SketchUp goes subscription

[3D Kiwi]

I like the Adobe Subscription, I think they have priced it right and you look on their website and there has been 51 new features, or improvements just to Premiere in 2018.

In saying that I dont have an active subscription to adobe anymore. I find Davinci and Fusion along with some other apps covers my needs really well, So for me its a matter of
why pay $900 a year when I dont have to.
And if a client comes to me and wants me to edit a AE comp or needs me to work in Adobe for some reason I can just rent it for a month or two and charge it to the client.
So I kind of get the Adobe apps when I need them for free.

[sadkkf]

I guess it's a time will tell scenario.

Some years ago, I bought an app that at the time was pretty unique. Not long after, they changed thier name & went the subscription route. I didn't follow & eventually found better alternatives w/o the extortion. Got a meesage the other day that it was now part of the Smith-Micro family with an intro price of $10. I still passed.

https://my.smithmicro.com/photodonut...or-photos.html

I'm in a similar boat. No longer finding value in the Adobe products, I found alternatives that work at least as well. Through my employer now I can get a CC subscription free and still don't.

[Snosrap]

Affording $800 a year is wealthy? That's like $14 a week or $66 a month. I'd say you'd have to be pretty destitute to not be able to afford that no matter what your income. Of course not everyone has that little bit of extra income but it's hardly wealthy. And how does spending $600 to $800 a year compare to saving $700 a month? And again, I don't think hobbyists are of real concern to these companies going to subscription model. The kind of money you're talking about here on subscription is easily justified when you make money with the software and that is the relationship being fostered with these models. People who make money with the software in turn support the development of that software. Not hobbyists who buy a perpetual version of a software and then sit on it for however long before deciding to or being able to afford to upgrade.

Tru that. Got years and months mixed up. I guess in Photoshops case and Illustrator, if the other similar developers stay up on the .PSD and AI file formats a former Adobe user could leave and go to X with their files intact and completely editable. But what if Adobe etc. at some point decide to close their file format much like 3D Studio Max where a user has to have 3DSMax loaded on their box in order to read a .MAX file. So in my opinion there is so much risk for a hobbyist to get involved with subscription based software because life can get in the way at times. I hate monthly payments of any kind - electric, water and gas -all life essential items- SketchUp, Photoshop, Illustrator - not so much.

[Bernie2Strokes]

A bit off topic, but the users of EIAS had a brief scare after Adobe purchased Allegorithmic. Someone brought up an old rumor that Adobe was going to buy up Electric Image next.

Long ago, in a galaxy far far away, I dreamed of buying that program. Even though it's no longer popular the idea of it selling out to Adobe angers me. Stop the monopoly!

[Ma3rk]

Affording $800 a year is wealthy? That's like $14 a week or $66 a month. I'd say you'd have to be pretty destitute to not be able to afford that no matter what your income. Of course not everyone has that little bit of extra income but it's hardly wealthy. And how does spending $600 to $800 a year compare to saving $700 a month? And again, I don't think hobbyists are of real concern to these companies going to subscription model. The kind of money you're talking about here on subscription is easily justified when you make money with the software and that is the relationship being fostered with these models. People who make money with the software in turn support the development of that software. Not hobbyists who buy a perpetual version of a software and then sit on it for however long before deciding to or being able to afford to upgrade.

Ya, they're after the new user who will consider it just a cost of business, over the aging lone wolf (moi) as you say. But, multiply your figure but how ever many tools you need to subscribe to for your workflow. It rapidly adds up and there are those dwindling few of us who ARE on a fixed income and of course really resent having to suddenly rent our "hammers". Capitalistic mindset at it's purist and really nothing wrong with that; it is what it is. However, that only works until the better, cheaper or free mouse trap comes along, then those subscription based companies are truly phuqued. I think it's just going to take those new-comers a little time to wake up to what they actually signed on for.

[jasonwestmas]

I hate subscription. It is a terrible longterm investment. But it is cheaper for some short term projects to temporarily ramp up Adobe and Autodesk seats.

Better to just use Lightwave, Affinity and Blackmagic.

Yup exactly, subscriptions are for short term investments for when you just need to get something done but don't necessarily need the technology later in the year. Stacking up subscriptions definitely doesn't make any sense for a small studio either, not for what they are charging now for the larger packages. The charges just keep adding up. I mean do we really need to bring out our lists of stuff we are interested in but can't do it because it is yet another subscription?

Before we know it, companies are going to be tethering hardware to subscriptions services only. Where does it stop. I'll be forced to be a technology curmudgeon using 1980s art and design techniques. Ok that's exaggerating things but I definitely won't be using software and digital hardware as much.

[gdkeast]

I'm not a big fan of the subscription model either. I like "owning" what I use and not being beholden to a monthly fee. For me, it would be like renting a camera versus owning it. And if you crunch the numbers, it seems to work out about the same whether you are renting the software monthly or paying annually for upgrades. It would seem that the perpetual license does favor the consumer though because if the upgrades aren't significant, then you hold the version you have and don't upgrade and the company doesn't gain as much in return. But if you're on the subscription model, you keep paying whether you want or like the new features, if new features are added at all. I like LW's current model and hope they keep it that way. If they go subscription, I hope they only offer it as an additional option to the perpetual license model. I have no issue with that at all.

[rustythe1]

But there still is the free version. you know what, yeah this is lame. "Proudly introducing SketchUp subscriptions." On their page kind of annoying

not really, its just an online one and crashes with anything more than a few thousand polys, no download free one any more

[jaf]

Well, as I approach 70, retired on a fixed income, a hobbyist, and grumpy, it's more depressing every year. I know, part of getting old.

I did my upgrade from LW 9.6.1 to 2017 in April of 2017. I upgraded to 2018 last year (January.) I updated my plug-ins and bought a few new one's. Then a year later, I see the next upgrade to 2019 is $395. Since I basically just use Modeler, I realized I can't justify yearly upgrades, especially if there's very little done to Modeler. So I'm learning Blender.

So then I see that my perpetual licenses to Substance Designer and Painter will now be "frozen" since I won't subscribe to CC and there likely won't be a perpetual license upgrade option.

I turn on my TV and see "4 line unlimited data for $99!" But I'm single and no family, so surely they will have a $25 - $35 plan. No. And my TV -- I basically watch sports, but to get the channels I want, I have to pick a tier that has a lot of movies, so it's rather expensive for one TV, one viewer.

Grumpy