Next phase of subscription transition announced

[Richard Doll]

Dear Community Members, 

Following my recent Graphisoft Insights post on the Subscription transition update, we know how important this topic is for you as our clients and anticipate your comments and questions. To streamline communication, we’ve created this thread to gather everything in one place. We’ll also use it to identify topics that may need further clarification, which we’ll address on our FAQ page.

Please note that while we cannot respond to individual questions in the forum, your local representative is available for personalized support.

Best regards,
Richard

Link to Insights article: https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/Graphisoft-Insights/Important-update-Next-phase-of-subscription-...

[Bricklyne Clarence]

Don't worry about it.

In due course it will all be cleared up in the FAQ.......er..... I mean,......by your reseller.......

Oh wait,.....

If only there were some way that a person from the actual source could actually directly clarify what's what and not through some inflexible, limited, "pick-and-choose-what-you-want-to-answer-and-ignore-everything-else" FAQ format or by lobbing off responsibility to do so to some third party reseller or representative in some far off land who might be operating on their own information.(....or maybe even none at all....)

You know,.....kind of like a 'Talk' place..... or a.... 'forum' of some sort,.....like an online... 'Community',..... where they could show up and directly answer the questions to users themselves.

It's just too bad such a thing and way of communicating doesn't exist, and probably hasn't even been invented yet.

Oh well,......

[stoneunturned]

And the kicker is, had they just finished the product before releasing it there wouldn't be any questions to answer.

Had they made their software usable for non-superusers (relying on missing / heavily implied knowledge of where one might to go in the UI that's only obvious if you have detailed knowledge of the background programming of that UI) there wouldn't be any questions to answer. AND LET'S NOT KID OURSELVES THAT THE NEW POPUP HELP FEATURE IS ACTUALLY HELPFUL IN ANY WAY. IT WAS PROBABLY WRITTEN BY THE SAME FOLK THAT DON'T YET KNOW HOW TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE LAYMAN ARCHITECT / DRAFTY.

Had they just created tools within archicad that are clear and self explanatory there wouldn't be any questions to answer.

Had they finished off existing tools before starting new ones, there wouldn't be any frustration, and there wouldn't be any questions to answer.

If the online help actually helped, there wouldn't be any questions to answer.

[Martin Jan Rosa]

Today we had an official transition training for current Archicad users in our local market (CZ). Even here, the distributor presented only a few different scenarios, from which I took away just one impression: total chaos. It's nice that we can choose from several paths to take - on the other hand, we don't have crucial information for decision-making (it's good to know that with certain obligations we'll have guaranteed approx. 50% discount compared to the monthly subscription price in the coming years, however, no one knows how much this subscription will cost and how much the longer-term subscription will be).

The atmosphere among local users is such that the vast majority of them plan to complete their SSA/FWD contracts and then stay with their last perpetual license. Frankly, everyone will eventually be on subscription, but we're facing a few years where the market will see an increase in outdated versions. From my perspective, as not only an active user but also a library developer and unofficial support provider, I consider GS's current communication absolutely terrible. This is the absolute height of stupidity on GS's part - if you can't positively motivate people to transition, it will harm both you and those of us who will have to work with users of outdated licenses...

I think there are many of us users who are willing to switch to subscription (and even welcome it), and at the same time accept a reasonable price increase. But please, stop burdening us with the necessity to study various ways of making the transition, making hasty decisions, or having to ask "where can I sign this," and instead communicate clear and open rules to us straightforwardly. Ideally globally, as local markets are passé (especially when local distributors are backed into a corner from our perspective as their customers due to your communication)!

[Bricklyne Clarence]

I think you're overly optmistic on Graphisoft's behalf in the assessment that many people are willing to switch to Subscription or might even welcome it.

Maybe 15 or 20 years ago.

I believe that while many will switch, it will be because the vast majority are a kind of 'captive' customer-base who either outright have no choice or alternative or who feel like they have no other alternative.

It could be people who are on Mac platform and don't want to switch to Revit which would necessitate a change to PC, or because they simply don't want to move to Vectorworks. Or people who are at a stage in their careers or their firms' life cycle where a switch is neither feasible nor cost-effective this late in the game for them. Or others who are tied down to a workflow ecosystem that necessitates having archicad as part of that system.

In any of the cases, I would wager that for the vast majority of users, the switch is not a happy, much less even welcome one - and not just because of the resource cost and price increase - but rather because of Graphisoft's behavior and track record preceeding this announcement, and carrying through it; along with the perpetually declining and diminishing quality in their version releases, which we can only expect to get worse from now on, now that they TRULY have no incentive to keep their product competitive or at the head of the pack (if ever it was) with a financing model that essentially assures they get paid regardless of how badly they cr*p the bed with new releases.

What is the motivation to do better next year, when you virtually already have in your pocket the money of the person complaining about this year's version's low quality, ?

Subscription-only is a model that works overwhelmingly and disproportionately in the Developer's favor, while conversely essentially punishing the customers with the ramifications of 'poor performance' on the part of the former.

It only works, close to equally in both parties' favor - when the developer has an already estabslished track record for producing a strong product and a great rapport and relationship with the customers.

Clearly neither of those apply to today's version of Graphisoft or Archicad. 

Regardless of their promises, their Roadmap hijinks, or their relentless and increasingly outrageous marketing campaigns (the only thing they seem to be good at nowadays), the quality of their primary product is now going to suffer going foward, and will only increasingly get more dilute, and effectively worse and worse.

[mthd]

Hi, @Bricklyne Clarence, I think it’s a bit premature to predict the future quality of Archicad’s new releases when non perpetual subscriptions become the norm.

I would be interested in your appraisal of VWA. I think someone here made a post asking about it not long ago. I am sure you would be able to dissect its inadequacies and its benefits in comparison to AC. After all there is not perfect CAD/BIM solution out there because all these companies compete against each other for their market share.

[jl_lt]

Premature maybe, but the evidence supporting the claim that future releases will be... lets say "inadequate", is almost overwhelming. 

On the other hand, its not like the software is not useful anymore because of years of less than stellar updates; Far from it, we still love it and continue to work with it... also, we have no other choice for the time being, so we are FORCED TO LOVE IT; and there is also this dooming feeling of being left behind relative to other software. If it continues like this, in a few years (as in, very few), and specially with the advent of AI and generative design applications,  the gap will be unsurmountable. Probably it is already.

Personally, i think the company has clearly lost their vision, core values (read: soul)  and focus.   They definitely forgot about its user base needs. And in trying to appeal to everybody (they are trying to lure Civil engineers, and probably chiropractors and enthomologists too, into using archicad!) they are currently appealing to no one.      Pick your niche, OWN IT and go with it demed!

[mthd]

We are mostly aware of their continued over-catering to the many other building services departments. The focus must shift back to the core product of Architectural related development and features. The old roadmap highlighted many of these in the ideas pool etc. I hope they are listening very carefully to us core users.

[jl_lt]

although saying "catering" would mean they actually delivered something of quality to those being catered, which is clearly not the case.   

my breaking point came when i naively tried to play Graphisofts game and asked them to share with us promotional material that highlighted the structural functionality and how engineers would benefit from using Archicad (and collaborating, with, God forbids, architects!). That way we could directly show it to them and they might be interested.  We even had already made an appointment with one of our engineers.

Graphisoft answer (not verbatim): "we dont have that kind of promotional material".

But now that we are at it, enthomologists could really benefit from a point-cloud archicad model of an ant colony.

[mthd]

Can you be a bit more specific about your collaboration methods that you are considering with your specific type of engineers ? Clearly a structural engineer wouldn’t be using Archicad as their main solution, it is simply not built for that sole purpose not even for MEP engineering. I don’t know very much about DDSCAD but that would be more specific for MEP engineering. To me as long as Archicad can exchange 3D models well with these other disciplines then that is what should matter the most.

[jl_lt]

 As far as i understand it, the intended structural Archicad models allows or promises to allow the engineers to extract mathematical info from the architectural project (nodes and forces) that they could readily analize with their software, and bring back that info to the core 3d model. Thus collaboration!    Please, someone correct me if im wrong about this. So far, i havent seen any real world examples of this relatively new workflow.

Our current workflow with engineers still is a painful iterative process in which every discipline tries to outdo the others and have it their way, without much regard to the architectural proposal. That is, until they see the 3d model and then suddenly everyone gets it, but even then,  they still dont comply.   Still, we tried to do everything we could to get those people out of 2d cad, but they just want to stay there.

"look for other engineers" you say.  yes!  but we love our engineers so much!  in a mashochistic kind of way of course.

As for Archicad not being suited for engineers, apparently thats what Graphisoft has been pushing for the last 5 years or so

[mthd]

@jl_lt True many older engineers are still sticking to 2D CAD workflows because that’s what they have learned and as we all know they have used that technology extensively.

I haven't yet received any requests to share a 3D model with any of my consultants, only 2D/DWG with Engineers, Builders and Surveyors. Mind you, I only do low rise residential projects. I am aware that Tekla is used extensively in Europe for engineering residential structures. And Revit is also widely used in the US and is the go to product in that region.

It’s the old adage “A Jack of all trades and a master of none”, I would like Archicad to become the “The Master of Architecture” and focus on that. The go to product and as long as the 3D model is accurate as possible when sharing with other main engineering applications.

That really should be the priority for Graphisoft and partners. Simple as that.

[Erik Bjornhage]

In Sweden (and overall in the Nordic region) most structural engineers are using Revit or possibly Tekla.

The Structural Analytical Model is an interesting concept that could make some real difference - if we were ever asked to provide one!?

I'm not sure if the SAM is compatible with any kind of analytical work flow inside Revit (if that is even a thing) or any other software package. Regardless, it's an interesting function that could be valuable - if anyone knew how to use it.

[Ernest Atanasiu]

Let's not murder them already, the product itself has a track record of a strong and reliable tool, it competes on all categories with everything that is on the market. It has flaws, it needs improvement here and there, sure. 

The subcription-only model is flawed in many ways, I agree . Speaking as a company, we could not afford switching right now to something else and that is the main anger point. On top of that, communication for this particular subject is annoyingly deffective through their resellers and distributors. 

But hey, if nothing else works, we could pull it off just by using a perpetual license stuck in v30 or whatever. We might not be competitive in 10 years, sure, but that is a problem for future me 🙂

[stoneunturned]

We share IFC models with our structural engineers (who use Revit) routinely. For all intents and purposes, it works very well.

Ernest, Archicad almost has good solutions for each problem and workflow, but it simply doesnt. It has half baked ideas that leave you searching for a hack, or simply accepting that you have to do it the dumb manual way. There is no way the update process should take as long as it does when the unreal engine can almost simulate life; the tools that look so promising when you start using them, only let you down just before the finish line and you find that youve wasted extremely valuable time on a false promise, and that -in some cases- have to start again, or do something extremely repetitive and laborious to get your task over the line. And then you go online or to your reseller and waste even more valuable time trying to improve the situation with wishes and posts like tis one etc... only for it all to fall on deaf ears, and you get none of that time back.

Im not changing software because i dont have it in me to learn a new ecosphere, but i cant stand using this laborious and underperforming software either. I dont want to be an architect anymore because of this software. But i dont have anything else so i may as well go on. And if i have to go on with this crud, im gonna scream and shout with profanity until someone realises that the user base is hurting. My guess is that only dwindling perpetual licenses or subscriptions will enact that change by which time i'll be off on the Caribbean from having successfully sold enough feet pics.

Some of us are the judge, the jury and the excursioner (read: the architect, the drafty and the IT specialist). I probably wouldnt understand if i had a team of drafty's doing the leg work, but im not disconnected like that. Im painfully aware of archicad's shortcomings, and exhaustingly exasperated at how @Richard Doll  and co arent even aware of what needs to be fixed. I dont even care about the topic of this thread, there is much bigger fish to fry before any of this [additional] nonsense is necessary to consider. All i want to do is get through my work day and enjoy what i do. Multitudes of inefficiencies present as physical pain to me, and most architects are that way inclined.

I think GS are in over their heads, i dont know that they'll ever be able to know what to listen to. So far the ideas generation at the top of the hierarchy is akin to me playing a game of darts (im terrible).

[Ernest Atanasiu]

I don't disagree, half-baked solutions are everywhere and I get the feeling that ADHD is a requirement for a job at GS. If you show them a glittery new  keynote they forget about Curtain Wall tool and never finish it. 
Let's hope that the new wishlist will point them in the right direction and show them what the users' priorities actually are. 

[mthd]

In reality the Graphisoft department must wake up properly to these smelling salts above. Do the heavy lifting with the direct architectural tools right inside Archicad first. That old roadmap and ideas pool is the exact place to start doing the heavy lifting from. We will all be watching the progress from the sidelines in the next 5 to 10 years. We all hope that the subscription money is well spent on developing the architectural tools further and to bring them all up into the 21st Century. Otherwise Archicad could become a dinosaur like AutoCAD 2D has become.

[Erik Bjornhage]

@Richard Doll 
The FAQ states the following:

16. Can subscription licenses be used as network (floating) licenses or offline licenses?

Graphisoft’s subscription products run using modern “cloud licensing” technology. Thus, licenses can be freely assigned to individuals using the Graphisoft license management portal. As an additional benefit, Archicad Collaborate subscription customers can also assign their licenses to a group of users as a license pool, where users can fetch these licenses on a first-come-first-serve basis. Users can also go offline with named cloud licenses for up to 7 days.

Could you please clarify that this, in fact, means that assigning licenses to a user group who in turn get their licenses from a licence pool (i.e. multi-user) - is only available under the Collaborate subscription. What follows is that any client that opts for the Studio subscription will then be forced to use assigned Named licenses - as in NOT multi-user or network licenses?

This would also indicate a shift in how Graphisoft handles liceses and will have big financial implications for many of your users.

[Jp1138]

That would mean that the path that has taken Autodesk years to complete, Graphisoft wants to runs through in a few months... Not a nice perspective for every user and more reason to not trust this management by subscribing...

[MinhNguyen]

I don't think this is restricted to Archicad Collaborate. As stated here, if you have an Archicad subscription cloud license (meaning any subscription that provides cloud licenses as I understand), you should be able to use floating licenses function. As of now, only Archicad Collaborate package is available (and Studio was announced not too long ago), therefore I suspect the FAQ was created when GS had just come up with the name Collaborate. Nevertheless, I would suggest talking directly to the local support as they should know whether Archicad Studio provides this feature for sure

[Erik Bjornhage]

@MinhNguyen - it does fairly clearly state that:

"As an additional benefit, Archicad Collaborate subscription customers can also assign their licenses to a group of users as a license pool..."

- indicating that this additional benefit (group assignment to a licencing pool) is Collaborate only.

Again, very unclear communication with only two months left to go before one of the cut-off dates.

[MinhNguyen]

Agree regarding the unclear communication. As I mentioned, the FAQ was probably made around the time when the name Collaborate had been created and even GS had no idea about later offering, ie. Studio, therefore the name stuck there. But anyhow, this is just my own speculation - we can complain about how badly GS has handled this situation for months and nothing much will change - therefore my best bet is always to ask the local support, as they have direct connection with the HQ in case something needs further explanation