Yearly subscription fee

[trevwhite]

I got offered 40% off the yearly technical subs fee. It is still £1200 with tax. Not sure what I would miss if I do not subscribe. The package works at present fine and I have not embraced 365. It does everything I need from it at present.


I cant believe how cheap Eagle + Fusion360 is. It is around 1/3 the price of Altium subs.

[PlainName]

Eagle + Fusion is subscription, so if you don't keep paying you lose the product. Altium is perpetual in that all you lose through not paying is new features (and bug fixes).

Also, being subscription, the price you pay now may not be the price you pay next renewal. Subscriptions can go up and down (can't offhand think of one that went down, though).

[alexwhittemore]

Altium is perpetual in that all you lose through not paying is new features (and bug fixes).

FWIW, you DO get bug fixes back ported to the version current as of your subscription lapse. I.e. I will continue to get AD21 bugfixes indefinitely into the future. Obviously, subject to Altium's definition of "bug fix" and support duration - there are plenty of things we consider "bugs" that will only be fixed in the future by substantial under the hood redesigns that won't get backported.

Also FWIW re Eagle: Autodesk has honored my grandfather pricing for Eagle Standard for two renewals so far, so there's that. It's technically a huge discount from what I would have been paying since I get unrestricted F360 along with that now (my $100/yr sub was originally JUST eagle standard). Also, the current $500/yr is a big price cut OR a big price increase, depending on what you happened to be paying for before, since they consolidated a bunch of tiered options.

[PlainName]

FWIW, you DO get bug fixes back ported to the version current as of your subscription lapse

Really? Wow, that's better than expected 

Autodesk has honored my grandfather pricing for Eagle Standard for two renewals so far

Yes, they say on the webby that they will honour existing standard licenses, but they're not selling new ones.

As you say, it depends on what you want it for. For Fusion + Eagle it's a very good price, but if you happen to suffer cashflow issues you might be cut off from it, however cheap it appears. Not forgetting that it's unlikely to be the only subscription cost in your folio.

[larry42]

I decided not to renew this year out of protest for the money they are wasting on 365 stuff (that I am not interested in) - and that most of the "support" I was paying for was to report bugs to them, just so that they could respond that "yeah, it's a bug, we'll add it to our todo list" (and never fix it, because we are moving over to a Cloud system)

[beanflying]

Eagle + Fusion is subscription, so if you don't keep paying you lose the product. Altium is perpetual in that all you lose through not paying is new features (and bug fixes).

Also, being subscription, the price you pay now may not be the price you pay next renewal. Subscriptions can go up and down (can't offhand think of one that went down, though).

Complete FROGSHIT about Fusion! You can if you decide not to renew go onto the Hobby License (FREE) or stay there for that matter for most home users and still work within the limits but you retain your files and can export or use them as required to move on.

[Ice-Tea]

FWIW, you DO get bug fixes back ported to the version current as of your subscription lapse

Really? Wow, that's better than expected 

Are you quite sure? That's not my experience...

[alexwhittemore]

Are you quite sure? That's not my experience...

Yes.

But again, at a certain point, it's impractical to backport fixes too far, so they don't. And then there's a difference between a "bug" for which a fix is backported, and an "annoying behavior obviated by a major under-the-hood redevelopment" that definitely won't get backported.

But theoretically, and in practice, you DO get some bugfix releases post-expiration.

[alexwhittemore]

Yes - I would expect any 20.x version released to be valid for a 20. license holder. I only have access to one expired license from a previous employer, so I'll try to have a look. Certainly looks from that thread like it's not currently the case. I'll send some emails.

[PlainName]

I would expect any 20.x version released to be valid for a 20. license holder

Can't see how that works. The 20.x version would be relevant to 2020 but, as a for instance, my license starts and ends in March so spans 20 to the beginning of 21. If I were to get all 21.x versions then I would effectively get 9 months extra for the price of one year.

[alexwhittemore]

Can't see how that works. The 20.x version would be relevant to 2020 but, as a for instance, my license starts and ends in March so spans 20 to the beginning of 21. If I were to get all 21.x versions then I would effectively get 9 months extra for the price of one year.

In a way, yes. In a much more relevant way, nothing interesting or worth paying extra money for is expected to happen over the duration of that 21.x major rev you already did get a whiff of. Mostly just minor fixes, especially to the newly released features that have never yet seen production use. If all you're interested in is new feature updates, it's absolutely the case that your subscription pays out exactly one day a year.

A maybe more interesting point is that they stop taking your support emails the moment your subscription lapses. I have half a mind to think that the update-without-license-issue exists by survivor bias: the only people they hear from are people for whom it's not an issue. Off-subscription forum users might simply not be getting the time of day.

EDIT I did test this just now using a license that expired Feb 24 2017.

AD 17.0.11 was released Feb 28, and that version works for me. I'm not sure if it's because it's a hotfix rev, or if it's because there's some grace period.
AD 17.1.9 released in November does NOT work for me. So at most I got all updates to the same minor rev, not major rev. Despite bugs obviously getting fixed thereafter.

So yeah, that sucks. I'll have to send an email.

[PlainName]

A maybe more interesting point is that they stop taking your support emails the moment your subscription lapses.

Yeah, I can imagine that might be a bit of a surprise if you're been keeping up the tab and got used to the excellent support

[Batang]

From email just received.

https://www.altium.com/promotions/be-productive?utm_source=marketo&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=quote-request-202104&utm_content=PG11318D4&TrackingId=ME21&mkt_tok=ODE3LVNGVy0wNzEAAAF9kxxx_HHNySejP-eZfB9oP_-sgcjL3hGT9M-HIZrbSS4XdpGXagS5mbbG1ZZoR17dei7mjCUnSamOwGM2yLKACsxay8OuPG92naQSmmuWJtjlKwfW

[alexwhittemore]

From email just received.

https://www.altium.com/promotions/be-productive?utm_source=marketo&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=quote-request-202104&utm_content=PG11318D4&TrackingId=ME21&mkt_tok=ODE3LVNGVy0wNzEAAAF9kxxx_HHNySejP-eZfB9oP_-sgcjL3hGT9M-HIZrbSS4XdpGXagS5mbbG1ZZoR17dei7mjCUnSamOwGM2yLKACsxay8OuPG92naQSmmuWJtjlKwfW

Be careful: this deal is for a one-year term-based license ONLY. It’s not a bad deal if that’s what you need, but it’s not a must-buy.

[voltsandjolts]

As long as they continue to offer Perpetual Licenses, alongside subscription options, then I'm fine with that.
Of course Perpetual License cost might go up to 'encourage' the subscription option.

I really hope the Autodesk buyout doesn't happen - then Altium would almost certainly become subscription only

[beanflying]

Bit of a battle going on I suspect due to the buyout 'negotiations'. Win Win for the customers at least Fusion and Eagle 30% off

Without getting into the pros and cons of either Altium is exe for smaller users.

[PlainName]

Of course Perpetual License cost might go up to 'encourage' the subscription option.

Due to go up by 10% on 1st June.

[PlainName]

I just checked and was able to save my license as a standalone one (I'd already done it, but did it again anyway). I was also able to download the current offline installer.

There is a hack for licensing a hookey copy. If the worst happened, I'd have no moral issue with using that to enable the version I was entitled to (assuming it works on that version, of course). The larger problem is what happens in future. Seems to me one is either on-board and doesn't have licensing issues, or jumped ship and what happens to the company then is moot.

[ajawamnet]

I've been using standalone ALF licenses for years now, and always get off line installers.  I can be totally disconnected from the web (in our case most of our machines ARE disconnected due to what we do) and can install any version up to the license period.  I've had to do this dozens of time during our machine upgrades ( we do it every year).  Since 1995 when I started with Protel, I have always been able to install any version. I recently installed Adv PCB 2.8 on a WinXP box with no problem.

[ajawamnet]

There's a long history now of "cloud dependent" software, hardware, and media people have purchased from many major vendors that have been effectively overnight without recourse / warning rendered completely perpetually unavailable and stolen away from the product owners because it simply ceases to be accessible if it can't "call home" to the cloud even if the product is otherwise quite potentially usable standalone from any actual cloud resources.

Obviously larger enterprise customers may not care since they probably have some private license server and service contract with Altium they can hold the company to but at least when in years past one bought a perpetual copy of Eagle one could keep the installer and local license key file and use those standalone & reinstall / use it forever, whereas with Altium it seems that there's a (not unprecedented) risk that it could just stop being usable one day if they get bought, go out of business, have technical problems that makes their cloud stuff unavailable, etc. etc.

And that's apparently a regression from how it used to work much more sanely & securely in versions past!

As I mentioned in the previous post, I have no issues when installing AD using an off-line installer and a standalone ALF file on a totally isolated machine - even the current AD21.

As to "clown" computing (i found out one guy on the AD forum hates me saying that) and/or licenses limited to a particular machine config, I'm wondering what the any progress in a users "Right to Fix" is going to do. I've mentioned this many times before, but a license is considered to be between entities - not machines. Now a company can totally close source firmware for a particular packaged product, but as a rule (as mentioned in the Fenwick document http://www.fenwick.com/FenwickDocuments/Patent_Licensing.pdf ) Licencees look to have the right to:

 "... generally seek to ensure that
nothing interferes with the benefits they have received. For example, licensees are concerned
with their ability to obtain assistance from the licensor in fixing defects that are discovered in
the technology, to have the right to fix the defects themselves if the licensor is unable to do
so, to obtain periodic upgrades and other maintenance services from the licensor, to transfer
their rights if they sell their business and to continue enjoying the technology even if the
licensor becomes bankrupt."

The next section - Licensor and Licensee Restrictions - is quite interesting and might be able to be construed as a limitation on Licensors restricting their licensees to a particular computational unit (ie a specific hard drive serial number, a specific hardware number of any type).

For instance, Microsoft wants you to "activate" the software for a particular machine. Again, under "Quiet Enjoyment"  (which Microsoft denies in their EULA click thru/shrink wrap) I'm not sure what that would do.

This is why Autodesk and Adobe went to a "rental" SaaS model - which looks great on the company books due tot he recurrent revenue stream.

Using a licensed technology  to design YOUR Intellectual Property is, I believe, going to become a serious issue as to whether a licensee - under reasonable circumstances - can be assured "Quiet Enjoyment". It's also going to be tested as to whom owns the IP and who is legally responsible for it.