topic Re: Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons in Modeling

Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons

Anonymous — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 21:45:53 GMT

I just want to know how other users feel about charging for additional content for ArchiCAD. I recently looked up ArchiGlazing as a solution for creating custom windows. It cost $209 US per copy. I know that is not a lot for most firms, but it can be a lot for start up firms or small offices with limited budgets, especially given the cost of ArchiCAD alone.
So let me know what you think. Is it fair to charge for additional content (bathroom fixtures, furniture ect..) and applications that should be part of the program?

PS
I know there is a free GDL library, but there are slim pickens in there.

Re: Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons

Erika Epstein — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 00:03:58 GMT

As add-ons such as ArchiGlazing are developed by 3rd parties, of course my answer is YES.
Why shouldn't independent people/groups who spend their time developing products be paid for their time and product? they see a need and develop product for it.

Re: Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons

Anonymous — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 03:19:34 GMT

Obviously people need to be paid for their work. For add-ons to be free there would have to be some subsidy for them and that is not likely.

The usual pattern in the software business is that third party add-ons either serve a very narrow segment of the market (and so are priced on the high side) or they address limitations in the software that affect lots of people. In the latter case prices can be lower due to the larger audience but the opportunity is often limited as improvements in the main program make the add-ons unnecessary.

It's a tough business either way and I'm glad there are those willing to do it.

Of course the alternative is not that they would be free but that they simply would not be available. It's better to have the choice.

The real problem isn't what the vendors charge but that architects don't get paid enough.

Re: Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons

Bricklyne Clarence — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 03:50:40 GMT

Hence wrote:
I just want to know how other users feel about charging for additional content for ArchiCAD. I recently looked up ArchiGlazing as a solution for creating custom windows. It cost $209 US per copy. I know that is not a lot for most firms, but it can be a lot for start up firms or small offices with limited budgets, especially given the cost of ArchiCAD alone.
So let me know what you think. Is it fair to charge for additional content (bathroom fixtures, furniture ect..) and applications that should be part of the program?

PS
I know there is a free GDL library, but there are slim pickens in there.

Yes it's true; all those third-party developers have every right to charge you for their hard work and ingenuity. Or at least as much right as third-party developers for other software such as Chaosgroup (Vray), Cebas (Finalrender) NextLimit (Realflow/Maxwell) do to 3ds Max users, for example. The subtle difference between our case and those users and that software (3ds Max - as an example) is that the developers of those software, have provided them (and continue to provide them) with native means of accomplishing what those third party plug-ins can do with almost as much versatility. For example Autodesk has spent a lot developing Mental Ray as a native renderer for 3ds MAX ( and Maya, and Revit and the rest of them) to the degree that it not only competes on almost equal footing with Vray, Final Render, Maxwell and the rest of the third party renderers, but also makes the question of whether or not to buy a third-party renderer a one of personal taste and convenience rather than one of, the necessity arising from an absence in the host software. The same can be argued for their Reactor system, which facilitates fluid dynamic simulations natively ala NextLimit's Realflow, and Cloth simulations ala Simcloth and other third-party cloth simulators.

Unfortunately the same obviously can't be said for AC's third party plugins as most of them exist due to a glaring absence or glaring absences in ArchiCAD; along with Graphisoft's reluctance to develop them. Or if they do exist in ArchiCAD, then achieving the same function (without mind-boggling work-arounds) as the third party plugin would require some level of (advanced) knowledge of GDL coding - which no one has any time to learn. Think of Archiforma (free-form and basic modeling), ArchiStair or Stairmaker ( Stair-modeling and documentation without the utter joy of pulling one's teeth), Objective (think: most of the most basic and obvious tasks in modeling such as rotating objects in Section views - that somehow, someway don't exist in a software as advanced as ArchiCAD) and so on and so forth.

I guess what I'm trying to say here is that you should not really be upset at all those third party developers who work so hard to ensure that you can do in ArchiCAD what ArchiCAD wouldn't (but should) let you do - and then have the audacity to expect to be paid for their efforts.

You should probably direct your frustration and anger towards Graphisoft who seem reluctant ( and some would argue decidedly and intentionally so) to give you the tools and means to natively achieve these tasks in ArchiCAD - after all you've paid for it - in the first place.

p.s.
But then again as some here would argue and have you believe; we don't really 'need' those tools, functions or alternatives in ArchiCAD (at least, they don't so that must mean you also don't and hence we all don't....or so the reasoning goes) in the first place, so why should Graphisoft waste their resources on improving their software for your convenience as a paying user?
You pay for it. Again.

Re: Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons

Ignacio Azpiazu — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 07:15:39 GMT

I think add-ons are great and the add-on developers should be paid handsomely in order to encourage even more add-ons, but I also think the payment/delivery method may be a bit messed up, even more so with annual AC 'major' releases.

Say ArchiGlazing at $200 (or ArchiForma, ArchiTerra, the many CadImage beauties): I would suspect that way less than 1 in 40 AC license owners purchases their product. Which is to say that the developers would get probably a lot more money if their product came bundled with AC at a $5 increase in the seat price.

There will always be add-ons for niche markets, but we are talking here about add-ons that substantially impact the ArchiCAD experience for probably every single user, and which in essence make up for basic ArchiCAD deficiencies. It would be in the best interest of Graphisoft, the add-on developers, and the users, to come up with some system like that. And/or some package price plan for a choice among tried-and-tested add-ons, if Graphisoft doesn't want to stifle competition among developers by selecting a single product to make up for the deficiencies in say the door/window library--I guess developers would happily cut down their package price to a fifth if they see the prospect of selling ten times as many copies.

And of course integration during development, so that the annual release doesn't result in having to wait for the corresponding add-ons or modify your workflow, would be nice too.

Re: Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons

vistasp — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 09:57:18 GMT

Yes, the developers have to be compensated for their time. And brains. Like most others - especially those who have to shell out from their own pockets - I can't afford addons. When you multiply the cost by the exchange rate for the rupee, they become prohibitive. So, if addons cost $30-40 as Ignacio suggested, I have half a dozen in mind.

Except Objective. GS needs to make Ralph an offer he can't refuse. And I'm very sure it'll happen in the next 271 years...

Re: Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons

Anonymous — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 11:28:58 GMT

Just the point of view of a developper in this thread.

The solution of the equation price/need or price/desire is allways difficult to find and can be time consuming. Ignacio has pointed the good fact : the bigger the number of prospects the smaller the price can be, the smaller etc.

There is another unknown hidden while doing our price hunt, the fact that you can be either copied or imitated soon or not, the fact that GS will or not integrate a similar functionality in next version(s). We are often very close to ideas and they are very difficult to protect. We donot have allways a clear preview, our foreview is often closer to smog than to crystalline air.

Last thing markets can react in very different ways in different regions. The price of an addon targetting different markets, has to balance very differents habbits and expectations…

not easy. Any way the customer has allways the only answer. If he buys the price is good if he doesn't better change it !

Re: Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons

Anonymous — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:03:43 GMT

Very good discussion. I agree that the developers of the add ons should be paid for their work. However i feel that GS needs to do a better job or recognizing the errors in the program and incorporating the fixes produced by the 3rd party developers into the program. Much like a car recall, where the auto company pays to fix a design flaw in the vehicle, GraphiSoft should compensate these developers for fixing their product for them.

Re: Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons

Anonymous — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:17:14 GMT

Two reasons there is (and always has been) so much third party development around Autodesk products:

1. The large user base (obviously)

2. Autodesk buys the stuff they like/want/need.

A lot of development occurs in the hope of being bought by Autodesk. Quite a few millionaires have been made this way.

Unfortunately I don't anticipate much of this from Graphisoft nor Nemetschek. It seems a particularly american way of business (and perhaps english and dutch) but doesn't strike me as a german nor hungarian approach.

Re: Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons

Bricklyne Clarence — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:45:11 GMT

Matthew wrote:
Two reasons there is (and always has been) so much third party development around Autodesk products:

1. The large user base (obviously)

2. Autodesk buys the stuff they like/want/need.

A lot of development occurs in the hope of being bought by Autodesk. Quite a few millionaires have been made this way.

Unfortunately I don't anticipate much of this from Graphisoft nor Nemetschek. It seems a particularly american way of business (and perhaps english and dutch) but doesn't strike me as a german nor hungarian approach.

.....yeah but the overall concept isn't entirely alien to Graphisoft neither. After all, isn't this exactly how the MEP module was born? It used to be called Ductworks way back in version 9 when it was developed by an independent third-party who subsequently folded or were bought out by GS.

Now I'm not exactly advocating this as a strategic approach for GS in dealing with AC's issues, but if there are aspects of ArchiCAD's deficiencies that they are unable to resolve in-house due to lack of development resources or whatever, then I don't think that many people would fault them for buying out and integrating a Stair-making add-on or Door/Window Library-builder, for example, that would address long standing needs while easing the current common issues associated with having to resort to third-party plugins such as a lag in release of new versions or lack of fluent integration with the host program. Naturally they would end up charging extra for it (as they are with the once-promised-to-be-free MEP module) which is largely why I would be against this strategy; and obviously it wouldn't address the original posters gripe of having to pay more; but it would certainly address a whole host of other issues allowing them to focus more on fine-tuning the core program's code and functions.

Re: Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons

Anonymous — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:56:08 GMT

Bricklyne wrote:
Now I'm not exactly advocating this as a strategic approach for GS in dealing with AC's issues...

I am.

Cherry picking the best of third party development can be a very effective business model. It leaves the main office free to focus on core development issues while encouraging others to explore all the various possible applications, extensions, enhancements, etc. that the developers haven't the time and/or knowledge to pursue. The winners then either build solid businesses that buttress the main program or get get a big payday when they are bought out.

Graphisoft doesn't have the reach nor the resources to do it all themselves. I think their best hope for the future is to encourage and support third party efforts and to reward the best of them with buyouts or contracts.

Re: Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons

owen — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 16:13:33 GMT

Matthew wrote:
Bricklyne wrote:
Now I'm not exactly advocating this as a strategic approach for GS in dealing with AC's issues...
I am.

Cherry picking the best of third party development can be a very effective business model ... Graphisoft doesn't have the reach nor the resources to do it all themselves. I think their best hope for the future is to encourage and support third party efforts and to reward the best of them with buyouts or contracts.

Exactly. Unfortunately they show little inclination to do this. Their strategy seems a bit all over the place really. They introduce the MEP package but sell off their Constructor package?? Can anyone see a strategy in this?

Although i generally support the strategy outlined by Matthew there are some fairly fundamental modeling features that cannot be developed in this way AFAIK, given the current ArchiCAD engine. Only Graphisoft has the power and resources to do that...

Re: Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons

Aaron Bourgoin — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 16:45:42 GMT

owen wrote:
Matthew wrote:
Bricklyne wrote:
Now I'm not exactly advocating this as a strategic approach for GS in dealing with AC's issues...
They introduce the MEP package but sell off their Constructor package?? Can anyone see a strategy in this?

I think there was lots of strategic thinking behind the departure of Constructor/VICO.

BTW Constructor MEP and AC MEP are not identical tools.

Re: Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons

Aaron Bourgoin — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 17:19:06 GMT

Just had a huge mindfart on this one:

VICO Constructor is, so far, the penultimate Add-On success story.

Think of it, you slave away with the API development kit and the ODBC drivers somewhere in hell and gone Finland, come up with add-ons that are so nifty and so useful that you wake up one morning and say to yourself, "hey, why don't I just license ArchiCAD as my engine and market my own solution to a complex problem. Hell, I won't even call it ArchiCAD anymore. I will call it what I want to call it - and charge double for my trouble." [ visualize Robin Williams doing the golf sketch here - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_OmnP527Dw ]

This starts a chain reaction when both developer minds and marketing minds meld. Jon Krakauer should get hold of this one.

And then, what is it that all those brilliant Russian ArchiCAD minds are up to? Don't you sometimes ask yourself that question when you read their posts in the Developer forums?

Lots of Developer activity on the ArchiCAD Wiki site these days as well. Hmmmm.....

Re: Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons

Anonymous — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 17:54:30 GMT

owen wrote:
Although i generally support the strategy outlined by Matthew there are some fairly fundamental modeling features that cannot be developed in this way AFAIK, given the current ArchiCAD engine. Only Graphisoft has the power and resources to do that...

This is why they need to focus on core development. It will be interesting to see how Rhino develops.

BTW: Aaron, you seem to have mucked up your edit a little. I didn't write that.

Re: Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons

Aaron Bourgoin — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 17:57:51 GMT

Sorry Matthew and sorry all,

I haven't used the "quote" button before. This was to be attributed to Owen.

I'll be more careful in future.

Re: Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons

owen — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 22:32:14 GMT

Aaron wrote:
owen wrote:
They introduce the MEP package but sell off their Constructor package?? Can anyone see a strategy in this?
I think there was lots of strategic thinking behind the departure of Constructor/VICO.

ok i'm sure there was .. i guess it just doesn't make sense to me. I was never really clear on how it came about - the original press release in 2005 was a bit vague but i take it Graphisoft was not entirely responsible for developing it? Anyway .. regardless of how, Graphisoft had a product which opened the door to the construction sector. Which is where the real money is, not with architects. It also means developing more of a design-to-construction package which surely would have had its advantages at Graphisofts end for software design, resourcing and marketing, and at our end as a modular system which can meet the needs of small architects up to global construction companies. Just look at Autodesk - they pretty much have the AEC market covered. I just don't get why they would sell it off again only a few years later (it surely wasn't losing them money?). Seems Graphisoft want to stay niche. Maybe this will work out, maybe not.

Aaron wrote:
BTW Constructor MEP and AC MEP are not identical tools.

I'd assumed they were similar (it would make sense) but not identical. As i haven't used either Constructor or MEP yet, and you use both i'd be interested to hear a little bit regarding the differences.

[EDIT] Never mind (re comparison) .. i'm tired and was being lazy. There are plenty of threads on this topic just a search away

sorry getting a bit off topic ..

Re: Do you think it is fair to charge for ArchiCAD addons

Anonymous — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 13:40:38 GMT

That question should be addressed to GS.
As far as GS keep the GDL so closed and capsulated, and for any serious work or interaction between existing object and new object, programmer needs approach to API, which needs to be registered and payed in advance, I vote YES.
Very simple. If creation of any Add-on costs me anything more than my spare time and good will, I should repay it.

So, in general, the question is not should you want to pay for somebody's work, then should anybody wants to spend his time and money for nothing.