Revit SaaS

[cbaze]

For those of you who don't know what SaaS is, it stands for Software as a Service. I recommend reading the Wikipedia article for a full explanation, but in a nutshell it means that the processing and storage of a program happens on the software vendor’s end instead of the end user’s. This can eliminate the need for high-end workstations, IT departments, even servers. Working on a central file between offices would also no longer be an issue. The concept puts more control in the vendor’s hands which some may see as a flaw…. but with yearly releases and no backwards compatibility, how much control do we really have anyway? I see this as a way to overcome many Revit shortcomings. AutoDesk can more easily observe how users really work, see how ridiculously slow large Revit models get, see what causes problems & crashes, and seamlessly release patches & updates. AutoDesk could keep it’s greedy corporate agreement with Microsoft by running their OS on their end, yet allow users with Linux and Mac OS to tie into the system. This is not a new idea… a book entitled ‘Construction Collaboration Technologies: The Extranet Evolution’ was published three years ago. I think it’s up to us as the consumers to start demanding better service from AutoDesk… and services such as this would be a really good start.

[patricks]

Essentially what you're talking about is everybody having a remote terminal connection to a source of computing power and storage elsewhere.

My experiences with remote desktop/terminals has been less than satisfactory, i.e. jumpy screen, poor refresh times, etc. And this was with a high-speed cable modem at home, and a business-class cable at work with a gigabit connection between the modem and server.

So unless some advances have been made in the last year or so in remote desktop computing, I wouldn't want to go that route.

But that's just my personal preference working in a small office and Revit models under 50 MB.. It might be a viable solution for a large office.

[cbaze]

Yes and no. With remote desktop, you're accessing an entire computer... so the data from the software you're using has to be transferred in addition to the client's entire OS. Also the idea with SaaS is that you're accessing a much more powerful computer than your workstation at home. Sorry for the whiney rant yesterday (I was tired and frustrated with a big piece of curtain wall that was taking 30+ seconds per add/remove segment), but I'd like to hear more about the feasibility of this if anyone reading knows more than I do. Autodesk freewheel is an example of SaaS, but I'd be the first to agree that it's entirely too slow. Perhaps the processing could be shared between the client and server? I don't know.... but I do know that large projects get way too slow, and there has to be a better way to do things.

[Calvn_Swing]

I want to correct you in regards to remote desktop. All that is getting transmitted is the graphics stream and user I/O. Remote desktop enables I/O mapping between devices at a remote location and the core hardware on the host computer. So, in the case of my little laptop remote desktopping it to my workstation; the keyboard, mouse, and display on my lappy are mapped to the appropriate ports on the workstation. Thus, I am controlling a much more powerful computer remotely (hence the name). I am not running any processes from the host on my laptop. All the laptop is doing is logging the I side, sending those over the LAN/WAN and then receiving the O (graphics stream) from the host. The host does all the graphics processing as well (which is nifty since my lappy lacks the 3D acceleration required to run Revit smoothly). To my laptop it is a lot like playing a video.

Now, that being said, remote desktop tends to be a little less smooth because it is designed for LAN use, not WAN use as there is little packet optimization or QOS built into the application. There are other dedicated applications that yield the same result but have lower overhead on the client and do superior routing of the data. So, you can get smoother. But, it's pretty darn close and it is free!

[MikeJarosz]

Essentially what you're talking about is everybody having a remote terminal connection to a source of computing power and storage elsewhere.


I think that's called a mainframe:idea:

[cbaze]

Thanks for the clarification. So basically you're uploading keystrokes & mouse location while downloading a monitor-resolution video stream... makes sense. What I really don't like about Revit that SaaS would help solve is the up-front costs for using the program. You need a $1500 workstation running Windows that'll be completely obsolete in two years, a $7000 license plus a $700 a year subscription for software that will last until AutoDesk buys out some other company, and a server depending on your number of users. I'd much rather pay a higher subscription fee to tie into Revit via high-speed internet with my Linux ultra-portable, let them do the processing, save the files to their servers, and not have to worry about the latest graphics cards, whether or not Revit is able to utilize all 4 cores of my workstation... etc.

[aaronrumple]

Internet down or Autodesk down and you're out of work. Buzzsaw doesn't have 100% up time. And adsk takes a vacation from Christmas to New Years..... I don't.

[cbaze]

If the license server, or the file server, or the individual workstation goes down I'm outta work. I've found the internet to be much more reliable than all of the current peices of the puzzle. Economy of scale would allow AutoDesk to have multiple redundant servers; I can't afford that.

[ron.sanpedro]

Autodesk's servers are so slow that installing Revit with a full content download can take hours, and you want to put all the eggs in your company in that one basket? ;)

Seriously, I think SaaS makes a ton of sense for totally commoditized volume software, like Word Processing, or very specialized and scalable stuff like Rendering, Energy Analysis, etc. But I just don't know if semi-specialized and yet core business tools like Revit really makes sense. And certainly not from an industry whose current guarantee of their product is "It might not even work, and if you install it you accept that. No promises made, but we did cash your check." Until there is a Lemon Law for software I just don't think I would trust my very existence on a daily basis to anyone but myself.

Gordon

[atbergma]

Until there is a Lemon Law for software I just don't think I would trust my very existence on a daily basis to anyone but myself.

Amen. Open source BIM, anyone?

[aaronrumple]

I've found the internet to be much more reliable than all of the current peices of the puzzle. Economy of scale would allow AutoDesk to have multiple redundant servers; I can't afford that.

Try doing a project using Buzzsaw - then report back.

The economics of SaaS also work against us, just like the current healthcare industry. We pay our money to the insurance company. They take 25%. So only $0.75 on the dollar is available for healthcare. Autodesk buys the server, they buy the buildings, they buy the power, they buy the IT staff. Then they charge you $1.25 for every dollar thay spend on this infastructure. So you now have 25% less resources to do you job. Can you pass on this 25% increase to you clients? ...or maybe Autodesk want's 50% return on this sort of investemnt.

[cbaze]

Then they charge you $1.25 for every dollar thay spend on this infastructure.

No, they charge me for 125% of the portion of the infastructure that I am using. Which is a lot cheaper than paying for all of my own hardware.... and is scalable unlike my own infastructure. Say the economy turns sour and I have to let go of half of my workforce, right now I'd be stuck with 50% more licences than I need and 50% more infastructure than I need. Not an issue with SaaS.

[aaronrumple]

Say the economy turns sour and I have to let go of half of my workforce, right now I'd be stuck with 50% more licences than I need and 50% more infastructure than I need. Not an issue with SaaS.

Sure you would. You think Autodesk would charge you in any less than a year increment? And you would have to pay a penalty if you drop a seat and pick it up later... And of course they could do that because they have your drawings. Don't pay up and they keep them.

SaaS isn't about how you want to do things. It is about the software industry keeping you paying on a regular basis.

That $1.25 of infastructure you are using is going to be a lot more expensive setup than what you are buying. And you won't have a choice on what they decide to build. It can't be done on the cheap because of scale.

You've collected a massive amount of resources in one spot. Now you need a hardended building to protect it from earthquake, fire, tornado and the occasional terrorist attack. Not cheap. And you need several. For redundency. Each needs a co-generation system for backup power. Not cheap. You need full time 24/7 staff. Not cheap. You need to pay for massive amounts of bandwidth. Not cheap. You need a marketing and legal team in addition to the technical staff.

None of that is needed for a small office buying a few PC's and servers. Sure you might be down for a few hours a year, but a cheap battery UPS will avert most power outages. A local power outage would have knocked you out if you were using SaaS anyway. And you don't need to buy. You can lease.

Buzzsaw Professional is something like $12,000 for a 25 user licence. I think that might be the smallest lump you can get. And only like 1/2 gig storage. For $12,000 I can get a couple of servers and terrabytes of storage. You'll also notice no pricing information is available on Autodesk's web site for this storage solution SaaS. Imagine what Revit would costs.

[cbaze]

Amazon S3 & EC2. Cloud computing. This stuff is taking the IT industry by storm. Wikipedia outlines the concept well "Consumers of the 'cloud' are concerned with services it can perform rather than the underlying technologies used to achieve the requested function." Amazon proves that the theory of economy of scale in computing works. Computer hardware is on of the worst investments you can make. I'd just like the option to pay more to let someone else make the investment for me.

[aaronrumple]

Amazon S3 & EC2. Cloud computing. This stuff is taking the IT industry by storm. Wikipedia outlines the concept well "Consumers of the 'cloud' are concerned with services it can perform rather than the underlying technologies used to achieve the requested function." Amazon proves that the theory of economy of scale in computing works. Computer hardware is on of the worst investments you can make. I'd just like the option to pay more to let someone else make the investment for me.

If we use the Amazon estimator and I use my typical Revit projects as a basis. And we use each journal entry as a transaction (I'd say that is pretty equivelent to a sales transaction, querry or search). I come up with a bill of $1250 a month - and that doesn't include the rest of the office.

For a much more realistic example: We do a lot of rendering - something that is already widely available as SaaS (vray, mental ray, etc..) . I've looked at a lot of different services. It just doesn't make economic sense. Buying rendering servers in-house is far cheaper.