instill confidence. 

 

If a feature doesn't require a file format conversion as it is new or overlay on existing then it shouldn't be in the version release it should be planned for another non-version monthly release. 

 

10 hours ago, line-weight said:

@zoomer's question was why the change to subscripton should be necessary to fix longstanding issues. Issues that have nothing to do with release frequency. Issues that have been sitting there for so many years that there have been maybe 5 or 10 major releases where there was an opportunity to fix them.

 

5 years seems to be the minimum for even bug fixes. 

 

Yes the only thing that is really going to speed this up is more revenue so more staff can tackle the issues, or open source parts and let the community battle test their own improvements. Even that requires an investment in better scripting and tools.

 

Both really require a solid push to bring more users on board and into the community and pushing pricing higher is not conducive to increasing user base. Is the program really moving fast enough at this point to be an acceptable down grade to pull customers from the "Big Guys"?

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, Matt Overton said:

Yes the only thing that is really going to speed this up is more revenue so more staff can tackle the issues

Unfortunately we have to trust that at least some of the increased revenue will be used for this purpose.  It's possible it will just increase corporate profits.  Nonetheless, this is true for all commercial software, and I'm hopeful that VW will continue to improve the product and do a better job at killing bugs and releasing features only when they are really ready to be used and not abandoning them later.

 

I don't think this thread is going to change anything, even if it is read by the VW decision makers.  We'll have to wait it out and see how it goes, and then each user will decide if the costs are justified and if there are better alternatives out there.

  • Like 2
Link to comment

 

9 hours ago, Matt Overton said:

Shame the video sound doesn't seem to be working for me

Maybe try this link instead?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlfRNceSiGY&t=6000s

 

9 hours ago, Matt Overton said:

but "Ready" implies there isn't a structured plan to spread features just let them slide if they become problems. "ready" does nothing to instill confidence. 

"Ready" is my take on what they're saying. The structured plan is monthly updates. Why would you not ship a fix or feature if it's ready that month?

 

9 hours ago, Matt Overton said:

If a feature doesn't require a file format conversion as it is new or overlay on existing then it shouldn't be in the version release it should be planned for another non-version monthly release. 

Yes, that's their intention I believe, to release features/fixes in service packs if they're ready to go and don't require a file format change.

 

Edited by Christiaan
Link to comment

I guess a thread like this is to some extent just cathartic. If there's a piece of software that you rely on to make your living - and if it's not trivial to change to another, then it's kind of a big deal when there are changes that you have virtually no control over.

 

A discussion like this is also useful to cut through the marketing and spin and try and get a picture of what's really happening and what's likely to happen. For example, for me at least it's important to understand that this really is about increasing revenue. They aren't changes that are being made to improve things for existing users. Those changes could be made without increasing the cost - unless the truth is that more revenue is needed to pay for the resources necessary. That's fair enough, but I think we should moderate our expectations about how much improvement we'll see.

 

Even if it's true that an increase in revenue will be used to produce a better software, this may in effect mean that VW is moving towards a different market and is no longer interested in people like me - smaller operators who don't actually need (for example) stuff for large multiple-user projects etc. And don't have the turnovers necessary to cover expensive software licences. And if that's the case, then people like me need to start having a look around for alternatives. Until now a major selling point for VW has been its relative affordability.

 

The discussion on this thread is useful for me to guess what the picture might be like in 3-5 years. Input from those knowledgeable about other software packages which have travelled similar trajectories is valuable. I'm not going to bail out of VW right now - basically I can't - but I need to start thinking about having some options in reserve if the licence cost has doubled 3 years hence.

 

Who knows if the commercial decision-makers at VW read these threads. Do they influence the decisions they make? Probably not much. Maybe a little bit. I doubt they are going to back-track on the move to subscription model but one hope I'd have is that they would consider having some sort of option for smaller operators, at a lower price tier and with certain features disabled.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
20 hours ago, Christiaan said:

It's also notable that subscriptions—at least monthly subscriptions—have already been growing at a significant rate.

 

Christiaan, that sales data will be interesting to watch, can you post where it’s recorded?

 

Uncertainty over when subscription revenues will supplant traditional revenues is most likely the reason NV “can’t predict” when they will retire Service Select. If subscriptions go gangbusters, I expect we’ll see Service Select retired at the short end of ndavison’s estimate. And if uptake is sluggish, then they’ll probably hold off until their subscription revenues have met some magic number.

 

Edited by M5d
Link to comment
6 minutes ago, M5d said:

 

Christiaan, that sales data will be interesting to watch, can you post where it’s recorded?

 

Uncertainty over when subscription revenues will supplant traditional revenues is the most likely reason NV “can’t predict” when they will retire Service Select. If subscriptions go gangbusters, I expect we’ll see Service Select retired at the short end of ndavison’s estimate. And if uptake is sluggish, then they’ll probably hold off until their subscription revenues have met some magic number.

 

 

534011174_Screenshot2022-10-14at12_59_17.thumb.png.32c7a0728aa122cd3744de5ae5c91b29.png

 

992944848_Screenshot2022-10-14at13_00_44.thumb.png.3525ef790067ecf93a2ea187e25a2929.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...