Whish #1

[whgeiger1]

Cheaper Upgrades to Legacy Products

Given current economic conditions, I am surprised that this whish is not ranked #1.

My last upgrade to AutoCAD was 2000i. Since then the upgrade price gap has increased to the point of no return. When file format issues arise I use a competitive product that cost 1/10 that of the required upgrade to bridge compatibility gap. Other issues, concerning real needs, have been addressed through customization.

Anybody out there share my views?

AutoDesk, are you listening yet?

WHG

[H-Angus]

Cheaper Upgrades to Legacy Products

Given current economic conditions, I am surprised that this whish is not ranked #1.

My last upgrade to AutoCAD was 2000i. Since then the upgrade price gap has increased to the point of no return. When file format issues arise I use a competitive product that cost 1/10 that of the required upgrade to bridge compatibility gap. Other issues, concerning real needs, have been addressed through customization.

Anybody out there share my views?

AutoDesk, are you listening yet?

WHG

I'm not really sure what you are wishing for .

If you have problems with opening different format dwg files you could think about using Autodesks Free Dwg TrueView (DWG True Convert)

It appears you are using software from ten years ago, which is fine if it suits your needs, but you brought economics up; how much of a profit do you make from the software? Surely the cost of the software is simply an overhead, in the same way as renting office space or paying the electric bills or paying telephone/internet bills.

Do you think the software should be free of charge?

[Ed Jobe]

Cheaper Upgrades to Legacy Products

Autodesk doesn't sell "legacy" products, only the current release. Some stores might carry an old release for a while, but adesk has no control over what they charge.

[jaberwok]

The wish lists are about technical improvements not cost.
Lower prices would always top the lists.

[whgeiger1]

Apparently no one here shares my views. So be it.

What follows just responds to the comments and questions raised by my post. [Qn] Received Questions/Assertions are followed by [An] My Answers/Responses

Regards to All,

WHG

[Q1] The wish lists are about technical improvements not cost. Lower prices would always top the lists.

[A1] Technical improvements to a function or process in a business setting are supposed to lower the cost of performing (or time to perform) them. While issue bifurcation is academically convenient, it nevertheless, remains artificial.

[Q2] Autodesk doesn't sell "legacy" products, only the current release. Some stores might carry an old release for a while, but adesk has no control over what they charge.

[A2] Buying Legacy Products from AutoDesk is not the issue addressed here. The issue is the opposite: upgrade costs to arrive at a current product.

[Q3] I'm not really sure what you are wishing for?

[A3] Cost effective upgrades from AutoDesk! $2,800 to upgrade a single seat of AutoCAD 2000i to 2010 does not meet my test for a cost effective purchase, particularly when a continuing annual cost of $450 must be added to this figure to maintain currency.

[Q4] If you have problems with opening different format dwg files you could think about using Autodesk’s Free Dwg TrueView (DWG True Convert)

[A4] AutoDesk changed the drawing file format so that, their older (legacy) products cannot open .dwg files created by younger versions. I do not have that problem as I already have a fix for it; but, thanks for the heads-up on the conversion software. I will try it.

[Q5] It appears you are using software from ten years ago, which is fine if it suits your needs, but you brought economics up; how much of a profit do you make from the software?

[A5] Software is just a tool for us; we sell knowledge, ideas and design here. The drafting package used for a particular project is usually client determined. AutoCAD is just one of several CAD packages we use and it will, as well as others, continue to remain incidental to our profit margins.

[Q6]Surely the cost of the software is simply an overhead, in the same way as renting office space or paying the electric bills or paying telephone/internet bills.

[A6] Car salesman logic! The issue is not whether to incur an expense or not, rather it is one of controlling the magnitude of such expenditures. Had AutoDesk chosen to charge, say $200/year for upgrades, then over the last 10 years they would have, in my case, received an additional $2,000 of revenue with a cost of delivery somewhere in the neighborhood of $200.

Econ 101:
Profit [P] = Revenue [R] – Expenses [E]
When [R] -> 0 so shall [E] -> 0 because if [P} < 0 your out of business!

So, at the moment, one could say that AutoDesk is biting the hands that feed it during economic bad times. In my opinion, they will loose much more than they gain by doing so. If you are a dairy farmer and want more milk, your choices are: 1) try to get more milk from the cows you have; or 2), acquire more cows by encouraging them to join your herd. For me 2) is the superior choice as implementation of 1) later over a larger group will lead to an even larger yield.

[Q7] Do you think the software should be free of charge?

[A7] Rhetorical question, requires a no answer, answer

[jaberwok]

If you are a dairy farmer and want more milk, your choices are: 1) try to get more milk from the cows you have; or 2), acquire more cows by encouraging them to join your herd.

or 3) BUY more cows.

[jaberwok]

Have you tried asking Ford to sell you a brand-new 1970 Mustang - at a 1970 price?

[whgeiger1]

or 3) BUY more cows.

I do not think AutoDesk will buy more customers given their propensity to 'milk' the ones they already have.

[H-Angus]

In a perverse sort of way I actually don't mind the software costs, it means that the software is really only distributed and used by professional people/companies.

So ......................... when the milk man wants to build a new house, he'll go to an Architect rather than a bloke in the pub (assuming that bloke in the pub isn't an Architect ).

[whgeiger1]

Have you tried asking Ford to sell you a brand-new 1970 Mustang - at a 1970 price?

JBW,

Last time I checked, FoMoCo was accepting a taxpayer bailout from the Feds to survive the consequences of a [P] < 0. Are they a big AutoDesk client as well?

Regards,

WHG