Sandvik acquires Cambrio (GibbsCAM) - Page 2
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 42
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    8,368
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    457
    Likes (Received)
    2231

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gkoenig View Post
    The average customer for CAD/CAM software is not posting to this forum, no.

    Mostly because the overwhelming majority of CAD/CAM users are not the ones who paid for their software. As a group, we are a niche that is actually quite difficult to work with for most vendors - we have high expectations and because we go through both the sales pitch and the user experience, we are in a position to smell the bullshit.


    So yea, we are a pain in the ass section of the market.
    Well, perhaps that is in fact correct.
    At the same time, for most CAD/CAM providers small ( 50 ppl or less, 50M or less annual$ ) companies are also 70+% of the market!

    But I do see your point that loosing, dropping a flat forcing-out of a few or more than a few, 10, 20, even 50 seat customers is not even a drop in their proverbial bucket.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    North Carolina
    Posts
    222
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    39
    Likes (Received)
    148

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SeymourDumore View Post
    ( but then again, wondering if the target of this post is not just a kid living in Momma's basement with a half broken laptop and dreams never to be fulfilled .... )
    Clever boy, you. Caught me. Back to my basement.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,215
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    907
    Likes (Received)
    2838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SeymourDumore View Post
    And yet, you have BOUGHT your Robodrill, and you have BOUGHT a seat of NX.
    You also did not switch to renting your Robodrill monthly, or modified your NX license to the Subscription model did you?
    Why not?
    Because if I can't sell it, I don't fucking own it!

    I bought the Robodrill for $26k... and sold it 22 months later for $24k.

    The $26k I paid for NX was in exchange for a license, and that license has zero value to anyone but me, and I cannot liquidate that asset. The moment Siemens cashed my check, that money was totally gone.

    We're all just paying for access, we own nothing. Software is really way more of a utility than a capital asset, so why not finance it as such?

    NX CAD/CAM 3 Axis costs $18,000 + $2,400 a year in maintenance. A subscription for same costs $5,400 - Siemens prices the Sub at a 6 year break-even with the perpetual. Channel your inner Warren Buffet and go do a Net Present Value workup comparing those two models over 10 years... The $15,000 extra cash you have in your pocket today by going with the subscription is worth one hell of a lot more than the $3000 annual savings that start in 6 years.

    Subscription got your foot in the door for HSM Works, but unless you keep paying the annual fee, you loose access to all the stuff you've ever created!
    The longer you subscribe, the more you have to swallow the hook!
    Running any business is about being on the hook!

    I'm on the hook with my customers, the bank for my mortgage, my vendors, the power company. Did Portland General "get their hooks" in me when they wired up my place for electricity? I don't pay that bill, I lose access to every single one of my capital assets.

    The brutal reality is; if your value pool is not pulling enough of it's weight to cover all your expenses comfortably, you need to re-evaluate the actual worth of that value pool. If you spent 6 years investing in hundred of CAM files, and that IP isn't able to comfortably pull the $2200 a year HSM Works subscription, you have way bigger problems than the subscription.

  4. Likes empwoer, nateacox liked this post
  5. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Aberdeen, UK
    Posts
    4,616
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1687
    Likes (Received)
    2182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gkoenig View Post
    We're all just paying for access, we own nothing.
    That is a specious argument. You know it, and I know you know it.

    We do not legally own "the software", that is true. However, on a perpetual license, off maintenance, we do own the right to use, on the explicit agreement that we do so without support or assistance, the version that we have indefinitely, which enables perpetual access to all the programs we made with it, at no additional cost to us.

    CAM software has no actual value to a machine shop. It is a transient tool that enables us to create and access our data, of which we have undisputed sovereignty, and which has actual quantifiable value as a commercial asset, in terms of committed man hours and profit on repeat orders. Nobody cares about the resale value of their seat of CAM software, it's not part of the equation, and you can't compare it to a capital asset like a machine tool. Ownership or rental of software is an operating cost.

    Before you start flinging the "haha you have bigger problems if you can't afford the subscription fee haha" bullshit, I am fully paid up on subscriptions to multiple seats of multiple softwares.

    This is a moral argument, not a pragmatic one. That should be blatantly apparent.

  6. Likes SeymourDumore, barbter liked this post
  7. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,215
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    907
    Likes (Received)
    2838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post
    That is a specious argument. You know it, and I know you know it.
    It is an apt argument within the intended context. Any small business needs to smartly allocate capital for the best ROI, and control for risk. If you are starting a machine shop, software is your biggest line item that is absolutely non recoverable. As such, it is probably also your single greatest risk.

    We do not legally own "the software"... clipped ...at no additional cost to us.
    We all agree with what a perpetual license is.

    Where we disagree is if that stated advantage you work up to has any realized value. There are only two arguments that favor perpetual licenses:

    1. You are so confident in the software that you can guarantee you'll keep the business on it for 10+ years. Remember, while the break-even between Sub and Perp is ~6 years, that ignores the opportunity cost of other capital allocations that could have been made in years 1-6. That is a high amount of confidence, especially in a field where big transitions are happening. I've been in the machining hustle for about 5 years, and I've gone through 3 CAM packages; I think this level of confidence in a particular package is unfounded.

    2. You've somehow managed to build up a pool of IP, but that pool of IP somehow has a problem even covering some relatively low carrying costs. Like, you really can't cough up $500 a year for Fusion? And you have this pile of work you did in NX (so, you are not a bargain basement business), but the $5k annual subscription is just a bridge too far? My argument is that this is a relatively rare scenario, and any business in that position has much deeper, fundamental problems.


    Ownership or rental of software is an operating cost.
    It is an operating cost... financed like CapEx, but totally illiquid. It it a fish? Is it a fowl?

    If it is an operating cost, then treat it like one and pay as you go the way you do your facilities, utilities, insurance, employees. Cash on the barrelhead, for fixed terms.

    Before you start flinging the "haha you have bigger problems if you can't afford the subscription fee haha" bullshit, I am fully paid up on subscriptions to multiple seats of multiple softwares.
    That is a repetition of my argument, not a refutation of it.

    Solve the contradiction here - I have invested in a big pool of IP, but that pool can't pull it's own weight in carrying costs. Who the hell kind of business is that?

    This is the kind of argument cranky guys who build bunkers make - "Well, when it all falls to shit, those big investments I made will pay off!" Just like the bunker, it probably isn't going to fall to shit bad enough you need that bunker, and if it does? The bunker probably isn't going to be enough to save you. You're just hemorrhaging capital.

  8. Likes nateacox liked this post
  9. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Aberdeen, UK
    Posts
    4,616
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1687
    Likes (Received)
    2182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gkoenig View Post
    <snip>
    Rather than responding to all of that, which is equal parts confirmation of my arguments and misunderstanding or strawmanning them, I will refer you to the final paragraph of my post, which you ignored:

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post
    This is a moral argument, not a pragmatic one. That should be blatantly apparent.
    And just to be super explicit, the objections to the subscription model in general have absolutely fuck all to do with the cost of it.

    Edit:

    And further to that, your admission that you've only been doing this for five years and have used three different software packages, only serves to prove that your situation cannot be compared to that of many of the rest of us.

  10. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    390
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    63
    Likes (Received)
    196

    Default

    Good god man this turned philosophical real quick.

    One point I think we can all agree on - ADSK has been fucking customers over for a very long time and it keeps getting worse. Look, I understand their Grand Master Plan...hell it ain't even half bad of an idea. Might even say it's a good idea. That isn't the point. The point is that they have alienated a large portion of their customer base in the last 5-10 years.

    Argument: ADSK knows they have to solve the ITAR problem and they are "working on it". Okay cool. MAYBE they should communicate that with publications and updates to user like "Hey we undestand this issue and this is what we are doing to adapt to solve it". That is a novel idea! Just being open. Well no they don't do that, they acquire, roll into Fusion, and strangle the OG product without so much as a heads up. EVERY CAM tool they have cannibalized has had this same scenario play out. Fuck ADSK, their business model is parasitic and they are too big for their own good. I am 100% positive that they have some serious talent on their dev teams. Totally. I am 100% sure that their grand plan makes sense. But they sure suck at implementing it.

    My RebuttalNO ONE HAS TOLD ME how they are going to solve the ITAR conundrum. Let's see...you built a massive user base who adore and love the fact that everything is cloud based and can be accessed anywhere and shared super easy. Great. So what, are you going to one day flip a switch and turn Fusion into an ITAR compliant product and rip it off the cloud and upset everyone over the killer feature that made everyone love Fusion (cloud). Seems unlikely. The more time goes on, the more they are painting themselves into a corner with this.

    As far as subscriptions, I, as a millennial do not inherently mind subscription. Whoever said paying maintenance is basically like a subscription anyway is kind of accurate. The major difference is that I can still access the software even if my maintenance drops off which is a HUGE thing. For example, my IT team and my Mastercam reseller both dropped the ball on maintenance this year and I was out of maintenance for like 3 months somehow. Got it rectified but I was still able to make parts!

    If CNC Software came out with an industrial license subscription I would absolutely jump on that. It would greatly help my consulting and contract programming dreams. As it stands I can't afford a $30K seat of multiaxis industrial, and I can't use an HLE or EDU license for profit driven work. So hell yea, get me that subscription and we are making money! I agree with whoever said it, a subscription SHOULD NOT be the only way to purchase a product.

    I think Adobe still has the option to outright buy their design softwares if the user so chooses. Or you can sign up for their subscription and gain access to their full suite of products. Those softwares are fuckin expensive and subscription models DO allow for priced-out users to get involved in the ecosystem which is great for both customer and seller.

  11. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,215
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    907
    Likes (Received)
    2838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post
    Rather than responding to all of that, which is equal parts confirmation of my arguments and misunderstanding or strawmanning them, I will refer you to the final paragraph of my post, which you ignored:
    Accusations of argumentative subterfuge on my part have little basis when you won't answer to the most basic premise that underpins the Perpetual argument:

    What business has all this valuable CAM IP, but is also in a position where paying a subscription is putting existential financial strain on the enterprise?

    I do not care about the philosophy; these are all business decisions. The Perpetual side makes a lot of emotional arguments (masquerading as "philosophy"), but the second you start applying basic Financing 101 tools to the question with reasonable assumptions, subscriptions look like a better and better deal...

    Which is why pretty much every piece of business software has gone subscription. Companies are not buying their database, or CRM, or HR, or even Microsoft Office anymore - it is all done via subscription. Bejesus, they don't even have servers anymore! It is all rented out to Azure or AWS! Even the god damn Pentagon is going to the cloud.

    And further to that, your admission that you've only been doing this for five years and have used three different software packages, only serves to prove that your situation cannot be compared to that of many of the rest of us.
    5 years in the CAM/machining side of the business. 10 years in industrial/product design before that.

  12. Likes empwoer liked this post
  13. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,215
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    907
    Likes (Received)
    2838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by metalmadness View Post
    My RebuttalNO ONE HAS TOLD ME how they are going to solve the ITAR conundrum.
    The holdup is primarily regulatory. The DOD decided early last year that cloud storage or encrypted data did not constitute "exporting." Then a month later, COVID hit and I think it screwed up the timelines for everyone. There are a few more regulatory issues that need to be more clearly defined, and Autodesk can't give a timeline or a promise because they do not know what those regulations will be nor when they will come into existence.

    My sense is that everyone knows that the Pentagon's cloud computing initiative is going to require that the regulators clarify these issues sooner rather than later.

    I think Adobe still has the option to outright buy their design softwares if the user so chooses.
    Nope. Adobe is 100% subscription at this point. I *think* there are some exceptions for extremely large scale buyers with very particular needs, but these sort of deals happen at the VP level with companies that are big enough, nothing talked about in this thread applies.

  14. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    California
    Posts
    1,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1989
    Likes (Received)
    652

    Default

    y'all are a bunch of little girls... wtf is wrong with you?
    each one of you guys makes good points. there isnt gonna be a universal right or wrong here. quit bickering for fucks sake.

  15. Likes Dan B, MotoX liked this post
  16. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    NY USA
    Posts
    868
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    187
    Likes (Received)
    603

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gkoenig View Post
    Back in the day when Autodesk bought HSM Works, I thought it was great news! I was just getting into this game, and there was no flipping way I could hemorrhage $10k for a seat of HSM Works. Within a couple of months of the acquisition, HSM Works became a $2200 a year subscription, and I got onboard immediately, then bought my Robodrill.

    Subscription made a piece of software that was inaccessible to me accessible. That is the upside none of you guys ever really admit to. Also, software is not a classic capital asset - you can't sell your license to a 3rd Party. The $26,000 I spent on NX was capital down the toilet that could only pay for itself by it's own bootstraps. Thinking you own software the same way you do a hammer of a mill is a dumb fucking concept.

    You guys are mad at Autodesk because they wouldn't let you keep a perpetual license on maintenance. Bad new boys - nobody in the perpetual game is letting you skip maintenance without big penalties! SolidWorks, NX, Esprit, Hyermill, MasterCAM - you skip maintenance and you either need to pay all the years you skipped, or buy a new seat from scratch.

    If having up-to-date software is important to you, you're essentially on subscription. The only case where you aren't is if you have a perpetual license, and you keep using the software without updates, to save a couple of thousand per-year/per-seat. None of the software we are talking about are toys, so I really don't see how you would be in a money-making position but be in SO MUCH financial stress that a $2000/yr subscription is a company killer. If you are really at that point, you've got way bigger fuckin' problems than a theoretical navel gazing argument about software business models.
    The issue is I did keep everything up to date. I stayed on maintenance, I followed every rule they laid out to keep my perpetual license. Money is not the issue. The software is the tool I bought that paid for itself the fastest. Best investment ever. I'm angry because after having done everything I was asked to do to retain my perpetual license...that I paid for...they decided I couldn't.

    The issue is not trusting a company when the company sets up a relationship that requires trust. The IP I generate with the software is worth many many times the cost of buying the software outright, not to mention the cost of a subscription. That's a no brainer. But why would I have a subscription with a company that has repeatedly changed the rules of the game and been less than transparent about their intentions to do so?

    Subscription users are completely at the mercy of the whims of AD. They could triple the price tomorrow and your only choice is to pay or flush your IP and start over.

    Like I said the IP....MY IP is worth far more to me than the software, but the subscription model makes your IP inaccessible if you don't pay the subscription.

    They are holding your work product hostage. The longer you work in that model the more locked in you become. If they stop all development on 360 tomorrow, and you gain no more functionality...you still have to pay to use your data. It's like social media....you are the product.

    I wouldn't subscribe to a wrench service. I don't subscribe to machine tools. CAM is just another tool in the chain required for me to create value. I don't want the value I created rented back to me perpetually.

    It's a great thing when you are starting out, I can see the merits in that scenario.

  17. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    NY USA
    Posts
    868
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    187
    Likes (Received)
    603

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by empwoer View Post
    y'all are a bunch of little girls... wtf is wrong with you?
    each one of you guys makes good points. there isnt gonna be a universal right or wrong here. quit bickering for fucks sake.
    ahh...welcome to PM.

    This place has calmed down significantly actually. Used to be you had to put on your asbestos undies just to have an opinion here.

  18. Likes empwoer liked this post
  19. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    848
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    48
    Likes (Received)
    120

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by empwoer View Post
    y'all are a bunch of little girls... wtf is wrong with you?
    each one of you guys makes good points. there isnt gonna be a universal right or wrong here. quit bickering for fucks sake.
    Subscription is good for some, and not good for others. And some take advantage of both. It's not much more complicated than that.

  20. Likes empwoer liked this post
  21. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Aberdeen, UK
    Posts
    4,616
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1687
    Likes (Received)
    2182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gkoenig View Post
    the most basic premise that underpins the Perpetual argument:
    It is only your opinion that that is the principle objection, as I stated clearly in my first reply to you.

    Quote Originally Posted by gkoenig View Post
    What business has all this valuable CAM IP, but is also in a position where paying a subscription is putting existential financial strain on the enterprise?
    Hopefully very few, as that would be an unfortunate position to be in. And once more, this is not the argument that I was making, you are simply choosing to present it that way.

    Quote Originally Posted by gkoenig View Post
    5 years in the CAM/machining side of the business. 10 years in industrial/product design before that.
    And how many times did you change software in your previous role? After you switched to NX were you forced to maintain a subscription to your previous software in order to retain access to your older models, or were you able to simply let the maintenance lapse and just keep it hanging around on your hard drive for when you need it? Did you spend thousands of man hours converting them all? Will you just keep them as importable dumb solids with diminished value?

    In the three times that you have switched CAM software in the last 5 years, what did you do with your legacy programs? Or do you mean that you switched jobs three times in the last 5 years, and therefore had no legacy data to concern yourself with?

    CAM programs are 100% not cross-compatible across different CAM softwares. There is no exception to this rule that I am aware of. There is no neutral file format between CAM softwares, even in a diminished functionality capacity.

    At a guess, I have probably somewhere between 2-3 thousand models made in Solidworks. No worries, they can be imported into whatever.

    I have at least twice that many part programs written in featurecam. Many of them highly developed, leveraging the API and custom functions. The most important ones are all anchored to the most recent version of the software, as it is not backwards compatible. I have heavily modified and automated post processors for all my machines, most of them written from scratch myself, all of them customised and dead reliable. And the last backups of those I have from my last perpetually licensed version are so out of date now as to be useless.

    When (not if) I switch wholesale to NX, I will be forced to choose between maintaining a subscription to software that I'm not really using, or completely abandoning all my legacy data. It's a nice comforting choice that just fills me with joy, thanks Autodesk!

    Quote Originally Posted by empwoer View Post
    quit bickering for fucks sake.
    Are you new here?

    FWIW I tend to agree with GK much more often than I don't.

    In this case, I don't like anyone framing the mandatory move to subscription as a good thing for the customer. If it was optional, then I would agree. As it stands, it is implemented solely to benefit the software vendor. If it happens to benefit some customers that is a convenient side effect. If it does not benefit some other customers, they are collateral damage. Those of us who are bitter about it, are the ones who have been dismissed as the latter.

  22. Likes Camputer, empwoer, XD341 liked this post
  23. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    California
    Posts
    1,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1989
    Likes (Received)
    652

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post
    It is only your opinion that that is the principle objection, as I stated clearly in my first reply to you.



    Hopefully very few, as that would be an unfortunate position to be in. And once more, this is not the argument that I was making, you are simply choosing to present it that way.



    And how many times did you change software in your previous role? After you switched to NX were you forced to maintain a subscription to your previous software in order to retain access to your older models, or were you able to simply let the maintenance lapse and just keep it hanging around on your hard drive for when you need it? Did you spend thousands of man hours converting them all? Will you just keep them as importable dumb solids with diminished value?

    In the three times that you have switched CAM software in the last 5 years, what did you do with your legacy programs? Or do you mean that you switched jobs three times in the last 5 years, and therefore had no legacy data to concern yourself with?

    CAM programs are 100% not cross-compatible across different CAM softwares. There is no exception to this rule that I am aware of. There is no neutral file format between CAM softwares, even in a diminished functionality capacity.

    At a guess, I have probably somewhere between 2-3 thousand models made in Solidworks. No worries, they can be imported into whatever.

    I have at least twice that many part programs written in featurecam. Many of them highly developed, leveraging the API and custom functions. The most important ones are all anchored to the most recent version of the software, as it is not backwards compatible. I have heavily modified and automated post processors for all my machines, most of them written from scratch myself, all of them customised and dead reliable. And the last backups of those I have from my last perpetually licensed version are so out of date now as to be useless.

    When (not if) I switch wholesale to NX, I will be forced to choose between maintaining a subscription to software that I'm not really using, or completely abandoning all my legacy data. It's a nice comforting choice that just fills me with joy, thanks Autodesk!



    Are you new here?

    FWIW I tend to agree with GK much more often than I don't.

    In this case, I don't like anyone framing the mandatory move to subscription as a good thing for the customer. If it was optional, then I would agree. As it stands, it is implemented solely to benefit the software vendor. If it happens to benefit some customers that is a convenient side effect. If it does not benefit some other customers, they are collateral damage. Those of us who are bitter about it, are the ones who have been dismissed as the latter.
    i dont disagree with you at all. just think its silly to argue about opinions. its literally a waste of breath/time.

  24. #36
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    NY USA
    Posts
    868
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    187
    Likes (Received)
    603

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by empwoer View Post
    i dont disagree with you at all. just think its silly to argue about opinions. its literally a waste of breath/time.
    This is a discussion forum, I greatly benefit from reading discussions that I don't even partake in. If this discussion benefits someone in the future that's worth doing.

    Plus autodesk has really pissed me off. It's cathartic to express that sometimes.

  25. Likes Camputer liked this post
  26. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Washington
    Posts
    185
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    27
    Likes (Received)
    166

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XD341 View Post
    This is a discussion forum, I greatly benefit from reading discussions that I don't even partake in. If this discussion benefits someone in the future that's worth doing.

    Plus autodesk has really pissed me off. It's cathartic to express that sometimes.
    ^ All of this

    Gk, I find it interesting that you gloss over what happened to Delcam when it was acquired by Autodesk. I'm happy to know that they had a sort of kind of disappointed vibe when they talked to you about it. Very comforting.

    Since this thread is about an acquisition, and the argument stemmed from a comment about a forced transition to a rented license from a perpetual, I think the case is extremely relevant to the topic. I also think that this is an argument worth having.

    So let's lay out what happened after Delcam was acquired for any future reader who stumbles across this thread and has no idea what the hell we're talking about:

    1)AD buys Delcam
    2)AD changes the interfaces to be more in line with AD's other products
    3)Support for Delcam products now goes through AD's online portal and immediately goes to shit
    4)Delcam's products stop developing. No meaningful updates year after year after year
    5)Delcam technology starts showing up in fusion
    6)AD introduces subscriptions of Delcam products for new customers, AD says current users can keep their perpetual licenses
    7)AD adds fusion to Delcam licenses and starts suggesting users use "free" fusion subscription they "gave" you
    8)AD claims Delcam products are not being discontinued
    9)AD makes it clear that all perpetual licenses will be converted to subscriptions
    10)AD makes it clear that Delcam products will be rolled into fusion and discontinued
    11)AD has users tie their license to a specific user profile
    12)AD gives kind of disappointed overall vibe to Gkoenig while talking about how they lied and screwed over their userbase

    Parts of the timeline might not be quite right, but that's the jist of it.

    I am one of the people who have been greatly affected by all of this. I've spent the last year reprogramming hundreds of jobs and mass migrating to a new CAM system. It has been a huge expense for the company, I'm sure. Much more than any amount of subscription money. There is very little ROI on reprogramming jobs that we've been running for years, but it still needs to be done as our parts get rev'd and changed fairly regularly and I can no longer access any of our featurecam files that our employees made over these last 15 years to change a couple dimensions and repost. I actually can't use those posts at all anymore. We still have them of course, because we bought them outright, but I am now locked out of being able to use them. I can't even open featurecam. That's at least $20k dollars down the drain right there, not to mention the years and years of edits and knowledge that perfected them.

    We could always pay Autodesk to rent the key back for a little bit, that's an option. How long do you suggest we pay for obsolete software so we have permission to look at our own files? One year? Two years? Five? What kind of price do you put on the ability to access every file you've ever made? It used to be a given. Mastercam could get discontinued tomorrow and I would still be able to revise a program I made in X6, or continue improving our posts for a program I'll make two years from now.

    Since you admitted you've only been doing this for 5 years and in that span you've rotated through 3 different softwares, I don't think you fully understand how deeply rooted the investment into cam gets. Tool libraries, macros, posts, interfaces, models, programs, subprograms, automation. Cam gets built more than bought, and it's scary to think that once you've finished, someone could lock you out of your own house. Plenty of people and companies are willing to pay much more to make sure that doesn't happen. To large companies the up front cost of the software is not a factor, so please stop saying it's all about cost.

  27. Likes gregormarwick, Mud, goooose liked this post
  28. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    8,368
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    457
    Likes (Received)
    2231

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gkoenig View Post

    The brutal reality is; if your value pool is not pulling enough of it's weight to cover all your expenses comfortably, you need to re-evaluate the actual worth of that value pool. If you spent 6 years investing in hundred of CAM files, and that IP isn't able to comfortably pull the $2200 a year HSM Works subscription, you have way bigger problems than the subscription.

    Can you PLEASE point to any post ever made by me - here on PM or anywhere else - where I was complaining about the actual cost of either the software or it's upkeep?
    In fact if anything, it is YOU who posted that HSM's monthly pay-to-play option was the only way for you to get in on the game.
    I could have responded in the assholic way by telling you that until you can afford a decent CAM software - which in fact IS an ASSET - either keep hand writing your programs from pen and paper drawings,
    or simply stay the fuck away from machining until you have enough to get in.

    No, instead I've said that software subscription as an OPTION is a truly generous offer to those who otherwise could not or would not get to use the tool.


    Your argument about a business's ability to sustain it's annual expenses is a bullshit argument simply because it's based on false equivalency.
    Your claim that software is more of a utility than an asset simply because you cannot sell it is pure and utter bullshit!
    ARe the software companies trying to convince us that it is and are in fact doing everything they can to make sure that it will be in the future?
    Yes, they absolutely are trying their damnest to achieve exactly that.
    That however does not change the fact that as things are right now, a perpetual license for a software tool is an asset, and will remain to be an asset until it is no longer capable of producing'
    what is demanded of it.
    Paying an annual fee by way of maintenance assures that said software tool is constantly updated, so as to keep it remaining an asset for as long as possible.

    SAS - such as what the subscription model will inevitably morph into - OTOH is not only not an asset, it is in fact a liability!
    Stop paying maintenance ( for whatever reason you choose to do so ), not only are you no longer able to create new content, but you also loose the ability to access your existing ones!

    You keep thinking that it is all about the monetary expense, and absolutely refuse to understand that for most of us it is NOT ABOUT THE MONEY!!!

    Or to use a wise man's post from earlier in this thread:

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post

    And just to be super explicit, the objections to the subscription model in general have absolutely fuck all to do with the cost of it.


  29. #39
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,215
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    907
    Likes (Received)
    2838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post
    It is only your opinion that that is the principle objection, as I stated clearly in my first reply to you.
    Part of our intrinsic disagreement is that of perspective of who the buyer of the software is. I'm primarily looking at it from a startup/small-business perspective where capital is limited, revenue is low, and blowing $20k on CAD/CAM is a serious financial risk. I think people in this position would be nuts to buy a perpetual license. Build up the IP pool and see if the business has some legs under it before big software capex.

    More established businesses? I'm sorta in the it doesn't matter camp. Software costs as a function of overall operating expenses and human resource costs. I think there are many factors at play in that decision, and I don't think the a blanket answer of Perpetual or Sub is a valid one.

    I also probably do not value CAM data as much as you do. I invest most of my time setting up the software environment with the aim of making the programming expenses for any particular part extremely low. They are also all parts we designed, so DFM is baked very deeply into what we do, which goes a long ways towards de-valuing the CAM data. From HSM > Fusion > NX, I just re-programmed everything from dumb solids as needed. I would say the programming time was mostly offset by efficiencies gained in re-factoring.

    In general, I am nowhere near as vociferous on this topic, I just take up the asshole contrarian position wherever I go. I do think Fusion is both technically, and from a strategy direction, a monumental disruptor in the CAD/CAM space, and everyone is better off for it existing, even if you never use it.

  30. Likes empwoer liked this post
  31. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Enid, Oklahoma
    Posts
    311
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1458
    Likes (Received)
    173

    Default

    Getting back on topic, I'm glad to see Gibbs in the hands of a company I know. I don't know who 3d systems was/is or who Cambrio

    was/is but it seems every time i had trouble that the reseller couldn't solve that "corporate" took forever to provide any help.

    At one point during the Cambrio thing, I wasn't able to use my software for over a week.

    Back in the day when it was just "Gibbscam", corporate support was awesome. I never had an issue that lasted longer than a few

    hours. I'm hoping for the best from Sandvik, at least I know they have skin in the manufacturing world unlike these software

    companies.


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •