EAGLE Central Forums
Where the EAGLE community meets. Sponsored by Stratford Digital.

Home » CadSoft Support Forums » eagle.userchat.eng » EAGLE License Recommendation
EAGLE License Recommendation [message #168856] Mon, 23 January 2017 18:24 Go to next message
James Morrison
Messages: 1129
Registered: November 2004
Senior Member

Hello Autodesk (specifically Matt),

In your last post about the path forward for EAGLE Make licenses, you maintain that a "Paid" license (i.e. one that you are paying a subscription for) will only function for 14 days without an internet connection.

I think that Autodesk has underestimated how much of an issue this will be, especially for professional design houses. These design houses are important as they support, and encourage, EAGLE to be used in a professional manner. The recommendation from a design house to new companies/clients go a long way to creating new customers for EAGLE (I know Stratford Digital has influenced many companies to get an EAGLE license because that is what we recommended, Olin has stated the same for his company).

I think the main issue is that we professionals need our current version of EAGLE to run forever. But I think there is a path forward with a small tweak. I would love it if Matt could respond to this suggestion:

EAGLE License Recommendation

No one has an issue with requiring the internet on installation or upgrading of EAGLE. If a subscription is valid then either of these is allowed. If the subscription is not valid or can't be verified (i.e. no internet connection) then neither is allowed BUT the software continues to work indefinitely as it did at the time of the last call home to Autodesk license server.

This means there is still a reason to pay subscription cost:
  • active support
  • access to new features with new versions

This allows for the support that professionals will need to be able to prove can be provided decades down the road (it happens all the time). It allows me to create a virtual machine with a specific version of EAGLE on it and know that in the future that software will work as it did during the initial project development. It also allows for use in walled-off security environments.

We also need a method (officially supported) of having multiple versions of EAGLE on the same computer at the same time with the ability to configure each install to update or not automatically. This is absolutely required as some clients, for various reasons, specify specific versions of EAGLE to be used.

This also puts a burden on Autodesk to make sure that their updates are significant enough to warrant people continuing subscriptions. That is a good thing and will give users some confidence that a subscription is worth it. The value of any change since v6.6 is pretty limited, hierarchical design is a good idea but not fully implemented. And we're still waiting on completion of the differential pair routing from v6. It seems the main additions since v6.6 is two, unasked for and highly restrictive licensing changes. So there isn't a lot of trust in the EAGLE community right now. Autodesk has said good things but little has been delivered yet.

I think the above is a good compromise. If Matt doesn't agree then please provide your suggestion as how I am going to be _guaranteed_ to be able to support projects a decade in the future. For this argument, "trusting Autodesk will allow it" will not be accepted as an allowable answer. It may be 100% true today but when you leave to retire in the Bahamas or the entire team is sold off to another global corp the policy can instantly change (see last 6 months).

Cheers,

James


James Morrison ~~~ Stratford Digital
http://www.stratforddigital.ca
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #168864 is a reply to message #168856] Mon, 23 January 2017 20:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Olin
Messages: 903
Registered: December 2009
Location: Massachusetts
Senior Member
James Morrison wrote on Mon, 23 January 2017 13:24

No one has an issue with requiring the internet on installation or upgrading of EAGLE.


Almost. I have one customer where I run Eagle on a computer in a secure lab. There is no internet connection.

I realize this scenario is rare, but there are instances out there. Autodesk should not ignore them because even though the lost revenue is small, the impact on customers in that position is not. They are basically forcing use of a competing package. Once you learn a tool and invest in it, you're a lot more likely to use it elsewhere.

Since the numbers of Eagle licenses in secure labs would be small, perhaps they can be dealt with by manual intervention. I would be OK with having to call someone, explain the situation, have them do a little sanity check on me and the company, then give me a stand-alone license. A little more hassle for this case is OK, as long as there is a way.

Quote:

For this argument, "trusting Autodesk will allow it" will not be accepted as an allowable answer.

I totally agree.
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169020 is a reply to message #168856] Fri, 27 January 2017 02:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
James Morrison
Messages: 1129
Registered: November 2004
Senior Member

Any update on this Autodesk? Matt?

James Morrison ~~~ Stratford Digital
http://www.stratforddigital.ca
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169127 is a reply to message #168856] Tue, 31 January 2017 05:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
technolomaniac
Messages: 4
Registered: January 2017
Location: San Francisco
Junior Member

Hi James, et. Al --

I've sent a number of variations of this email over the last few days, so let me share it and solicit people's feedback. This is *some* of what we're doing to make this model a bit more user-friendly and I want to be clear, there is an eagerness to get this right, whilst still ensuring we hit our objectives. Constructive comments are welcome.

Firstly, thank you for your email and insights; it's clear that you've thought deeply about this and I appreciate your honest, unfiltered feedback. I've watched and responded on the various forums where I felt it might help but the response means we can't hit every post, unfortunately.

The subscription debate is a tough one for sure, and one we didn't take lightly, I can assure you. We toiled for some time along with the support team and the development group to decide just when to make the move. To be sure, it doesn't sit well right now with some folks, however let me try and give you some context for "why?" we made the decision and what capabilities the tools already provides (or we're working on) to ensure you have lasting SW to work with yourdata...

Firstly, from the outset we knew we've wanted to integrate EAGLE's capabilities with MCAD, MFG, Cutting (CAM), etc to provide something far in excess of any 'ECAD<>MCAD' solution on the market. After all, this is a deep part of Autodesk's history and the value we bring to the table, and the company has been centered around 3D CAD, even when done in 2D (for example Autocad) for 25+ years. Thus, we have been looking long and hard at what it takes to build 'whole products' and this acquisition of an electronics solution marks just the beginning of a process that'll take us in some wild directions. That being said, we are working on this and will continue, hybridizing EAGLE's schematic and PCB capabilities with an MCAD + MFG workflow that we hope will prove second-to-none.

That being said, all of our tools are subscription and with me having been a relatively new addition to Autodesk (I ran product at Supplyframe which owns Hackaday and 15 years w/Altium before that), this was a decision that was made before my time... Still, I support it. (Not just being a lemming, I support this 100%.) The argument / debate is largely about making tools available if/when you need them and providing a continuous stream of updates / value that's achievable when you consistent revenue stream to fund R&D. It's a curious model for ECAD, to be sure, however it doesn't come without *us* taking a huge hit in those first few years! (We lose substantial annual revenue as we move customers over, as you might imagine.)

Now to be sure, subscription has the potential for revenue 'upside', but I want to be 100% clear: even if I doubled EAGLE's revenue tomorrow, I wouldn't move the Autodesk needle even ½ of 1%. At a ~$17B market cap, EAGLE's revenue is not why we acquired it and we are not the evil overlords come down to squeeze every last cent out of EAGLE's most loyal users (it was my decision to make, and I wasn't focused on the incremental revenue).

What motivated the acquisition were really two things: 1) the core capabilities on which we could build what we're endeavoring to build and 2) the community. Now of course the latter (at least on public forums) probably appears frustrated at the moment I assure you, it stresses me out too (nobody is losing more sleep than me over the change!) but truth be told, the vast majority of EAGLE users we *not* inclined to upgrade to the latest and greatest version. Why? Perhaps because they never felt they were getting enough value, version to version, for this to make sense? Regardless of the reason, the bulk of EAGLE users are on v5 or v6...Not v7. Whether we like it or not, I have to operate on the facts.

So with all of that in mind, we want a license model which aligns to the larger Autodesk so we can integrate EAGLE (in a hard way...not a "passing files back and forth" way) into Autodesk's larger platform, which is both subscription and thriving. So the question was: when to rip off the band aid? And what could we do to make it hurt a little less.

With regard to that last item, here's what we've settled on thus far for ensuring you have legacy SW and versions and data available to you:

1) The free version shouldn't expire and will only require a connection the first time you open it.
2) The free version should open files of any size and layer count and allow you to place NEW objects anywhere within the extents of the free version.
3) The free version should allow you to output files (gerber, PDF, NCDrill, etc) of any size or layer count, regardless of the license you have.
4) Any paid license should automatically roll over to the free version if/when your license lapses. (working on this)
5) Every version of the free software will be made available for download outside of the normal update system.
6) We will not own your data and will continue to publish an XML file + DTD for *all* eagle file types.
7) We will expand the EAGLE API (coming soon-ish) to ensure users have access to EAGLE's datamodel via Javascript, Node, etc., to ensure a pipe out of EAGLE is easy to implement.
Cool We will continue to make all legacy and new versions available for download.
9) We will provide you a license of an earlier, Cadsoft version of EAGLE with the purchase of subscription (this is as-is, with no support implied...it will match your current tier...some work to make sure we get this right just yet, but it's coming).
10). We'll look to build an exporter to the legacy version 6 format and ensure, for the first time, backwards compatibility.

I know that's a mouthful but I wanted to be sure and stress that we're trying really hard to make this work in a way that works for the user. My background is as an engineer and I live in this community in a real way (not as some passive marketing schmuck), thus I'm hoping that having built consumer products, I'm covering many of the bases with this strategy. (And believe me it hurts when my friends call me out and tell me I'm squeezing them or locking away their data or that I just dont "get" it.) Still, I'm sure there'll be gaps. Some are unavoidable, some perhaps just oversights on our part.

What I'd love is if you all could, in a constructive way, look thru that list and let me know whether you think there's more than you already knew today (which means I needed to get onto the forums and discuss this in greater detail) and also, what you think about some of these items as a way forward (although perhaps suboptimal...are they meaningful?).

I really DO value your feedback and I can assure you, I'm working my tail off to make sure we demonstrate value to users like yourself and others who have shown such an obvious passion for the product. It's not easy to be parsimonious and also explain the "whole" view, so this is an email I may I have sent in various forms to different people and it's all changed a little each time as I go thru it, just to ensure I make the salient points.

I didn't want to send a half-hearted reply widely for fear I end up under the microscope with every troll in Trollville pushing their agenda with my words. Smile But this is where we're at and I can tell you, that we will continue with subscription as we move forward, though we are making attempts to be concessionary and meet the community half way.

Thank you.

Best regards,

Matt


I solve problems.
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169128 is a reply to message #169127] Tue, 31 January 2017 08:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Robert Johnson
Messages: 87
Registered: November 2004
Member
Matt Berggren wrote:

> Hi James, et. Al --
>
> I've sent a number of variations of this email over the last few days, so
> let me share it and solicit people's feedback. This is *some* of what
> we're doing to make this model a bit more user-friendly and I want to be
> clear, there is an eagerness to get this right, whilst still ensuring we
> hit our objectives. Constructive comments are welcome.
>
> Firstly, thank you for your email and insights; it's clear that you've
> thought deeply about this and I appreciate your honest, unfiltered
> feedback. I've watched and responded on the various forums where I felt it
> might help but the response means we can't hit every post, unfortunately.
>
> The subscription debate is a tough one for sure, and one we didn't take
> lightly, I can assure you. We toiled for some time along with the support
> team and the development group to decide just when to make the move. To be
> sure, it doesn't sit well right now with some folks, however let me try
> and give you some context for "why?" we made the decision and what
> capabilities the tools already provides (or we're working on) to ensure
> you have lasting SW to work with yourdata...
>
> Firstly, from the outset we knew we've wanted to integrate EAGLE's
> capabilities with MCAD, MFG, Cutting (CAM), etc to provide something far
> in excess of any 'ECAD<>MCAD' solution on the market. After all, this is a
> deep part of Autodesk's history and the value we bring to the table, and
> the company has been centered around 3D CAD, even when done in 2D (for
> example Autocad) for 25+ years. Thus, we have been looking long and hard
> at what it takes to build 'whole products' and this acquisition of an
> electronics solution marks just the beginning of a process that'll take us
> in some wild directions. That being said, we are working on this and will
> continue, hybridizing EAGLE's schematic and PCB capabilities with an MCAD
> + MFG workflow that we hope will prove second-to-none.
>
> That being said, all of our tools are subscription and with me having been
> a relatively new addition to Autodesk (I ran product at Supplyframe which
> owns Hackaday and 15 years w/Altium before that), this was a decision that
> was made before my time... Still, I support it. (Not just being a lemming,
> I support this 100%.) The argument / debate is largely about making tools
> available if/when you need them and providing a continuous stream of
> updates / value that's achievable when you consistent revenue stream to
> fund R&D. It's a curious model for ECAD, to be sure, however it doesn't
> come without *us* taking a huge hit in those first few years! (We lose
> substantial annual revenue as we move customers over, as you might
> imagine.)
>
> Now to be sure, subscription has the potential for revenue 'upside', but I
> want to be 100% clear: even if I doubled EAGLE's revenue tomorrow, I
> wouldn't move the Autodesk needle even ½ of 1%. At a ~$17B market cap,
> EAGLE's revenue is not why we acquired it and we are not the evil
> overlords come down to squeeze every last cent out of EAGLE's most loyal
> users (it was my decision to make, and I wasn't focused on the incremental
> revenue).
>
>
> What motivated the acquisition were really two things: 1) the core
> capabilities on which we could build what we're endeavoring to build and
> 2) the community. Now of course the latter (at least on public forums)
> probably appears frustrated at the moment I assure you, it stresses me
> out
> too (nobody is losing more sleep than me over the change!) but truth be
> told, the vast majority of EAGLE users we *not* inclined to upgrade to the
> latest and greatest version. Why? Perhaps because they never felt they
> were getting enough value, version to version, for this to make sense?
> Regardless of the reason, the bulk of EAGLE users are on v5 or v6...Not
> v7.
> Whether we like it or not, I have to operate on the facts.
>
> So with all of that in mind, we want a license model which aligns to the
> larger Autodesk so we can integrate EAGLE (in a hard way...not a "passing
> files back and forth" way) into Autodesk's larger platform, which is both
> subscription and thriving. So the question was: when to rip off the band
> aid? And what could we do to make it hurt a little less.
>
> With regard to that last item, here's what we've settled on thus far for
> ensuring you have legacy SW and versions and data available to you:
>
> 1) The free version shouldn't expire and will only require a connection
> the first time you open it.
> 2) The free version should open files of any size and layer count and
> allow you to place NEW objects anywhere within the extents of the free
> version. 3) The free version should allow you to output files (gerber,
> PDF, NCDrill, etc) of any size or layer count, regardless of the license
> you have. 4) Any paid license should automatically roll over to the free
> version
> if/when your license lapses. (working on this)
> 5) Every version of the free software will be made available for download
> outside of the normal update system.
> 6) We will not own your data and will continue to publish an XML file +
> DTD for *all* eagle file types.
> 7) We will expand the EAGLE API (coming soon-ish) to ensure users have
> access to EAGLE's datamodel via Javascript, Node, etc., to ensure a pipe
> out of EAGLE is easy to implement.
> 8) We will continue to make all legacy and new versions available for
> download.
> 9) We will provide you a license of an earlier, Cadsoft version of EAGLE
> with the purchase of subscription (this is as-is, with no support
> implied...it will match your current tier...some work to make sure we get
> this right just yet, but it's coming).
> 10). We'll look to build an exporter to the legacy version 6 format and
> ensure, for the first time, backwards compatibility.
>
> I know that's a mouthful but I wanted to be sure and stress that we're
> trying really hard to make this work in a way that works for the user. My
> background is as an engineer and I live in this community in a real way
> (not as some passive marketing schmuck), thus I'm hoping that having built
> consumer products, I'm covering many of the bases with this strategy.
> (And believe me it hurts when my friends call me out and tell me I'm
> squeezing
> them or locking away their data or that I just dont "get" it.) Still, I'm
> sure there'll be gaps. Some are unavoidable, some perhaps just oversights
> on our part.
>
> What I'd love is if you all could, in a constructive way, look thru that
> list and let me know whether you think there's more than you already knew
> today (which means I needed to get onto the forums and discuss this in
> greater detail) and also, what you think about some of these items as a
> way forward (although perhaps suboptimal...are they meaningful?).
>
> I really DO value your feedback and I can assure you, I'm working my tail
> off to make sure we demonstrate value to users like yourself and others
> who have shown such an obvious passion for the product. It's not easy to
> be parsimonious and also explain the "whole" view, so this is an email I
> may I have sent in various forms to different people and it's all changed
> a little each time as I go thru it, just to ensure I make the salient
> points.
>
>
> I didn't want to send a half-hearted reply widely for fear I end up under
> the microscope with every troll in Trollville pushing their agenda with my
> words. :) But this is where we're at and I can tell you, that we will
> continue with subscription as we move forward, though we are making
> attempts to be concessionary and meet the community half way.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Matt

One thing missing from your post is anything about platform support.
Presumably Autodesk will support Windows, but how about Mac and Linux moving
forward? Jorge has given some assurances there, but it would be nice to see
it on your list as well. Integration with other Autocad products would be
nice, but is only viable for me if those products will run on my Linux
workstation.

Bob
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169129 is a reply to message #169127] Tue, 31 January 2017 09:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Markus Rudolf
Messages: 181
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On 31.01.2017 06:55, Matt Berggren wrote:

> 1) The free version shouldn't expire and will only require a connection the
> first time you open it.

It would be a start if it doesn't need to connect to internet at all.
It's a big no-no for many users. You can gather download statistics by
making it obligatory to fill in a form on the webpage before one can
download the installer.

> 2) The free version should open files of any size and layer count and allow
> you to place NEW objects anywhere within the extents of the free version.

If that aimes on "maintanance" of existing projects, you can bet the
change to be made to the PCB is in the corner that is not covered in the
"free" routing area. How about layer restriction.
I guess this is of no help.

> 3) The free version should allow you to output files (gerber, PDF, NCDrill,
> etc) of any size or layer count, regardless of the license you have.

Thats what it did all the time, so no big news.

> 4) Any paid license should automatically roll over to the free version
> if/when your license lapses. (working on this)

Ok. Still say licenses should not expire, but I guess the promise you
made half year ago regarding perpetual licenses is void anyhow.

> 5) Every version of the free software will be made available for download
> outside of the normal update system.

Was like this before, so also no big news.

> 6) We will not own your data and will continue to publish an XML file + DTD
> for *all* eagle file types.

Was like this since V6 I guess, so also doesn't impress me much.

> 7) We will expand the EAGLE API (coming soon-ish) to ensure users have
> access to EAGLE's datamodel via Javascript, Node, etc., to ensure a pipe
> out of EAGLE is easy to implement.

I guess adding some features to the ULP will be enough. You should
rather work on more important features like a push and shove router and
online DRC checking which is asked for since years...

8) We will continue to make all
> legacy and new versions available for
> download.

I guess that is the same as number 5)

> 9) We will provide you a license of an earlier, Cadsoft version of EAGLE
> with the purchase of subscription (this is as-is, with no support
> implied...it will match your current tier...some work to make sure we get
> this right just yet, but it's coming).

Let me get this straight: That means if I get a one month subscription I
get a perpetual license for V7.7 of the same feature set for free? I
guess you just won 10000 new EAGLE V7.7 users.

> 10). We'll look to build an exporter to the legacy version 6 format and
> ensure, for the first time, backwards compatibility.

Sounds great, especially regarding 9)

Markus
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169135 is a reply to message #169127] Tue, 31 January 2017 11:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
rk
Messages: 386
Registered: February 2005
Senior Member
Am 31.01.2017 um 06:55 schrieb Matt Berggren:
> That being said, all of our tools are subscription ...
> ..., this was a decision that
> was made before my time... Still, I support it.

So, by saying "it's not going subscription" you were intentionally
misleading us, you already knew the opposite?

THANK YOU VERY MUCH!
Re: EAGLE License Recommendat ion [message #169146 is a reply to message #169135] Tue, 31 January 2017 14:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Henny Coenen
Messages: 3
Registered: September 2016
Junior Member
I honestly believe these discussions lead nowhere, they're going to what they want anyway. And yes of course it's about the money, and no they really really really DON'T care.
Tip: talk to oracle, they can give you some more pointers. new features are questionable, reasoning too, Too bad, i liked eagle but for me it really went down the drain after 7.4.0.

Look we have a new feature...... "Nag screen".
Didn't want it either but it was the best we could do.
Was (half? i forgot) a day of work..... Well spent!

Don't know if it's a brain-eating virus, don't know if they've been lobotomized, and don't care anymore.

Hope they read it, hope the new subscription scheme fails miserably.
I'll find a competing product, without questionable features, without subscription, without phoning home.
And i'll happily accept the learning curve and move on.

Heck, if i'm on vacation i'll drive by their window, holding a copy of the competing product and waving happily :-)

Eagle, R.I.P.

--
To view any images and attachments in this post, visit:
https://www.element14.com/community/message/214819
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169147 is a reply to message #169127] Tue, 31 January 2017 14:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Hans Lederer
Messages: 301
Registered: June 2008
Senior Member
Be it open source or proprietary software, be it a perfect tool free of
flaws or missing features, or an old-fashioned cumbersome piece of code;

doing designs on which my reputation, my income and my clients depend
and for which I must be able to answer for / modify them in a decade
from now;

for this I do need tools I own and I can continue to use unchanged, or
backup and reinstall, or freeze together with the design data (and OS
and machine if necessary), indefinitely and without any reliance on the
support / goodwill / future payment / bare existence of outside parties.

So, renting such software is unacceptable for me. Period.

So, I will keep the existing perpetual Eagle V7 licenses (regretting the
money spent for the upgrade from V6) and go looking for a suitable
replacement over the next 1-2 years. I'm sorry about Eagle, liked and
used it for decades, but such is life.

Hans
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169148 is a reply to message #169128] Tue, 31 January 2017 14:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Rob Pearce
Messages: 481
Registered: September 2012
Senior Member
On 31/01/17 08:01, Robert Johnson wrote:
> Integration with other Autocad products would be
> nice,
Unfortunately it's one of the things that most strongly brings back
memories...

Many years ago I used a CASE toolset (software engineering tools) from
well-known PCB CAD specialist Mentor Graphics. They had bought up a
small company who produced a slightly obscure but serviceable CASE
toolset, intending to spread their market presence into that aspect of
the overall product design cycle. They constantly touted their
forthcoming integration with their PCB tools (which we already used for
our hardware design) and our management chose Mentor's CASE tool for
exactly that reason. Even though the tools were not as good as the
Yourdon tool, and nowhere near as widely known and supported as the
Teamwork offering. Guess what? The integration never happened. Neither
did any of the bug fixes they kept promising "in version 8" (yes, we
were on V7 of the tool). In fact, there never was a version 8. Mentor
abandoned the product, along with any plans to compete in that market.

Now don't get me wrong, Eagle is a far better product than Mentor CASE
ever was. I just keep getting these flashbacks, is all.
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169152 is a reply to message #169127] Tue, 31 January 2017 20:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Olin
Messages: 903
Registered: December 2009
Location: Massachusetts
Senior Member
technolomaniac wrote on Tue, 31 January 2017 00:54

9) We will provide you a license of an earlier, Cadsoft version of EAGLE with the purchase of subscription (this is as-is, with no support implied...it will match your current tier...some work to make sure we get this right just yet, but it's coming).


Will this be a perpetual license like version 7 is now? Or, do you mean I would have to rent your regular newer Eagle, and then I get the right to run version 7 only as long as I keep paying the subscription?

On a different but related topic, is version 7 still available today as a perpetual license for a one-time fixed cost?
Re: EAGLE License Recommendat ion [message #169154 is a reply to message #169127] Wed, 01 February 2017 00:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
geralds
Messages: 231
Registered: February 2014
Senior Member
Hi Matt,

This may not be that the license expires after the deadline falls to a free version.
The free version is a toy for children, for playing with this at school.

I have a small company and I need to work with professional tools.
We are a development house and work in contract with our customers.
After expiration of the license period, the update must be terminated and the software must work with the last full version.

And!!!
How often does AutoDesk update the tool over time?
once twice? Or more? Usually once a month?
Then the price would be ok, about 500, - EUR per year (but NOT, if only one update per year appears!).
Anything else would be a corruption of the given agreement.

Yes, I know about companies that extend time, depending on gameplay and promises ...
Lobbyism is a contemptuous game of liars.

I know about AutoDesk in the story.
I have come from the PCAD area since 1985.
In history, this was a debacle with the hardware dongles.
Now we have a debacle with the software dongles.
Today, the dongle is called "subscription".
And we have to connect the "AutoDesk dongle" over all other dongles.
Yes! At that time, the hardware dongle of AutoCad did not work properly if this was not the first on the COM port.
At that time, the business unit was separated and everyone was able to decide which product was best for their projects.
Today, a giant company delivers everything and, moreover, completely overpriced, with some "logical" explanations..
"Eat, or die!" ... It has the monopoly.

Statement:
1) with the free version, we can not create parts with all layers.
Some parts are simple, but some are so complex that we need more layers.
Some parts may be larger than the circuit board area of ​​about 80 cm 2.
Some parts can be mounted in the middle layers, e.g. Heatpipes or cooling devices or mounting devices.
Some parts can be used in HF ranges. So you need shielding or specific contours.
And so on ...
This is the minimum of the PCB standard. -> All layers with the! Standard board!
Once again - I do not think about a toy version of PCB, I think about minimum standards.

2) Dimension:
Now we have all the other facial areas we can see.
What is standard? - for you, for me, for the others?

AutoDesk is a global player (your dimension) that has billions of dollars of profit.
I am just an engineer (my dimension)  who lives in a small area, in a small town with about 1.5 million inhabitants.
And I struggle every day to get projects for my small company in this city.
I am not a global player.
Of course, I also work hard with the contract with my clients, the companies are much bigger than mine.
I can not sleep like you! I do not believe you can not sleep well.
Now, what is standard? - Standard is what we define together. -> ISO Agreement.

With the Eagle 6 the standard was a circuit board with 160x100 with up to 6 layers.
Now!!?? Realize this please - now it is 160x100 with only two layers.
Impressive! This is a step back, no step forward, in version 8 !!!! "Uff ..."
I had to wait with my version 6.6.0 Professional license for a serious upgrade, surpassed version 7.
Because this version was a disaster, now hoping that the version 8 brings an absolutely good upgrade.
Nothing! "Buh" nothing. All of them can be found in version 6, merging into version 7.5.0.
And the top, all manuals are only available in version 7 with the Eagle 8.

Who then sorted the symbols in the sch also in the pcb?
The group button is the first button, top left, on the right side I see the move button.
The Group button is always activated after you stop an action (for example, other work, such as routing).
What is the theater?
Also, I found out that version 8 is also a bug; At the beginning. - ok, I also found some goodies.

My suggestion:
Standard dimension, routing range:
16m² (4mx4m) is too much for mostly projects. And we have to pay for it, but we never use it.
Wow, realize these :: 16sqm .... a panel, or wall. 4 m high and 4 m wide and 1.6 mm thick.
Then forward the device, then mount the devices to the board. Keep up. Mount on one or two sides?
- sorry, how can this handle easy? - because Eagles name is "easy to use cad software".
16sqm ... you can also be 6m long, 2.5m wide, or other what you want.
Well, most users or companies work with smaller PCB than 16sqm.
If you have a standard PCB area that can be mounted in a 19 "housing I can feel happy.
For example. Backplane, 2HE, 3HE or equal.

I can live with a PCB standard up to 2sqm, but with all layers.
We need layers!
! Most CAD software have this dimension as standard. !
Or a 4sqm circuit board, a 1/4 between the 16sqm as per unit.
With these steps you can have two or three categories.

What I will say - 16sqm can be divided into smaller units of the cost category.
A panel with 2sqm or 4sqm can be handled more easily than a 16sqm panel.

Free Version; Toy Version:
A EURO card. => 160x100 with up to 4 layers.
With this version, every user can work as "fast and dirty".

We are now living in the 21st century, not in the Middle Ages. - So - please apply a standard today.
I do not know a company that resets their products after the end of the period to a toy version !!!
That's cheating! To the customer. It is a real paternal and childish.
I have no problem with current agreements, but the already achieved standard has to be adhered to.
Best to be improved for loyal customers.

I'm with you with agreements, yes, but I work for my company, not for AutoDesk.
I would be delighted if Cadsoft, ups AutoDesk, thinks about people working together, not machines.
All must live, even survive.
With reason you can achieve much more than just the argument "" money "".

Best Regards,
Gerald
---

--
To view any images and attachments in this post, visit:
https://www.element14.com/community/message/214891
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169157 is a reply to message #169128] Wed, 01 February 2017 04:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
technolomaniac
Messages: 4
Registered: January 2017
Location: San Francisco
Junior Member

We're continuing Linux support. Cheers, mb

I solve problems.
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169158 is a reply to message #169135] Wed, 01 February 2017 04:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
technolomaniac
Messages: 4
Registered: January 2017
Location: San Francisco
Junior Member

It didnt go to subs at the time of acq and with the new version, we decided to go this route. Did you have any feedback on the post or you were just trolling?

I solve problems.
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169159 is a reply to message #169020] Wed, 01 February 2017 04:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
technolomaniac
Messages: 4
Registered: January 2017
Location: San Francisco
Junior Member

@James...bump.

I solve problems.
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169167 is a reply to message #169127] Wed, 01 February 2017 09:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Morten Leikvoll
Messages: 1348
Registered: November 2007
Senior Member
On 31.01.2017 06:55, Matt Berggren wrote:
> Hi James, et. Al --
>
> I've sent a number of variations of this email over the last few days, so
> let me share it and solicit people's feedback. This is *some* of what
> we're doing to make this model a bit more user-friendly and I want to be
> clear, there is an eagerness to get this right, whilst still ensuring we
> hit our objectives. Constructive comments are welcome.
>
> Firstly, thank you for your email and insights; it's clear that you've
> thought deeply about this and I appreciate your honest, unfiltered
> feedback. I've watched and responded on the various forums where I felt it
> might help but the response means we can't hit every post, unfortunately.
> The subscription debate is a tough one for sure, and one we didn't take
> lightly, I can assure you. We toiled for some time along with the support
> team and the development group to decide just when to make the move. To be
> sure, it doesn't sit well right now with some folks, however let me try and
> give you some context for "why?" we made the decision and what capabilities
> the tools already provides (or we're working on) to ensure you have lasting
> SW to work with yourdata...
>
> Firstly, from the outset we knew we've wanted to integrate EAGLE's
> capabilities with MCAD, MFG, Cutting (CAM), etc to provide something far in
> excess of any 'ECAD<>MCAD' solution on the market. After all, this is a
> deep part of Autodesk's history and the value we bring to the table, and
> the company has been centered around 3D CAD, even when done in 2D (for
> example Autocad) for 25+ years. Thus, we have been looking long and hard at
> what it takes to build 'whole products' and this acquisition of an
> electronics solution marks just the beginning of a process that'll take us
> in some wild directions. That being said, we are working on this and will
> continue, hybridizing EAGLE's schematic and PCB capabilities with an MCAD +
> MFG workflow that we hope will prove second-to-none.
> That being said, all of our tools are subscription and with me having been
> a relatively new addition to Autodesk (I ran product at Supplyframe which
> owns Hackaday and 15 years w/Altium before that), this was a decision that
> was made before my time... Still, I support it. (Not just being a lemming,
> I support this 100%.) The argument / debate is largely about making tools
> available if/when you need them and providing a continuous stream of
> updates / value that's achievable when you consistent revenue stream to
> fund R&D. It's a curious model for ECAD, to be sure, however it doesn't
> come without *us* taking a huge hit in those first few years! (We lose
> substantial annual revenue as we move customers over, as you might
> imagine.)
> Now to be sure, subscription has the potential for revenue 'upside', but I
> want to be 100% clear: even if I doubled EAGLE's revenue tomorrow, I
> wouldn't move the Autodesk needle even ½ of 1%. At a ~$17B market cap,
> EAGLE's revenue is not why we acquired it and we are not the evil overlords
> come down to squeeze every last cent out of EAGLE's most loyal users (it
> was my decision to make, and I wasn't focused on the incremental revenue).
>
>
> What motivated the acquisition were really two things: 1) the core
> capabilities on which we could build what we're endeavoring to build and 2)
> the community. Now of course the latter (at least on public forums)
> probably appears frustrated at the moment I assure you, it stresses me out
> too (nobody is losing more sleep than me over the change!) but truth be
> told, the vast majority of EAGLE users we *not* inclined to upgrade to the
> latest and greatest version. Why? Perhaps because they never felt they were
> getting enough value, version to version, for this to make sense?
> Regardless of the reason, the bulk of EAGLE users are on v5 or v6...Not v7.
> Whether we like it or not, I have to operate on the facts.
>
> So with all of that in mind, we want a license model which aligns to the
> larger Autodesk so we can integrate EAGLE (in a hard way...not a "passing
> files back and forth" way) into Autodesk's larger platform, which is both
> subscription and thriving. So the question was: when to rip off the band
> aid? And what could we do to make it hurt a little less.
>
> With regard to that last item, here's what we've settled on thus far for
> ensuring you have legacy SW and versions and data available to you:
>
> 1) The free version shouldn't expire and will only require a connection the
> first time you open it.
> 2) The free version should open files of any size and layer count and allow
> you to place NEW objects anywhere within the extents of the free version.
> 3) The free version should allow you to output files (gerber, PDF, NCDrill,
> etc) of any size or layer count, regardless of the license you have.
> 4) Any paid license should automatically roll over to the free version
> if/when your license lapses. (working on this)
> 5) Every version of the free software will be made available for download
> outside of the normal update system.
> 6) We will not own your data and will continue to publish an XML file + DTD
> for *all* eagle file types.
> 7) We will expand the EAGLE API (coming soon-ish) to ensure users have
> access to EAGLE's datamodel via Javascript, Node, etc., to ensure a pipe
> out of EAGLE is easy to implement. 8) We will continue to make all
> legacy and new versions available for
> download.
> 9) We will provide you a license of an earlier, Cadsoft version of EAGLE
> with the purchase of subscription (this is as-is, with no support
> implied...it will match your current tier...some work to make sure we get
> this right just yet, but it's coming).
> 10). We'll look to build an exporter to the legacy version 6 format and
> ensure, for the first time, backwards compatibility.
> I know that's a mouthful but I wanted to be sure and stress that we're
> trying really hard to make this work in a way that works for the user. My
> background is as an engineer and I live in this community in a real way
> (not as some passive marketing schmuck), thus I'm hoping that having built
> consumer products, I'm covering many of the bases with this strategy. (And
> believe me it hurts when my friends call me out and tell me I'm squeezing
> them or locking away their data or that I just dont "get" it.) Still, I'm
> sure there'll be gaps. Some are unavoidable, some perhaps just oversights
> on our part.
> What I'd love is if you all could, in a constructive way, look thru that
> list and let me know whether you think there's more than you already knew
> today (which means I needed to get onto the forums and discuss this in
> greater detail) and also, what you think about some of these items as a way
> forward (although perhaps suboptimal...are they meaningful?).
>
> I really DO value your feedback and I can assure you, I'm working my tail
> off to make sure we demonstrate value to users like yourself and others who
> have shown such an obvious passion for the product. It's not easy to be
> parsimonious and also explain the "whole" view, so this is an email I may I
> have sent in various forms to different people and it's all changed a
> little each time as I go thru it, just to ensure I make the salient points.
>
>
> I didn't want to send a half-hearted reply widely for fear I end up under
> the microscope with every troll in Trollville pushing their agenda with my
> words. :) But this is where we're at and I can tell you, that we will
> continue with subscription as we move forward, though we are making
> attempts to be concessionary and meet the community half way.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Matt

Hi Matt
I have a suggestion for you to consider.
Can you please make an offline option to validate licenses by giving out
some key that can be typed in? This could happen on a remote pc and the
key could be passed by a phone either as voice or text message, or even
on a post-it note.
It would also be nice if a customer could call your support desk and ask
for this code in case all your friends or colleagues are at sleep when
you need it.

Taking the online requirement out of the equation will add some comfort imo.
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169179 is a reply to message #169127] Thu, 02 February 2017 01:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
James Morrison
Messages: 1129
Registered: November 2004
Senior Member

technolomaniac wrote on Tue, 31 January 2017 05:54
Hi James, et. Al --

I've sent a number of variations of this email over the last few days, so let me share it and solicit people's feedback. This is *some* of what we're doing to make this model a bit more user-friendly and I want to be clear, there is an eagerness to get this right, whilst still ensuring we hit our objectives. Constructive comments are welcome.

Firstly, thank you for your email and insights; it's clear that you've thought deeply about this and I appreciate your honest, unfiltered feedback. I've watched and responded on the various forums where I felt it might help but the response means we can't hit every post, unfortunately.

The subscription debate is a tough one for sure, and one we didn't take lightly, I can assure you. We toiled for some time along with the support team and the development group to decide just when to make the move. To be sure, it doesn't sit well right now with some folks, however let me try and give you some context for "why?" we made the decision and what capabilities the tools already provides (or we're working on) to ensure you have lasting SW to work with yourdata...

Firstly, from the outset we knew we've wanted to integrate EAGLE's capabilities with MCAD, MFG, Cutting (CAM), etc to provide something far in excess of any 'ECAD<>MCAD' solution on the market. After all, this is a deep part of Autodesk's history and the value we bring to the table, and the company has been centered around 3D CAD, even when done in 2D (for example Autocad) for 25+ years. Thus, we have been looking long and hard at what it takes to build 'whole products' and this acquisition of an electronics solution marks just the beginning of a process that'll take us in some wild directions. That being said, we are working on this and will continue, hybridizing EAGLE's schematic and PCB capabilities with an MCAD + MFG workflow that we hope will prove second-to-none.

That being said, all of our tools are subscription and with me having been a relatively new addition to Autodesk (I ran product at Supplyframe which owns Hackaday and 15 years w/Altium before that), this was a decision that was made before my time... Still, I support it. (Not just being a lemming, I support this 100%.) The argument / debate is largely about making tools available if/when you need them and providing a continuous stream of updates / value that's achievable when you consistent revenue stream to fund R&D. It's a curious model for ECAD, to be sure, however it doesn't come without *us* taking a huge hit in those first few years! (We lose substantial annual revenue as we move customers over, as you might imagine.)

Now to be sure, subscription has the potential for revenue 'upside', but I want to be 100% clear: even if I doubled EAGLE's revenue tomorrow, I wouldn't move the Autodesk needle even ½ of 1%. At a ~$17B market cap, EAGLE's revenue is not why we acquired it and we are not the evil overlords come down to squeeze every last cent out of EAGLE's most loyal users (it was my decision to make, and I wasn't focused on the incremental revenue).

What motivated the acquisition were really two things: 1) the core capabilities on which we could build what we're endeavoring to build and 2) the community. Now of course the latter (at least on public forums) probably appears frustrated at the moment I assure you, it stresses me out too (nobody is losing more sleep than me over the change!) but truth be told, the vast majority of EAGLE users we *not* inclined to upgrade to the latest and greatest version. Why? Perhaps because they never felt they were getting enough value, version to version, for this to make sense? Regardless of the reason, the bulk of EAGLE users are on v5 or v6...Not v7. Whether we like it or not, I have to operate on the facts.

So with all of that in mind, we want a license model which aligns to the larger Autodesk so we can integrate EAGLE (in a hard way...not a "passing files back and forth" way) into Autodesk's larger platform, which is both subscription and thriving. So the question was: when to rip off the band aid? And what could we do to make it hurt a little less.

With regard to that last item, here's what we've settled on thus far for ensuring you have legacy SW and versions and data available to you:

1) The free version shouldn't expire and will only require a connection the first time you open it.
2) The free version should open files of any size and layer count and allow you to place NEW objects anywhere within the extents of the free version.
3) The free version should allow you to output files (gerber, PDF, NCDrill, etc) of any size or layer count, regardless of the license you have.
4) Any paid license should automatically roll over to the free version if/when your license lapses. (working on this)
5) Every version of the free software will be made available for download outside of the normal update system.
6) We will not own your data and will continue to publish an XML file + DTD for *all* eagle file types.
7) We will expand the EAGLE API (coming soon-ish) to ensure users have access to EAGLE's datamodel via Javascript, Node, etc., to ensure a pipe out of EAGLE is easy to implement.
Cool We will continue to make all legacy and new versions available for download.
9) We will provide you a license of an earlier, Cadsoft version of EAGLE with the purchase of subscription (this is as-is, with no support implied...it will match your current tier...some work to make sure we get this right just yet, but it's coming).
10). We'll look to build an exporter to the legacy version 6 format and ensure, for the first time, backwards compatibility.

I know that's a mouthful but I wanted to be sure and stress that we're trying really hard to make this work in a way that works for the user. My background is as an engineer and I live in this community in a real way (not as some passive marketing schmuck), thus I'm hoping that having built consumer products, I'm covering many of the bases with this strategy. (And believe me it hurts when my friends call me out and tell me I'm squeezing them or locking away their data or that I just dont "get" it.) Still, I'm sure there'll be gaps. Some are unavoidable, some perhaps just oversights on our part.

What I'd love is if you all could, in a constructive way, look thru that list and let me know whether you think there's more than you already knew today (which means I needed to get onto the forums and discuss this in greater detail) and also, what you think about some of these items as a way forward (although perhaps suboptimal...are they meaningful?).

I really DO value your feedback and I can assure you, I'm working my tail off to make sure we demonstrate value to users like yourself and others who have shown such an obvious passion for the product. It's not easy to be parsimonious and also explain the "whole" view, so this is an email I may I have sent in various forms to different people and it's all changed a little each time as I go thru it, just to ensure I make the salient points.

I didn't want to send a half-hearted reply widely for fear I end up under the microscope with every troll in Trollville pushing their agenda with my words. Smile But this is where we're at and I can tell you, that we will continue with subscription as we move forward, though we are making attempts to be concessionary and meet the community half way.


Thanks Matt, I appreciate the full response. It's obviously nuanced with a lot of considerations on many sides.

And sorry for the delay. I've been a bit busy, plus I wanted to make sure that I digested what you were trying to say.

No one is saying that EAGLE shouldn't charge money for using the software, we all recognize the link that there should be between revenue and future development. However, this is now the second major revision that has been released where the large majority of design effort has been into licensing schemes that add _zero_ value to the user. Sure, they may have import to the Farnell/Autodesk. But the company exists to serve its customers, not the other way around.

I'm not interested in "access to EAGLE's datamodel via Javascript, Node, etc, ...". Maybe others are and maybe this is the piping you need to integrate with your MCAD tools in Autodesk. But this is piping, not features.

Instead of going through your response line by line, let me enumerate some requirements for professional use of EAGLE and then I'll see how your suggestion stacks up. These are situations that I don't think were addressed before:

A. Work with Multiple Versions of EAGLE at the Same Time

This is an absolute must for a design bureau: The main issues here:

1) license requirements that a user delete previous versions of EAGLE within a certain number of days
2) being able to service customers with various versions of EAGLE

And for background, it must be understood that CAD professionals don't just upgrade their tools for the latest version without a lot of consideration and testing. While new versions may mean new functionality, they also are a risk for new bugs. And unknown bugs cost professionals money and time when boards don't come in and work like they are supposed to.

That goes for the version that a design bureau would use internally. It also goes applies to clients, who often go through their own internal version of the same decision. Clients can also have other tools and processes built around particular versions of EAGLE and just jumping to a new version of EAGLE can sometimes break those.

ANALYSIS:

I don't see anything in your response that addresses the license terms that we need to delete older versions of EAGLE. You have stated in another post that this wouldn't effect any versions before V8 (though I'm not sure that is true since Autodesk bought CadSoft and likely acquired all their assets and liabilities too, so while you say it doesn't apply I'm not sure Autodesk lawyers would agree, especially when Autodesk accountants discover how many licenses this might apply to if no one upgrades to V8).

The ability to save out in older formats is helpful and a feature I have advocated for over a decade.

B. Guarantee Being Able to Edit My Data in Native Version of EAGLE a Decade or Two in the Future

If I have to make a change to a real system in the future I need to be able to do it with the _exact_ version of EAGLE that it was made with e.g. V6.5, V8.1, etc.

If I have to load the data into a different version of EAGLE then we have the introduction of potential sources of error:
1) bug in converting data file from old version to new version
2) bug in new program effecting _any_ part of the design (polygons fill differently, ends of copper wires have different shapes, more/less resolution on unit conversion, ....).
3) but in new program in generating output files

When you're dealing with a very old design, there is a lot of detail that you no longer have in the short-term memory. So you want to make sure that only what you intend to change changes. Using a different version of software introduces other variables and the more variables you have the more work it is to do this and to verify the design. And the more time/cost it takes to do the job.

And remember, we design safety critical systems with EAGLE. This is no toy, it is used for Professional work. So this needs to be taken seriously.

ANALYSIS:

I don't see anything in your statement that addresses this directly. We have the issue of deleting previous versions along with reliance on internet connection to Autodesk servers that have no obligations to continue to operate.

C. Running EAGLE No Matter What Externally Goes Wrong

This is basically the issue around EAGLE stopping to work after 14 days if it can't call home. Here is a list of things that could keep me from being able to use EAGLE:
  • copper communication line gets cut to my house, I live in the country, there aren't many other options
  • DDOS attack on my ISP, internet is down
  • corporate firewall blocks EAGLE
  • Autodesk decides that EAGLE isn't profitable and maintaining server is losing money, so they shut it down
  • my country (say China) decides that my packets can't leave country to Autodesk's servers
  • I'm in a location with no internet access (secure facility, wilderness, ...)
  • ....

Some of the things above could be temporary, but not necessarily. The point is, I have to be able to work no matter what happens. There are simply too many things that can go wrong and cut me off from using EAGLE V8 currently.

ANALYSIS: I don't see anything here that addresses this directly. I suppose being able to save out in old version and then load it up could work. But V8 has already created a structure that isn't backward compatible with the reusable modules, and I expect more of this in the future. So there doesn't seem to be any way you can guarantee that this method would be error-free and wouldn't just end up causing me more work. My experience with this is that it might work for the most simple case, but boards I design are rarely the simple case.

You've also suggesting to maintain the persistent license model for (older versions of) EAGLE in PARALLEL with the new subscription model! I thought the old system was inefficient and cost lots of support turmoil--now you have all of that and the subscription issues.

D. Working within the Legal License Constraints

Any professional design house wants to be using legally licensed software. At least around here, the cost of getting caught with pirated software is high. There are many reasons for wanting to be legit, having support being probably number one on that list.

This argument that you can somehow fall back to the free, non-commercial licence in the future is non-sense. By saying that, you are essentially condoning using EAGLE outside of the legal terms. If someone is going to do that (on your recommendation) then they might as well just crack EAGLE Ultimate and be done with it. Both are outside of using EAGLE according the license. So why pay ever.

This is a nonsense argument and I'm surprised it hasn't been detected by your team of lawyers.

ANALYSIS:

This is a fail.

The suggestion to use the Free, non-commercial license is laughable for any business. You are asking us to use your software illegally.

CONCLUSION:

I don't see anything here that allows a professional organisation any sort of comfort with the licensing model. There have been some small steps made but the root problems are still in place.

Autodesk has made the same mistake that Farnell did: They pushed out a major licensing change without actually asking the people who would have to pay for it.

I have used EAGLE for 2 decades and distributed EAGLE for one decade, so I know the market. Would it really have hurt Autodesk to reach out to a few of us in the EAGLE community to consult to make sure you got it right? Ed and Jorge could have given you 5-10 contacts right off the top of their heads. I learned about Farnell's license attempt the day it came out (even as a distributor I didn't get any advanced notice) and I told them that day that it was going to be a fail. At least Farnell had the sense to back down and revert.

I'm not saying that Autodesk has to revert to _exactly_ the way things were. BUT THE ISSUES ABOVE ARE REAL and no amount of hand waving or "trust us" is going to make them go away. Many, many businesses that make money using EAGLE are not going to commit to this sort of scheme.


New Proposal



You didn't specifically address why my initial proposal wouldn't work.

Having some time to contemplate, I realize one deficiency from Autodesk's point of view: With my previous recommendation, one could purchase a one month subscription, terminate the subscription, and then get lifetime use of that software forever. So obviously that is likely not looked upon favourably by Autodesk, though I'd wish they'd just come out and say that.

If someone purchases a two-year license they get a perpetual license. When their two-years are up, if they continue to subscribe (monthly) they continue to get updates and support. If they choose to not subscribe then the lose both updates and support but the version of EAGLE that was licensed when they discontinued the subscription will work as a perpetual license.

Not being connected to the internet would be considered the same thing as not subscribing. So for the first 2 years you would not need to connect and EAGLE would continue to work fine. After the two years, if subscription is dropped then the perpetual license kicks in, no need to connect then either. You would only need to connect to update and reset the latest version of EAGLE that your perpetual license would pertain to.

This is good for Autodesk:
- 24 month subscription is better than 1 month -- guaranteed money
- 24 months to get enough new functionality to convince customer to go to monthly subscription

(As an aside, please don't tell me how monthly subscription money is better than a lump sum. If Autodesk can't figure out how to take a lump sum in one pocket and hand it out internally as if it was a subscription then maybe they should just get out of business altogether. Plus you get interest on that money, so it's even better.)

This is good for customer
- guaranteed, native access to edit data forever with a legit license in the native, specific version of EAGLE
- being able to walk away after 2 years means that Autodesk has to actually work to convince you to shell out more money in the future (see last 3+ years where there really wasn't any particular reason to upgrade for most people)
- it solves all the issues I outline above

You've already committed to a perpetual license in some cases, so this proposal is the best of both worlds I think. I don't think there is any value in creating a system to license V7--that seems like wasted work. Anyone who wants V7 already has it and new people aren't going to think that is much of a value, especially as the functionality and compatibility begins to separate.

I look forward to your response. If this proposal isn't acceptable, I'd like to hear _why_. I think this is a great "half way" to address the issues that Autodesk has stated and maintain a usable licensing scheme for its customers.

Cheers,

James.





James Morrison ~~~ Stratford Digital
http://www.stratforddigital.ca
Re: EAGLE License Recommendat ion [message #169180 is a reply to message #168856] Thu, 02 February 2017 01:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mark Sauerwald
Messages: 15
Registered: September 2014
Junior Member
Matt

Thank you for your post, helping to explain some of the thoughts going on at Autodesk right now.
I have a primary job, where my employer uses Altium, and I use that for most of the design work that I do.   I also do some work on the side for a small business, and we have used Eagle for several years.   For a long time, I had the licence that allowed me to work on 4 layer, 6x4 boards, but occasionally I need to work on larger boards (but never more than 4 layers).   In December 2016 I  bought the full version of Eagle, so I have the perpetual license for the Pro version.  The next month, everything changed.

I am excited about the concept of having an integrated MECHANICAL/Electrical CAD system, and I hope that this becomes a reality.   It would make the increased cost of the system worthwhile.  

If I understand the proposed licensing scheme, I will be able to subscribe to the smaller system for 4x6 boards, and use that, and if I need to work on a larger board, I rent the professional version for the duration of that job - 2 or 3 months, then go back to the lower cost licence.   So long as 10 years down the road I will be able to view the files, generate gerbers and drill files etc, I think that I can live with that.

That said, I don't think that I will jump into V8 until the dust has settled - perhaps a couple of years.

Mark

--
To view any images and attachments in this post, visit:
https://www.element14.com/community/message/214977
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169204 is a reply to message #169179] Thu, 02 February 2017 16:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
justyn
Messages: 21
Registered: October 2014
Location: UK
Junior Member
James Morrison wrote on Wed, 01 February 2017 20:41
If someone purchases a two-year license they get a perpetual license. When their two-years are up, if they continue to subscribe (monthly) they continue to get updates and support. If they choose to not subscribe then the lose both updates and support but the version of EAGLE that was licensed when they discontinued the subscription will work as a perpetual license.


I would go for this.
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169206 is a reply to message #169127] Thu, 02 February 2017 17:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
justyn
Messages: 21
Registered: October 2014
Location: UK
Junior Member
technolomaniac wrote on Tue, 31 January 2017 00:54

What motivated the acquisition were really two things: 1) the core capabilities on which we could build what we're endeavoring to build and 2) the community. Now of course the latter (at least on public forums) probably appears frustrated at the moment I assure you, it stresses me out too (nobody is losing more sleep than me over the change!) but truth be told, the vast majority of EAGLE users we *not* inclined to upgrade to the latest and greatest version. Why? Perhaps because they never felt they were getting enough value, version to version, for this to make sense? Regardless of the reason, the bulk of EAGLE users are on v5 or v6...Not v7. Whether we like it or not, I have to operate on the facts.


Matt,

This argument that not enough users had upgraded to v7 is hugely frustrating to hear.

Version 7 offered incredibly poor incentive to upgrade for existing users. I mean seriously, so little. And I say this as someone who did upgrade and has been using it!

Given that most designs don't realistically allow use of the full autorouter and that the hierarchical design feature was far too basic and restrictive to offer much (again, as someone who determinedly uses this feature!) why exactly would people upgrade to v7?

You've spoken about the exciting features you're planning to add to Eagle moving forward - if they're truly worthwhile, people will upgrade for them regardless of whether or not they're on subscription.

technolomaniac wrote on Tue, 31 January 2017 00:54

we are not the evil overlords come down to squeeze every last cent out of EAGLE's most loyal users (it was my decision to make, and I wasn't focused on the incremental revenue).


This is very interesting to hear, since I assumed that it was a decision forced on you by Autodesk. Clearly not.


Matt, I'd really like to hear a response to James Morrsion's proposal that a perpetual license be available in some form in addition to subscription.

I mean, I'm trying to give you money here, and you're making it impossible. It's crazy.
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169209 is a reply to message #169179] Thu, 02 February 2017 17:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
justyn
Messages: 21
Registered: October 2014
Location: UK
Junior Member
James Morrison wrote on Wed, 01 February 2017 20:41
If someone purchases a two-year license they get a perpetual license. When their two-years are up, if they continue to subscribe (monthly) they continue to get updates and support. If they choose to not subscribe then the lose both updates and support but the version of EAGLE that was licensed when they discontinued the subscription will work as a perpetual license.


Sorry to send another reply, but I would tweak this.

I would add some sort of one-off premium on top of the 2-year subscription cost for a perpetual license. This would create a strong incentive to keep the subscription going after two years (with continuing access to the perpetual license) rather than letting it lapse, because otherwise the premium would need to be paid again once you wanted to restart.

For this (or any option) to be worthwhile there would need to be some method of offline installation, of course.
Re: EAGLE License Recomm endation [message #169217 is a reply to message #169158] Thu, 02 February 2017 19:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Henny Coenen
Messages: 3
Registered: September 2016
Junior Member
Let's take a little stroll down memory lane shall we?

https://www.element14.com/community/message/166900/l/eagle-version-75-relea sed#166900 (/message/166900/l/eagle-version-75-released#166900)

There were several sound arguments made, several times, about half implemented features, the lack of resources and introducing a nice nag screen which should have been an absolute no-go in many people's opinions. not only in this little thread... just chose this one to show you what i think is flawed reasoning from your side.

you did what you wanted anyway and really... the only answers were, "well, we did it this way. it's the best we could and we think we're right"

i'm reading the same here. i read well defined arguments, presented in a very nice and clear matter. and the nice answer you have to that is generally "we're going this way anyway"
It may be a fact that many users didn't upgrade to version 7, you may blindly use that fact to shove a subscription down peoples throat which is more expensive than you claimed it to be.

You could also ask yourself: Where did we go wrong in version 7 that people don't use it? i also find it very hard to believe you don't know the reasoning you use is not entirely true.

does this discussion have a point? I just honestly said: "I believe not because they'll (you) do what they (you) want anyway". True, the packaging of that message is not nice, but the message itself is perfectly clear.
We can have a long discussion about the subject "did eagle go down the drain?". For me... it did. Ad- nag- or crippleware is just morally not done. Especially if you claim to be low on resources and next set a developer to create adware and have the guts to present this as a feature.

There are several best practices. itil, bisl, lean, whichever you choose...

one thing they all agree on is the following point: it's all about customer perception. that perception wasn't great, it sure didn't get any better.

if that's trolling, then fine. you may call me a troll. it does not change my belief that you have effectively killed eagle, nor that you'll do as you please anyway.

--
To view any images and attachments in this post, visit:
https://www.element14.com/community/message/214943
Re: EAGLE License Recomm endation [message #169223 is a reply to message #169217] Fri, 03 February 2017 02:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Matt Berggren
Messages: 34
Registered: November 2016
Member
When someone has posts lacking detail beyond the snarky "we hate you" bent, is that trolling?  Yup.  But it's incited a more meaningful, actionable reply so let's upack this a bit more and I promise it ends on a high note...

Autodesk isn't Premier Farnell.  We didn't have a hand in anything done prior to the acquisition (7.5, 7.0, 6.1, whathaveyou...) and our intent post acq is a good one.  We are improving routing, improving reuse, improving hierarchy, adding true ECAD<>MCAD support, better file handling, revision management, library tools, etc.  This is coming with subscription.  If you need these tools, you are welcome to subscribe. 

Perpetual licensing is not our business model moving forward and version 8 aligns with that model, perhaps a little sooner than any of us expected.  But we weren't coy here.  We said it may come and it did.  The cost is consistent with the previous license price and in many cases, the TCO is in fact lower.  I wont debate this point and if the value of EAGLE's capabilities we're adding doesn't eclipse the need to subscribe, then perhaps we've failed (i.e. we didnt deliver) or perhaps the product isn't what's best for you.  Believe me, I get that.

WRT to nag-ware, ad-ware, etc; we removed that ad ware post acq.  We also added a free export to MCAD (not an additional service), a better interface to mfg, the first major pass at design reuse, improvements in routing, better visualization of missed connections in schematic, renamed a wire a line (like it should have been for 26 years), cleaned up a number of selection issues including modal versus non-modal behavior, etc.  This is all something you'd find in the tool (free or paid) were you to open it.  In fact, much was added in 7.7.

So in fact, we are making good on our promises and the notion of EAGLE as a cash-cow is a mischaracterization that anyone without knowledge of the business could be forgiven for making. 

*I would likewise argue that it isn't about "customer perception" at all* as you've stated.  +It's about *customer success* in using your tool+.  If you build a better tool, able to do more, which makes them more effective and ensures they get to see their kid's little league game on the weekends or gets them home in time for dinner with their spouse, then you win.  If I build a tool only to serve perception, that's a slippery slope toward vaporware. 

We need to build features that make design better, more efficient and less error prone.  This is why we said "Routing!" when we first started working on the tool.  Obstacle avoidance, better rules, better trace handling, push and shove (driven by those rules), are all in the cards.  When will we deliver on those?  As soon as we humanly can.   The ECAD<>MCAD tools are improving as well.  This is a path toward total integration.  (As I said, we didn't call the product Fusion for nothing so if I'm leaking anything by sharing this, then I guess we didn't do a great job of hiding this in the first place!) 

If you dont need any of this, then I appreciate that you may +not+ be our target customer.  And that's ok.  They can't all be zingers!  And there's no captive audiences here.  But if it's cool to you to see EAGLE mature to compete on the same footing as the big boys, but perhaps leaner, cleaner & less expensive; then let's discuss priorities around this and make sure we get to the right finish line(s) first.

We are putting our money where our mouth is and we welcome you to try it out and come along for the ride.  I'd be super happy if in 6 months you said: "look at that!  I never knew it'd be able to do that!".   For us, that's the only measure of a win.  That and making it affordable.  And we have started down the path toward both.  Of course, you're forgiven if you feel like we're asking you to bet on something which isn't fully baked.  We get that.  Trust me, +I+ get that.  But it'll happen.  And when it does...it'll be glorious and you'll be proud to have a license. 

Best regards,

Matt
p.s. and truly, thanks for a proper reply with some meat on it.  I need something more to reply to or I too, like any other human, show my humanity.

--
To view any images and attachments in this post, visit:
https://www.element14.com/community/message/215060
Re: EAGLE License Recomm endation [message #169224 is a reply to message #169180] Fri, 03 February 2017 02:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Matt Berggren
Messages: 34
Registered: November 2016
Member
Hi Mark

Thanks for the honest email and I can appreciate you want to hold off.  This is ok.  We are ok with this.  I will say that the 50% off promo for upgrades (the EAGLE50 promo code) will expire 6 mos from launch.  However I would expect a lot of progress by then to reassure you that we're not just blowing smoke.  FWIW, if you bought in december, you should contact the sales team at Autodesk on the eagle site and ask for a refund and rebill.  We can issue you a license of 7.7 but ensure you have the upgrade, so you can move across whenever you want.  That way you get the best of both worlds and you're not feeling like you paid twice for one item so close together.

Hope that helps.

Best regards,

Matt

--
To view any images and attachments in this post, visit:
https://www.element14.com/community/message/215061
Re: EAGLE License Recomm endation [message #169225 is a reply to message #169206] Fri, 03 February 2017 02:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Matt Berggren
Messages: 34
Registered: November 2016
Member
Hi Justyn --

Thanks for the post.  As I noted in another reply, I cant really take ownership of what happened before our time, however since the acq we've released 2 'point' releases and a new version, so we are trending in the right direction (in 6 months while learning a new code base, build tools, workflow, integrating back end business processes, etc...all the same group involved at every level).  We'd added ECAD<>MCAD support (for free...ie not a paid add-on), better export to mfg, routing improvements (interactive and auto), design reuse with Design Blocks, wiring improvements, etc. So we are moving fast, at the price of a good night's sleep, to be sure.  But it's all happening.  In fact, the only complaints we've heard so far are wrt to licensing. 

To that end, we're not gong back to the old "maintenance model" that other tools use, +so we wont issue a perpetual license against a subscription like James discussed+.  I know this sounds like a healthy compromise to some, but it doesn't fit the model that ensures we keep improving the tools at this pace.  Did we know we would meet with resistance?  Of course.  And we knew we'd lose some users with the change.  But this has occurred across the whole of Autodesk whilst building a stable community who have adopted the new model, once we starting putting up features that made them more productive. 

We may have moved to subs faster than anyone (even I) anticipated - and we may have opened an old wound with the Flexera licensing that EAGLE had in the past - but this again is something we'd agreed to push when it made the most sense (with the major release version).  It's not the end of EAGLE, just the end of a licensing model that is steadily going away. 

If you dont feel comfortable moving at this time, we totally get it.  Wait a while, see what we do, tell us what you want to see most in terms of features and functionality and then make your decision based on whether we've delivered what we say we're going to deliver.  If the model isn't right for you at that time, then we'd hope to part as friends and you feel like EAGLE was a great stop along the way. 

Best regards,

Matt

--
To view any images and attachments in this post, visit:
https://www.element14.com/community/message/215062
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169233 is a reply to message #169225] Fri, 03 February 2017 09:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Hans Lederer
Messages: 301
Registered: June 2008
Senior Member
Am 03.02.2017 um 03:25 schrieb Matt Berggren:
> […]
> we're not gong back to the old "maintenance model"
> […]
> +so we wont issue a perpetual license
> […]
> And we knew we'd lose some users with the change.
> […]
> It's not the end of EAGLE, just the end of a licensing model
> […]
> If the model isn't right for you at that time, then we'd hope to part
as friends and you feel like EAGLE was a great stop along the way.
> […]

Well, these statements should clarify Autodesk's position and we all can
stop this obviously fruitless licensing discussion and start evaluating
the alternatives.

No, this model isn't right for me, and so we part now, with quite some
pain. Not really as friends, since I did buy, use and like Eagle for 26
years in three companies and Autodesk/Matt will be the one who killed it
for me.

My thanks for those years and my sympathy to the remaining Cadsoft
people! (I gather that several have left already.)


Farewell — Hans
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169234 is a reply to message #169233] Fri, 03 February 2017 12:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Markus Rudolf
Messages: 181
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On 03.02.2017 10:45, Hans Lederer wrote:

>
> No, this model isn't right for me, and so we part now, with quite some
> pain. Not really as friends, since I did buy, use and like Eagle for 26
> years in three companies and Autodesk/Matt will be the one who killed it
> for me.
>
> My thanks for those years and my sympathy to the remaining Cadsoft
> people! (I gather that several have left already.)
>

Same here, all the best to the old team.

Markus
Re: EAGLE License Recomm endation [message #169235 is a reply to message #169225] Fri, 03 February 2017 14:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
James Morrison
Messages: 1129
Registered: November 2004
Senior Member

[quote title=Matt Berggren wrote on Fri, 03 February 2017 02:25]Hi Justyn --

<snip>
To that end, we're not gong back to the old "maintenance model" that other tools use, +so we wont issue a perpetual license against a subscription like James discussed+.  I know this sounds like a healthy compromise to some, but it doesn't fit the model that ensures we keep improving the tools at this pace
<snip>

First off, I wish I'd get a direct response instead of a side-comment in a related thread. I've put a lot into EAGLE over the years, I think I deserve a straight answer.

Please explain this Matt. I made the argument that this is _better_ for funding as it gives you two-years of guaranteed subscriptions. Without it you're only guranteed one month--how is my suggestion worse? Please explain.

Also, please don't tell me that you can't do a perpetual license. In another thread Jorge explained that educational licenses are given a 3-year license:

Quote:
-Universities that had a previous CadSoft Educational license can go to
http://www.autodesk.com/education/free-software/eagle and obtain their
free 3 year educational license. The IT Lab coordinator will need to
install EAGLE in each computer, but the individual students would need
to create accounts so they can use when they are in the lab.


So it is possible to do this sort of thing. Changing that 3 year term to 99 years is the same thing as perpetual. So you have the ability to do it.

Now explain why you won't. This is an issue for _any_ professional. If you want EAGLE to be a hobbyist tool then subscription only might be OK. But professionals cannot accept that. I don't think that has really sunk in yet.

Cheers,

James.


James Morrison ~~~ Stratford Digital
http://www.stratforddigital.ca
Re: EAGLE License Recomm endation [message #169238 is a reply to message #169225] Fri, 03 February 2017 14:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
justyn
Messages: 21
Registered: October 2014
Location: UK
Junior Member
Hi Matt,

Thanks for the relatively frank reply.

To be clear I don't hold you accountable for what happened before your time, I'm merely pointing out that looking at upgrade figures for v7 would be quite misleading, considering the low quality of that release.

And whatever you say it seems totally clear that you could make more revenue, not less, by focusing on subscription but also offering perpetual at a premium (name your premium!) for those who need it. But it seems you won't consider it, which I'm sorry to be blunt shows a worrying lack of flexibility or respect for your loyal users.

Anyway, to be as constructive as possible...

technolomaniac wrote on Tue, 31 January 2017 00:54
With regard to that last item, here's what we've settled on thus far for ensuring you have legacy SW and versions and data available to you:

1) The free version shouldn't expire and will only require a connection the first time you open it.
2) The free version should open files of any size and layer count and allow you to place NEW objects anywhere within the extents of the free version.
3) The free version should allow you to output files (gerber, PDF, NCDrill, etc) of any size or layer count, regardless of the license you have.
4) Any paid license should automatically roll over to the free version if/when your license lapses. (working on this)
5) Every version of the free software will be made available for download outside of the normal update system.
6) We will not own your data and will continue to publish an XML file + DTD for *all* eagle file types.
7) We will expand the EAGLE API (coming soon-ish) to ensure users have access to EAGLE's datamodel via Javascript, Node, etc., to ensure a pipe out of EAGLE is easy to implement.
Cool We will continue to make all legacy and new versions available for download.
9) We will provide you a license of an earlier, Cadsoft version of EAGLE with the purchase of subscription (this is as-is, with no support implied...it will match your current tier...some work to make sure we get this right just yet, but it's coming).
10). We'll look to build an exporter to the legacy version 6 format and ensure, for the first time, backwards compatibility.


Parts of your "10-point plan" for mitigating the negative effects of this subscription model are quite interesting.

The foundation of protecting our data and avoiding being held hostage by subscription lock-in is the XML+DTD for the file format, this is necessary but not sufficient at the moment since only Eagle properly supports it.

So using v7 (or v6) of Eagle, which operate entirely offline with a license file, effectively as competition for yourself and therefore also allowing them to act as an emergency backstop against either temporary or permanent license failure is an intriguing approach.

Therefore I will be watching what you do with the exporter to Eagle v6 or v7 format carefully. I see potential in creating a workflow that automatically archives a v6/v7 file version along with all v8+ work, to be sure that we will always be able to use and modify our designs if necessary by using the the older offline Eagle with fewer features.

I'm afraid it probably isn't enough for me, and like others I am evaluating alternatives (it turns out that they're much better than they used to be). I'm also concerned that since as a demographic Linux users are probably least likely to sign on to the subscription model their proportion of your user base will dwindle, and with it the importance you assign to the platform.

But I'll continue to watch how this plays out over the next few months, and we'll see.
Re: EAGLE License Recommendat ion [message #169240 is a reply to message #169238] Fri, 03 February 2017 15:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
rachaelp
Messages: 596
Registered: March 2015
Location: UK
Senior Member
> Justyn B wrote:
>
> Therefore I will be watching what you do with the exporter to Eagle v6 or v7 format carefully. *I see potential in creating a workflow that automatically archives a v6/v7 file version along with all v8+* work, to be sure that we will always be able to use and modify our designs if necessary by using the the older offline Eagle with fewer features.
I agree, backwards compatibility features should be automatic. How about as the file format is XML, make sure anything that pertains to new features is contained in separate tags which v6/v7 will ignore and ensure that all the important design data remains in the existing file format so the files can ALWAYS be opened in the pervious versions of EAGLE without having to either specifically export it or continually have two versions of the file saved?

--
To view any images and attachments in this post, visit:
https://www.element14.com/community/message/215092
Re: EAGLE License Recommendat ion [message #169244 is a reply to message #169225] Fri, 03 February 2017 18:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Royce Arnold
Messages: 6
Registered: October 2009
Junior Member
> Matt Berggren wrote:
>
> To that end, we're not gong back to the old "maintenance model" that other tools use, +so we wont issue a perpetual license against a subscription like James discussed+. I know this sounds like a healthy compromise to some, but it doesn't fit the model that ensures we keep improving the tools at this pace. Did we know we would meet with resistance? Of course. And we knew we'd lose some users with the change. But this has occurred across the whole of Autodesk whilst building a stable community who have adopted the new model, once we starting putting up features that made them more productive.
>

Matt,

This infuriates me.  I'm a long time Autodesk user/customer (25+ years).  I go back to the days of DOS with AutoCAD and even managed to survive AutoCAD R13.  I even chose Inventor over SolidWorks when the time for 3D came.  To say that the other users of Autodesk products have "adopted the new model" in inaccurate.  Many users (such as myself) are grandfathered into the perpetual license model.  Who knows how long that will last, but when it ends, I'm done with Autodesk!  Although, this whole mess with Eagle has me seriously considering terminating my entire relationship with AutoDesk.  In short, NO, we have not all accepted the new model.  People such as myself are hanging on and hoping that Autodesk comes to it senses.  Something that seems to be increasingly less likely.  I've had discussion after discussion with individuals with Autodesk and their Resellers.  I always hear that I am not the only one with my complaints or arguments.

Let's discuss the "old maintenance model" vs subscription.  Please explain the advantages to me and the other members of this forum.  I'll start.  Pros and Cons from the user perspective.

Pro Subscription:   Licenses cost can be 100% expensed.  OK, I can agree with that.  And for larger license holders, that could be a significant advantage.  For smaller ones, it is not as clear cut.

Con Subscription:  At some point, Autodesk can reduce development efforts without reducing revenue.  A real concern and worry for me in regards to product quality and features.

Con Subscription:  Entities outside AutoDesk or my organization, could act to terminate my ability to use the license.  This could range from hacker attacks, crypto attacks, solar flare disruption, terrorist attack, disgruntled employee, failure of AutoDesk hardware / service, failure of local internet access, etc.

Pro Maintenance:  Licenses are perpetual.  If Autodesk makes a decision I can not live with (i.e. see current license situation),  I have the ability to continue to operate with my existing license.

Pro Maintenance:  Autodesk is encouraged to continue to develop features that users want.  Yes, I view this exact opposite as you stated.

Pro Maintenance:  Maintenance Model be modified to provide the same "subscription" revenue stream.  How?  Tie all support / updates to maintenance contracts.  I have other products like this.  I'm not thrilled about them, but I can accept them. Autodesk ends up with the same continuous revenue.  We end up with a perpetual license.  Further, Autodesk continued revenue for a product is directly tied supporting the product, not just the products existence.


Many of the people on this forum are engineers.  Traditionally, we are one of the hardest groups to sell or market to.  We are won over by the use of facts and logic, not marketing BS.  The very nature of our jobs require us to anticipate points of failure and plan accordingly with any system we are dealing with.  What you are hearing from me and many of my colleagues, is that the risk / cost to benefit ratios of the new subscription model are too high.

I'm not advocating Autodesk abandoning the subscription model altogether.  My only Pro for Subscription is a very big one for some larger organizations.  And if I operated a 100+ seat AutoCAD/Eagle operation, there would be some definite attraction.  However, I would still likely require at least one perpetual license even if only for piece of mind.  But, I do see both models as being possible and living together in harmony... mostly.

--

--
To view any images and attachments in this post, visit:
https://www.element14.com/community/message/215095
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169245 is a reply to message #169127] Fri, 03 February 2017 18:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Neon John
Messages: 20
Registered: October 2016
Junior Member
On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 21:55:00 -0800, Matt Berggren
<technolomaniac@gmail.com> wrote:


> Firstly, from the outset we knew we've wanted to integrate EAGLE's
> capabilities with MCAD, MFG, Cutting (CAM), etc to provide something far in
> excess of any 'ECAD<>MCAD' solution on the market. After all, this is a
> deep part of Autodesk's history and the value we bring to the table, and
> the company has been centered around 3D CAD, even when done in 2D (for
> example Autocad) for 25+ years. Thus, we have been looking long and hard at
> what it takes to build 'whole products' and this acquisition of an
> electronics solution marks just the beginning of a process that'll take us
> in some wild directions. That being said, we are working on this and will
> continue, hybridizing EAGLE's schematic and PCB capabilities with an MCAD +
> MFG workflow that we hope will prove second-to-none.

Matt,

Has it occurred to you that there is a significant percentage of the
Eagle user base that simply doesn't want all that complexity and cost?

I suspect I'm close to typical. I run a 4 person (variable number of
contractors too) manufacturing company that manufactures induction
heaters. We introduced our first product, the Roy induction heater in
2009 and that's when we bought Eagle. I've kept it up to date until
now.

I do all the design work except for some mechanical work that I hire a
contractor for. Our needs are minimal and for that we use QCAD. It's
closed source but it runs on Linux and its native file format is DXF.

To me there seems to be an obvious solution to this problem. Keep
Eagle as a stand-alone product just like it was and at the same time
incorporate it into you complex and expensive product. Backfit
stand-alone Eagle with applicable significant new features as you
develop them for the integrated product.

In this manner you can service both the small user who doesn't want
and/or can't afford the complexity of your integrated product and you
can service your traditional customer base with the integrated
product.

I know that AutoDesk has gotten so large that it doesn't have to give
a sh*t about what us small customers want. We small companies can't
be that way. If a customer will pay the price, I will incorporate a
special feature into even an old board, spin a few and modify the
firmware accordingly.

The design files are under source code control so I can go back and
fetch the design files with little effort. I keep every version of
Eagle on our machines so it's simply a matter of firing it up and
making the mods.

To protect against old versions not running on an upgraded OS, I have
a large gun safe in the building's basement. Inside are laptops
loaded with the environment it takes to run the old versions. Thus if
Canonical makes changes to Ubuntu that break old versions, I can still
use the laptop to make the changes.

Your current scheme of renting new versions breaks this method of
operation. Thus if you continue on your current path, I much change
packages. KiCAD is my choice.

Understand that I don't WANT to change. I'd like to continue in my
current familiar work environment. But you're currently forcing my
hand.

Why don't you give my proposal consideration and then adopt it? That
way everyone would be happy.

John
John DeArmond
http://www.neon-john.com
http://www.tnduction.com
Tellico Plains, Occupied TN
See website for email address
Re: EAGLE License Recommendation [message #169246 is a reply to message #169179] Fri, 03 February 2017 19:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Neon John
Messages: 20
Registered: October 2016
Junior Member
On Thu, 02 Feb 2017 01:41:04 +0000, James Morrison
<james@eaglecentral.ca> wrote:

> New Proposal

+1

John
John DeArmond
http://www.neon-john.com
http://www.tnduction.com
Tellico Plains, Occupied TN
See website for email address
Re: EAGLE License Recommendat ion [message #169286 is a reply to message #169224] Tue, 07 February 2017 00:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Robert Beaubien
Messages: 1
Registered: February 2017
Junior Member
Matt,  This pricing does not allow for the hobbyist to continue working with Eagle.  I purchased the $169 option that allowed for 6 layers and 100x160mm boards and I designed within that limitation.  All my boards are 4 layer.  Now to get the same functionality is going to cost me $250 the first year and god know after that.  I do this for fun and don't make any money off it.  I would have no problem with a $250/subscription (every year) that also included benefits like an online parts library, but even that is a stretch, and at $500+ year, I simply can't afford it. 

Why would you change the limitations of your enthusiast versions?

--
To view any images and attachments in this post, visit:
https://www.element14.com/community/message/215258
Re: EAGLE License Recommendat ion [message #169288 is a reply to message #169286] Tue, 07 February 2017 07:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
rachaelp
Messages: 596
Registered: March 2015
Location: UK
Senior Member
Robert Beaubien wrote on Tue, 07 February 2017 00:48
Matt,  This pricing does not allow for the hobbyist to continue working with Eagle.  I purchased the $169 option that allowed for 6 layers and 100x160mm boards and I designed within that limitation.  All my boards are 4 layer.  Now to get the same functionality is going to cost me $250 the first year and god know after that.


Hi Robert, You don't need the premium subscription for 4 layer boards, they are upping the standard limit to 4 layers which I believe will be available in the next v8.0.1 release available any day now.

Robert Beaubien wrote on Tue, 07 February 2017 00:48
  I do this for fun and don't make any money off it.  I would have no problem with a $250/subscription (every year) that also included benefits like an online parts library, but even that is a stretch, and at $500+ year, I simply can't afford it.


Online parts library... what a horrible idea.... EAGLE already comes with a large part library that you can use if you absolutely must. Really though, everybody should just create their own clean library which they fully check themselves as you cannot just blindly use libraries created by others without thoroughly checking them first anyway. I wouldn't want Autodesk wasting effort creating an online parts library which is essentially of no real value as they should be putting their resources into useful things like adding more high end routing features etc.

Robert Beaubien wrote on Tue, 07 February 2017 00:48
Why would you change the limitations of your enthusiast versions?

There isn't an enthusiast subscription version at the moment. Both the subscription versions are fully commercial, it's just the freeware one which is non-commercial.

Best Regards,

Rachael


Re: EAGLE License Recommendat ion [message #169293 is a reply to message #169288] Tue, 07 February 2017 12:37 Go to previous message
geralds
Messages: 231
Registered: February 2014
Senior Member
Hi Rachael,

Yes this was also my objection, when I spoke here in this forum about standards.

(first i asked for Matt, Jorge answered me. Then we talked about the standards. Please scroll a bit down.)
Then Jorge told me that AutoDesk can make the standard PCB 160 cm² with up to 4 layers.

But! - how can I (μ) PGA or (μ) BGA? You need more than 4 layers.
Well, this is absolutely unreal to think that "standard" is 4 levels!

-> This "standard" was a standard in the 1990s, when we started the electronic work.
The standard in 1985 I worked with, was 99 layers with PCAD (v 5) - on the MSDOS platform.
Eagle did not really exist at this time. In the 90s, Eagle entered the hobby scene.


I do not know - do you know Elektor? This was an "absolute must" in the electronics hobby in Europe.
My first Elektor was 11/1976 - the the Layouter worked by hand with Letraset, then the layout was copied onto a thermal transfer foil.
In the 90s to 2k's Elektor used ULTIBOARD, I used PCAD, PROTEL, OrCAD, or by hand as a training.
Then the 2k's PCAD was migrated to Altium, the price was astronomical. So I went to Cadsoft. (v5.12)
Elektor is now using Altium. (Why I told Elektor, because that was the beginning for most electronics engineers, they went from hobby to pro.)

Well, what is standard ?? !! - Standard is what the market needs by giving time -> today 2017 and future.


No, my opinion, standard for Eagle must have a full number of layers as minimum, and 1 or 2 m² dimension, not 160 cm².
All Others is for hobby. It is a step back when you stay in a place forever.
With 160 cm² I can not create a 19" PCB with 6U - 160x233mm.
What is standard? - 19" or mini-PCB mounted in a brake of a car?

What is standard? - a space ship?
Standard was for Eagle 160x100 with 6 layers (V6).
Now it is 160x100 with 2 layers, then "comes back" 4 layers, as mentioned above.
Well, this is an aggressive step back! The customers are cheated, pulled over the table.
Customers are confused with "news". In a year, no one knows any more.
The young engineers do not know how we, the old ones, fought at that time.
Advertising on the web is designed to be confusing.
Has super beautiful huge pictures, but extremely little meaning.

AutoDesk does not matter, it says: "we also provide the software for the authorities and large companies." (See a message from Matt with this sentence).
For us it is not matter, we are dependent and have to live on both sides to get slaps (supplier side and the customer side).

Best Regards,
Gerald
---

--
To view any images and attachments in this post, visit:
https://www.element14.com/community/message/215289
Previous Topic: Nightmarish AutoDesk 'support'
Next Topic: Sneak peek: obstacle avoidance and walk around routing in EAGLE v8...
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Aug 20 15:34:40 GMT 2017