GRAPHISOFT screwed us again. This licensing nonsense is an absolute train wreck.

[Space_Agency]

So today I go in to change the representation of an existing run of ductwork in a project we created in V28. But nope cannot edit it. And it dawns on me that we recently changed our license to Archicad "Studio". So now ALL of our previously created duct routes, any objects that are classified as MEP elements in our embedded libraries are now also completely un-editable. I can't move it to another layer. I can't link it to another design option. I can't change the 2d or 3d representation. Nothing. It is essentially frozen and completely uneditable. So I go to change our license. And of course Graphisoft has made it so that the license we just paid for a few days a go in no way is credited to an upgrade to a "Collaborate" option. So we have just wasted more money now by having to essentially pay for both license types. What a complete RIP OFF. The practices of this company have moved from making software 'for architects by architects', to just simple greed. It's one thing to degrade the license and take away the tools, It's another to basically freeze everything that you've already created with a tool that was paid for and then now have to pay for an additional license just to unfreeze it. Why? Money is more important than keeping your user base is the only thing I can surmise. 

[mthd]

Sad to see you go @Space_Agency as you are in the US and Autodesk Revit dominates the engineering market and controls the CAD industry quite a bit over there. I think we would understand that move particularly if the MEP tools are better in that application.

[Barry Kelly]

That is a pretty poor response from Graphisoft if you ask me.

They should at least give you a reason why it is not possible.

You local distributor may just be doing what they are being told, so maybe their hands are tied as well.

But if there is a valid reason, it would be nice to know what it is.

You would think Graphisoft would be wanting to keep their customers happy.

Barry.

[jl_lt]

It cannot be a technical reason because they put up the system (unless they subcontracted it, in which case we are all in trouble).   So, the only reason that might seem logical is that they don't want people selecting the cheaper version and just occasionally upgrading to get all the benefits and then downgrading again.

I get it, but if that's the case it actually makes them look even worse if that's possible. Like, why act so short-sighted?

Most people don't need ALL the tools ALL the time. The ones who do need them, will pay; why make the ones who don't also pay?    

How about instead of acting as myopic corporate lemmings, they open up the offerings and let people choose. And I mean real value Graphisoft!  not chopping what we already have and make us pay for the wall tool.  Flexibility is the key, the opposite of what the competition is doing.

With a competent base software that appeals to the biggest possible audience, then you can offer additional tools that appeal to specific profiles. The revenue you get from growing your audience will unironycally let you appeal to the big office market you are so hard trying to chase.

Big offices have the resources to change their platform almost overnight, which they will do when the next shiny thing come along. It's the loyal smaller costumers that will remain

[Space_Agency · Accepted solution]

Update: After pushing a bit with my reseller for an explanation on this they eventually got one from Graphisoft as well as a proposed solution.

The solution was Graphisoft offered to set up a trial Collaborate subscription and have us use that right up until the Studio subscription term is complete and switch to a full collaborate subscription before the other ends. Really appreciate our reseller pushing on this for an explanation and a solution. 

Based on our understanding of the explanation, there is a manual (i.e. not automated) process for a crediting/refunding for annual subscriptions, but not for monthly. At first glance, that seems like Graphisoft is just valuing one subscription/customer type over another. Given the process is apparently all "manual" I imagine that means each time a monthly subscriber would need to do this upgrade process, it has to be done by a person, step by step. That would likely cost Graphisoft additional money to go through that process. Initially, I can respect that as a business cost for Graphisoft to try and avoid. But I also see this as Graphisoft having left an automated approach to upgrade for all subscription types unaddressed prior to rolling out the new subscription platform. And that also appears symptomatic of a larger issue relating to the rollout of incomplete features such as the recent iterations of the somewhat functional MEP tool revision since v26, problems with the most common tools left unaddressed while new features roll out, and a slew of new features being announced but rolled out at an alpha or beta implementation level, and then the *chef's kiss* of Graphisoft charging more money for all of it. I see this as a failure in Graphisoft's leadership, software development process, and understanding of customer needs and values. Perhaps I am being too harsh, but frankly the amount of time spent to solve issues (including this one) with the software on the user end is eating away at profit. So even with the accommodation from Graphisoft, I still feel looking for platform alternatives remains on our agenda. We're all likely aware of the time commitments involved in making that shift as well as what the current BIM landscape is out there. I would hope that Graphisoft shifts the sails on how it is approaching business with all of its customers, but this seems to be in line with how many tech companies are operating now with respect to service.  

All said, I acknowledge Graphisoft has accommodated here and will keep that in mind moving forward. Thanks everyone for the suggestions and support.  

[Barry Kelly]

I am glad you have it sorted and that Graphisoft were accommodating to your problem.

I can (kind of) understand reluctance in not swapping the monthly renewal.

That is easy for you to cancel and then take out a subscription licence yourself, just means you will have one month with studio license.

But the annual license you would hope they do remedy (and they have done so for you) if you realise you have the wrong subscription.

Especially when upgrading from studio to full collaboration.

You wouldn't want to be stuck with that for a whole year if it is the wrong product.

Barry.

[Laszlo Nagy]

When @Space_Agencyfirst posted about this, I wrote to a contact at GS HQ and they drove the solution to this issue.

[Space_Agency]

Thank you so much Laszlo! Highly appreciated!

[Jahon]

Hi Space_Agency and fellow architects,

Thank you for sharing your update. Reading that your reseller managed to get Graphisoft to set up a trial Collaborate subscription to bridge the contract term is highly valuable. It proves that Graphisoft can provide pragmatic, manual exceptions when pushed, despite local resellers claiming their hands are tied by corporate guidelines.

I am facing the exact same "software hostage" situation in Belgium. My MEP Designer tool was suddenly blocked mid-contract on my 3-year Studio subscription. Like you, my workflow for contractors is completely frozen, and I am working until midnight doing manual workarounds for features I already legally paid for.

I have informed my local reseller (KUBUS) that this unilateral downgrade during an active contract is not just a commercial dispute, but a breach of the brand-new EU Data Act (which bans these exact vendor lock-in tactics and forced cloud-migrations) and interferes with my 10-year legal liability as an expert architect to access my source data locally.

If they refuse to mirror the exact solution Graphisoft provided to you (activating Collaborate features to cover the remainder of my active term), I am filing a formal enforcement complaint with the European Commission and the Belgian Economic Inspection next week.

Your post proves we must not accept the "we cannot make exceptions" corporate excuse. Small practices cannot be treated as financial milk cows.

[Lingwisyer]

Was this with the migration from AC28 to AC29?

[Jahon]

Yes, been stripped of all MEP tools and just noticed it on AC 29.
It feels like a punischment for an old user.