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-...

[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

[laembert]

Please explain. In case I convert and in the future I will end subscription, which version will I end up with? If there is significant difference between conversion in 2024 and 2025, how it is possible we still do not have EXACT informations from local dealers?? 

GS FAQ

10. What are the options for customers converting in 2024 when their conversion period is over?

For customers converting in 2024, converted subscriptions will be renewed at the standard subscription list price after their maximum 3+3-year or 1+1+1-year conversion terms run out. Alternatively, customers may choose to fall back onto the perpetual path with their licenses. In such cases, their perpetual licenses will be upgraded to the then most up-to-date perpetual software – albeit without the SSA/Forward coverage going forward.

11. What are the options for customers converting in 2025 when their conversion period is over?

For customers converting in 2025, converted subscriptions will be renewed at a price adjusted with a similar magnitude price increase % as guaranteed until 2028 but without an exact % guarantee in the future. Customers may choose to fall back onto the perpetual path with their licenses during 2025-2028. In such cases, their perpetual licenses will be reset to the Archicad version they converted from subscription in the first place – albeit without the SSA/Forward coverage going forward.

[Karl Ottenstein]

This totally strange (to me!) policy was confirmed to us, making conversion in 2025 less valuable than converting this year.

Archicad 30 in 2 years will be the last perpetual license version.   Someone converting this year who later cancels after 30 has been released will get 30.  Someone converting next year, when they own just 28 let’s say, who cancels any time in the future …even long after 30 has been released… will not get 30 but will roll back to 28.   My opinion is that this is not just confusing for us customers… but utterly stupid on the part of Graphisoft as it further erodes customer loyalty (however much is left at this point).

[Paul King]

I think the near universal consensus amongst users I am in touch with is not to be bullied away from our perpetual licences, and once these can no longer be upgraded, and to simply stop throwing good money after bad, given that within 3or 6 years of converting, costs will triple.

Probably the single biggest reason for selecting and sticking with ArchiCAD, despite the much higher up front perpetual licence cost, and the ongoing higher staff training costs is the lower annual cost offered under a Select arrangement.

Staff training cost are much higher because candidates already trained in ArchiCAD are much rarer, and there is reduced practice attractiveness to potential new staff (further limiting the talent pool), since to most staff, lack of Revit skills and experience is far more career limiting than lack of ArchiCAD skills, since most other practices use Revit.

The requirement to pay such a staggering 3 years in advance just to secure the so called 'discount' (which is actually a significant price increase over current Select pricing) is a huge worsening of the deal - we not only get a price increase, but we must also pay much more interest on that money borrowed, and we face triple the risk of total loss of the sunk investment -  many of us cannot be sure we will be able to use the license for all three years;  people can and do get sick, they stop working to have a child or deal with other life events, or they simply fail to find enough work to make use of their licences. 

This is on top of the fact that with updates there has been a strong pivot away from architect centric development in recent years, meaning that for architects, we are getting less upgrade value for our money.

The deal has become worse for us in every direction - less upgrade value, higher risk, 3-6 years of higher cost, followed by 300% higher cost thereafter.

GS have just destroyed most of their customer good will, and their own revenue pipeline for 2030 and beyond.

Tough luck for those that do swallow the subscription Kool-Aid if (when) GS declares bankruptcy within the next few years, as a result of flushing away all three of its main competitive advantages over Revit - price, perpetual licensing & architect-centric development. (in fairness, that last item has already been sacrificed in an attempt to become more Revit-like)

Seems to me there is a high risk that those who give up their perpetual licenses or who do any work on AC versions more recent than V30 will sooner rather than later lose ongoing access to their projects, as they will be reliant on cloud subscription and hosting infrastructure that will no longer exist.  

So yes, the incentives are all completely backwards.

[The MR]

I have read all the comments on this topic over the last couple of months or so & as someone on 26 I decided to obtain an upgrade quote. Then I ruminated for a while over what to do.

Should I upgrade to 28 now to ensure I can keep a 29 or maybe even a 30 perpetual licence?

What will the upgrades entail that I will benefit from or even use? How difficult will they make it for me to open old files? The roadmap is unlikely to be an enforceable document.

The goalposts look like they are going to keep moving for a while yet & with the proposed 3 year upfront deal being talked about & how everyone progresses or regresses beyond that. The dust will take a while to settle to the Graphisoft new normal, obfuscation.  To which they have been exemplary so far on this subject.

I started on 6.5 so I've seen some great upgrades & a fair few not so great.

I had a very poor 12 months with Archicad in around 2021 with thousands of continual crashes & no fix until hot fixes were released so I have seen the worst of it when it doesn't work. But I stuck with them.

When 27 came out I couldn't see any solid reason to upgrade other than design options but I have done without that for 20+ years & doesn't really impact the way I work or use Archicad as I am by hand for for all of my concept ideas.

The cost to upgrade now is a lot more than I was anticipating & a cost to which I will probably not recoup based on any potential increase in my productivity for the outlay over the next, say 12 months or so. So in the end the decision was made for me. I cannot justify the outlay & I will not upgrade but (hopefully) continue to use 26 until I stop working for clients which is only 2-5 years away. 

I will now put up with its foibles, its occasional crashes, lack of formal support & the fact that my mac will stay on 14.7 OS Sonoma.

I've done simple & some incredibly complex projects in Archicad so it is a tool that is very useful but it is still just one tool.

I do understand many others are in a position where they are being stood over & forced into a position of eventually pay or be shut out of your own intellectual property. That hurts. Maybe in some jurisdictions that could be illegal. In AUS I don't think so (didn't finish my law degree) & anyway, it would be a long fight to find out.

Graphisoft have taken a hard line for on paper at least, their future bottom line. They had a lot of goodwill in the Archicad community. Goodwill has to be earned over a long period of time, which they did. 

A lot of that goodwill has been eroded over the last few upgrades but due to that original goodwill, the Archicad community by and large grumbled but stayed. 

Now that goodwill has been drained completely. 

[Marcel Cooper]

I've only just woken up to this issue and need to catch up on the relative costs but as a gut reaction and since V28 more or less works adequately, I may take a few years "holiday" from support, bank a bit of cash and then buy back in to the subscription model when I feel I am beginning to lag behind.....but at that juncture, I will review all the available BIM software and re-valuate before re-investing.

I may then remain with Archicad or I may move elsewhere, that is Graphisoft's gamble. I took a break from Microstation support between 2008 to 2014, banked a tidy sum and when I reviewed, I moved to Archicad so who knows, perhaps Autodesk next time?

Archicad are not alone in wanting to change the licensing model and I'm afraid this is what the future holds for us generally, but one thing I can promise you is that software companies are not doing this with the aim of earning less money, which means we are intended to pay more. 

[Patrick M]

ya know, if you get back to the point where you listen to users, work to develop tools and features that do what we need to, and most importantly develop some consistency and reliability in the program and user interface, I see no issue with hiking our annual cost 3-4x per year.
but is that really what is happening? are we getting 3-4x better support and a better product, or are we just paying more for the same 'good enough' new and incomplete features year after year? Yeah, paying more is definitely an important topic for us small business owners often skating by on razor thin margins... 
As for responding to indivudual questions on the forum, I guess that goes to my original comment. We've all kind of given up on that... But will this new leased license method get us bMats that actually work? oh, right, not taking questions... nevermind

[jl_lt]

i have talked about this elsewhere, but I think Graphisoft trully missed their oportunity window to expand into emerging markets and student markets with better and tropicalized pricing schemes, something i discussed to the point of exhaustion with local representantives.           At least in Mexico, as near as only 7 years ago, a significant portion of the market was still up for the grabs, as only bigger and fancier offices used Revit;   now almost everyone uses it, whether their project need it or not (ill let you guess if they all pay for their licenses).  What did Graphisoft did here? basically nothing.   its also very possible that something similar happenned in other latin american countries, give or take a couple of years.  

So, sensitive topic ahead:   What i discussed with these local representatives was the possibility of offering better pricing schemes if not a different price.  Consider this: the price of an Archicad License here in Mexico is more than what many architects make IN A WHOLE YEAR.  i wish i was kidding or using hyperbole with this, but im not.     How many folks do you think will be able to buy a license?    But if you offered a more flexible paying scheme... i dont know, something like the price distributed over 4 years instead of 1 with a slight increase to make up for the flow loss, it would certainly make a LOT of people consider buying the software.   

but now Graphisoft is telling these same people  that not only they will NOT own a copy but they will pay a price SIMILAR to a perpetual license PER YEAR, but only for rent. In the economical and cultural context of my country (and i guess many others) the proposal simply sounds ridiculous.  

"but they use Archicad in Switzerland" you say.  And we are glad they do, because they showed us the Archicad way.          But its an 8 million country. Lets see if they want to take on the burden of supporting Graphisoft as the only guys that can pay for the new pricing schemes. Its not like there are many Switzerlands or Japans out there.

So, the numbers just dont add up. The market you are catering to is not your Niche.   

MORE USERS (some of which might want to pay for premium features) = MORE REVENUE   its better than   LESS USERS THAT PAY MORE = MORE REVENUE

One is sustainable, the other is not. Contrary to what all the vitriolic comments might make you think, we want you to succed Graphisoft, just stop being so shortsighted.

(Here is another idea, why instead of interviewing your own employees, or in adition to that, you go out and interview Pritzker laurates that use Archicad?)