DISQUS

JeffMirisola · 1 year ago

Bear in mind that your annual subscription is based on which version of SolidWorks you're using; base, Pro or Premium. I believe the premium maintenance is ~$1500/year....

Rob · 1 year ago

"paying $1295/seat for a new version of SolidWorks each year" ... IS bad. It is really bad. it's a mass product for heaven's sake. Plus: get the price down and there will be much more interest in the software. Get down to $300-500 and there will be 3-4 times the users and the revenue goes up with that also.

Josh M · 1 year ago

yep Rob, I'd agree. I could afford SolidWorks for myself right now if it
were under $1000. $600 with $300 upgrades is not unreasonable at all. I
don't think it devalues the program either. Like I've commented before, if
Adobe can do it with programs like Acrobat and Photoshop, I don't see why
SolidWorks can not do something similar. The CAD market isn't as big, and it
would probably mean, paying for other programs like PhotoView360 and
CircuitWoorks that are added to the Premium version, but really, that's
alright with me.

Matt Lombard · 1 year ago

Ugh. Can't this topic just go away? All I did was a short post initially. I do believe this needs to change. Users need options. It's not that $1295 is bad, but if you're a company that has a lot of licenses, it's a linear multiplier for that support, and you can't pay to just support a couple licenses.

The biggest deal is that between support and upgrades, you are forced to group them together, even if you don't want/need one of them. Just choices that make sense, that's all I want.

Josh M · 1 year ago

yeah Matt, hopefully it will go away and there will be some options added.
It crazy to see the amount of interest this has gotten. You know me.
happy-positive-everything is good, but hope you get some more votes on this.

Matt Lombard · 1 year ago

"happy-positive-everything is good"

yeah, that drives me as crazy as the people who are always down. Eyore or Piglet. They're both so extreme.

I'm a "radical centrist", which is why both sides think I'm nutz.

Josh M · 1 year ago

I'd actually argue that I'm not like that at all, but more of a where's-my-favorite-pen with a tinge of sarcasm kind of person. Just keeping it fun and interesting while making the points right. This pepper sauce is incredible.

Brian · 1 year ago

Mmmmm! Pepper sauce!

Kevin Silbert · 1 year ago

It doesn't seem too tough to me... If you need the program to run your business, it's $$$ up front and $ per year. If you can't afford it, or you just want to tinker with it, buy it once ($$$) and don't get on subscription, and count on buying a new version in 3-4 years if you need to keep up. And you won't fall afoul of any of these new fees.

SolidWorks uses these maintenance $ to develop the new releases that everybody (eventually) likes and wants to get on, but nobody wants to pay for it. Everybody wants more (features, quality, improved documentation, better support, etc), but they want to pay less... Surprise surprise!!!

Josh M · 1 year ago

Hey Kevin, I'm all for paying for good software. I'd pay for SolidWorks gladly. I disagree with the penalties as incentive for people to stay updated. I think there should be other incentives, perhaps incremental discounts on subscription service the longer you have it.

perception has a lot to do with the problem. If it wasn't perceived that everyone is getting penalized for this while it's only a small minority, this wouldn't be an issue at all. how does that sound?

Kevin Silbert · 1 year ago

"If it wasn't perceived that everyone is getting penalized for this while it's only a small minority, this wouldn't be an issue at all"...

Amen to that- I don't know what all the hoopla is about myself- If you want to stay on subscription, do so; if you don't want to, then don't... you'll never run afoul of any penalties!

I think people just like to fly off the handle with righteous indignation at the smallest issues any more- the 'net gives them a mouthpiece. But SW has the right to run their business however they want to, and users like us have the right to take it or leave it. We can make suggestions all we want, and if they make enough sense for all parties involved, maybe they'll implement them. But if they started selling SW for $500 with free subscription for life, they'd be out of business and we'd lose all our built-up investment, which would make ME an angry beaver :)

But I do like your thought about incremental discounts for staying on subscription- it incentivizes with the carrot rather than the stick. I can only imagine the nightmare it would be between Corporate and the VARs and the Users, trying to remember when things got started, etc, with multiple seats having different dates (and hence charges)... Yikes!

Hop · 1 year ago

With the high price and ease of downloading it on bit torrent, I suspect there will be more and more people updating their seats without paying.

Kevin Quigley · 1 year ago

$1295 a year is CHEAP!! In the UK we pay £1000 a year for STANDARD, £1250 for Office Pro and £1500 for premium. It has always been the case here that if you miss the subs you are penalised.

I would gladly pay USA prices, believe me.

Heinz Nachtigall · 1 year ago

I am all for paying good money for a good product, but i think it's a mean gagging system :) - not every company can afford so many licences being updated or serviced. I mean if a small company has 10 licences u need 10 service licences? That's crap - there should be a package system plus service/support and licence should be sperated, one indivudually can choose how much one needs of each
And here is fine example (and I think our company is not the only one) of a company being smacked by this ridiculous idea:
We have 4 SW workplaces - quite many of our customers don't update each year - so we now need SW versions from 2005 to 2008 on almost every Workplace because SW annoyingly is not able to save in a previous version. Now consider how this new rip-off will multiply the costs!