The internet-tethered license is huge hole. It's like designing a PCB with a non-keyed power connector and no polarity protection. You could promise yourself that you'll be careful, you'll always plug it in the right way, but eventually it's going to release the magic smoke.
You can't build up trust over time with something like that. We all know that it's just a matter of time before Autodesk drops Eagle and shuts down the servers. We're only haggling over how long that is.
http://www.autodesk.com/products/softimage/overview
Future of Eagle?
http://www.autodesk.com/products/softimage/overview
Future of Eagle?
SoftImage has been mentioned before as a precedent, but I could not find a clear statement how Autodesk actually handled this: Did they "just" stop developing it further, while you can continue to use your existing version of the software indefinitely? Or is Softimage also licensed via a subscription model, and once the subscription ends you can't use it anymore?
http://www.autodesk.com/products/softimage/overview
Future of Eagle?
SoftImage has been mentioned before as a precedent, but I could not find a clear statement how Autodesk actually handled this: Did they "just" stop developing it further, while you can continue to use your existing version of the software indefinitely? Or is Softimage also licensed via a subscription model, and once the subscription ends you can't use it anymore?
Altium should capitalise on this publicity by offering a half price deal to existing Eagle license holders or something and push that they have a perpetual license.
Opportunity going begging...
It might be, but only for taking away Windows based users. With EAGLE being a lot more in the maker/hacker space I suspect a reasonable proportion of those users will be on Linux. For me personally (for professional work) it's Mac for my main design work and Linux for the PC on my lab bench so Altium wouldn't work for me. I suspect even with a drastic price cut Altium would still be way out of the price range of most EAGLE users though.
I think as many have already said, the main beneficiary of the fallout will be KiCAD and it'll likely get a lot of additional funds donated by disgruntled EAGLE users taking their subscription money and donating to KiCAD in protest. Whilst I will stick with EAGLE as I like it and have a lot of time invested in it, and I do believe there will be more coming from Autodesk to help solve these issues, I can't really fault people for taking this stance and having a very capable alternative to EAGLE which is a real competitor to EAGLE (Cadence/Altium/Mentor are in a league of their own in terms of features) could be good for EAGLE as it will force Autodesk to push ahead of KiCAD in terms of functionality or bleed users.
Just my 2p worth....
Rachael
They ask for a subscription right after buying the software and hardly doing anything to it yet. [...]
So whatever happened to investing in a product? Why does Eagle have to live paycheck-to-paycheck, depending on subscriptions trickling in to clothe and feed developers? Autodesk easily has enough cash to pay 20 developers to work on Eagle full-time for two years, bringing it up to true professional standards, something nobody could resist because it's so good. But Autodesk needs it to start pulling in monthly fees right away? [...]
Getting the money immediately turned out to be more important than the development and improvement of the product. They spent most of their development time the past few months integrating the licensing code. We don't have any reason to believe this prioritization won't continue into the future.
To be fair the CADSoft developers that Autodesk have inherited DO have some idea about how an EDA works. There are two ways it can go really..
1. The developers have lots of ideas that they can now work on that perhaps they were not able to under the previous ownership.
2. The AutoDesk management fail to understand this specialist market and make the developers do what they think will be best for revenue. Developers get fed up and move on and AutoDesk hire new yes men to replace them.
To be fair the CADSoft developers that Autodesk have inherited DO have some idea about how an EDA works. There are two ways it can go really..
1. The developers have lots of ideas that they can now work on that perhaps they were not able to under the previous ownership.
2. The AutoDesk management fail to understand this specialist market and make the developers do what they think will be best for revenue. Developers get fed up and move on and AutoDesk hire new yes men to replace them.
I think CadSoft was a small outfit based in Germany. I wonder how many of the employees who haven't been fired or already quit are willing to continue working for Autodesk? Employee's reviews are not exactly rosy ... https://www.glassdoor.co.uk/Reviews/CADsoft-Reviews-E722114.htm I'm inclined to think option 2) is more likely.
To be absolutely fair to Autodesk, Maya used to be a major competitor to 3DS Max until they bought it. Many of the same concerns were voiced at the time but it's still going now 11 years on.
Past performance is not a guarantee of future returns.
To be absolutely fair to Autodesk, Maya used to be a major competitor to 3DS Max until they bought it. Many of the same concerns were voiced at the time but it's still going now 11 years on.
Past performance is not a guarantee of future returns.
No, it's not. That's the point I was trying to make to all the people who are pointing at Softimage as a guarantee of doom.
That appears to be a completely different company called Cadsoft Consulting who are based in Arizona. They are unrelated to CADSoft/Autodesk the owners of EAGLE.
To be absolutely fair to Autodesk, Maya used to be a major competitor to 3DS Max until they bought it. Many of the same concerns were voiced at the time but it's still going now 11 years on.
Past performance is not a guarantee of future returns.
No, it's not. That's the point I was trying to make to all the people who are pointing at Softimage as a guarantee of doom.
I see the same course for Eagle. It so easily replaceable by free tools such as KiCad, it is facing a terminal decline. Autodesk could perhaps give it a lease of life by making it free except for high end versions, and focus efforts on high-revenue customers. But Autodesk will certainly lose customers to freeware with their current approach.
of course, all companies have a financial duty to their shareholders, not their customers, so will always make decisions in the financial interest of the company.
I'm going to disagree with you on this one.
As a *regular* user (and I'm talking nearly daily here even though I don't do PCB layout for a living per-se), there is a *huge* amount of usability improvements that Eagle can most definitely use which would improve the experience in it for both new *and* existing users.
So ... ongoing development of PCB software is something that *is* needed. Take the most obvious example ... Auto-routers - there is not a single vendor on the planet that has got that one even close to right (some are considerably better than others, but when you get down to it ... pretty much all of them are "meh").
... and this is for *all* packages, not just Eagle (I'm talking Altium, KiCAD and so on).I don't get your point. You have NOT gotten any of those improvements from Eagle for the last 6 years or so, still you stayed, proof that you do not need those improvements which was our point.
Second you want autorouter improvements but make the point yourself no-one has it or can deliver. We probably have to wait for AI to improve and be integrated in cad packages for that to happen.
So what you will end up is, a steep monthly licensing bill with some but without the real improvements you want, or seek, well good luck to you. You might consider switching to Altium and you will have all the improvements starting tomorrow, with the same monthly bill ofcourse.
Not true. Credit (albeit very limited) where it is due, CadSOFT did improve Eagle over time, but it has been at a glacial pace so you could very rightly assume that nothing was ever done.
... and you are completely missing *my* point.
All products can do with development, and it is in the interests of *EVERYONE* that there is a rich and vibrant development on them all so that there is competition and that they are all forced to get better.
If Eagle stays stagnant for too long ... it dies. Same applies to Altium, KiCAD and so froth.
That means as the users we have "choice".
The development does however mean that someone actually has to do the work ... and they need to EAT and LIVE. A roof over your head, a bed to sleep in, a meal in front of you - that means money.
So how do you fund that?