Autodesk goes Adobe

[myara]

I think they are great news, the best we have had in months from AD.

I've been offered a few projects where I have to use 3DS Max or Motion Builder as the final format, but I don't own those packages and buying them only to convert my SI files and tweak a little things before deliver them to my client isn't worth the price. I have to turn down those projects, I lose that opportunity and AD doesn't receive a piece of the money I could have earned.

Now the question is how much would those rent cost? And if they would include old versions because I've never used the latest version (usually 2~3 years old software). My guess is that they won't, but at least they are starting to try new alternatives and that's good.

[rant] And if SI doesn't have as many updates or benefits as Maya has, thing that I understand and accept because SI will always be the ugly duckling with less resources, budget and marketing, it would be nice that at least it wasn't the most expensive of the 3. [/rant]

[Lord Futzi Voldemort]

FYI : the article is a summary of what carl bass said to analysts on the investor call that happened last week during earning reports; it's not an interview with that web site. rental is obviously huge benefit in the M&E space, where studios hire temporary employees based on projects.

I agree, and I'm not even against it as long as there are standard licenses. All I'm saying is: AD obviously saw the need to improve cashflow, and that's what this is about.
Those 40% don't mean anything. It only says there are 40 % of ADs customer using the subscription model (and pay less than the regular upgrade price). If there were only the standard license and upgrade model, 100% of revenue would come from it. Would you call it successful because of that?
There is always "what people say" and "what it is about" ;-)

PS: I don't see how a rental model would be more predictable. Usually it'S the opposite ;-)

[Hirazi Blue]

Question: Doesn't the fact that a product is on offer as a rental and as a perpetual license both change the way the product gets looked at, based on the licensing model someone would want to adopt? If you take a look at Maya LT for instance it looks to me - even with all its limitations - like a potentially interesting product to rent (on a project basis), but not to own.

[ojo3D]

Question: Doesn't the fact that a product is on offer as a rental and as a perpetual license both change the way the product gets looked at, based on the licensing model someone would want to adopt? If you take a look at Maya LT for instance it looks to me - even with all its limitations - like a potentially interesting product to rent (on a project basis), but not to own.

Perhaps Maya LT was launched only with the purpose of renting. I don't see why somebody would buy it, but rent it I think it's fine.

With a full DCC, I figure it's better to own the license.

[Mathaeus]

Question: Doesn't the fact that a product is on offer as a rental and as a perpetual license both change the way the product gets looked at, based on the licensing model someone would want to adopt? If you take a look at Maya LT for instance it looks to me - even with all its limitations - like a potentially interesting product to rent (on a project basis), but not to own.

yeah it is interesting. Personally I'd like to see Max for renting. Simply because there are Max projects around, and I don't want to have this heavy truck permanently. Liquid simulation software could be interesting too, as there is demand in TV commercials. Something like Real Flow reliability and pricing, sounds competitive against live shooting - theoretically....

Regrading Maya LT, perhaps it's better to wait, I believe AD will became more realistic, one day. Something similar was with XSI Foundation too, I think first Softimage announcement was, something like, 2k price, render size limit, so on - together with similar propaganda, how this offer is great, only because arrogant high end software wanted to appear to us, small idiots. ( well, same people, all the time ) A few months later become the 3d democracy.

[Eugen]

If you rent 3ds Max, would you be willing to pay for permanent licenses for the plugins - which you are going to need?

[Hirazi Blue]

That, at least, is a problem Maya LT seemingly avoids by not allowing plug-ins at all. But in this new age of "rent all, own nothing" this is a very interesting topic. Eventually plug-in makers will be forced to update their business model to this new situation, however unwillingly. But once they ultimately do, the perpetual license seems doomed.

edit: typo

[Mathaeus]

If you rent 3ds Max, would you be willing to pay for permanent licenses for the plugins - which you are going to need?

no Occasionally, no need for that, it's about assets for 'virtual walking' projects, powered by more or less, game engine, running in real time. But theme is more like archiviz. I'd say, nice example how it's hard to put something into in - advance defined categories. Max, because export rely on tons of tags defined by Max, and because it's easy to find users. Lightwave or Blender will fit nicely too, Maya or SI are out - not enough people for any.
Anyway, hardly I could imagine anything of AD stuff, really easy to rent, just because of their huge dependency of plugins. Even such basic function like rendering has nothing with AD. But people will get nice dx11 shaders... no comment. Now I really need to stop.