Open source 3D software has made massive leaps forward in recent years. Specifically, the 3D modeling tools in Blender are on par with, if not better than, anything Maya or 3ds Max has to offer. I don't see SaaS working out for Autodesk unless they can find new ways to differentiate themselves from open source offerings.
I don't see SaaS working out for Autodesk unless they can find new ways to differentiate themselves from open source offerings.
The thing is, they differentiate themselves from open source offerings by having a massive ecosystem and guaranteed compatibility across your whole production pipeline because everyone else is using them as well. Just as Microsoft have with Office and Adobe have with Creative Cloud, Autodesk have a degree of market dominance because of community and networking effects, regardless of any features or usability or pricing issues. However, unlike Office or CC users, there are probably relatively few professionals using Autodesk products who operate in isolation or only need to share data within their own small group, which makes it much harder for any disruptive newcomer to challenge their position.
> the 3D modeling tools in Blender are on par with, if not better than, anything Maya or 3ds Max has to offer.
This is unfortunately untrue. In fact saying that this is untrue is downplaying it, this could not be further from truth and is ridiculous to even consider. Anyone who has used all of these programs knows how incredibly awkward blender is to use. Even moving an object around or saving a scene is a disaster so forget about cranking through shots in a studio under a deadline.
If blender was better, studios wouldn't pay thousands for licenses of other closed software. They do though, and that should tell you something. Animation studios large and small don't have money to burn but the truth is that the tools make a huge difference in productivity and blender is not even in the same league as commercial tools.
I will admit it's pretty subjective. I will also be the first to admit Blender takes a lot of getting used to. But as someone who has used both Maya and Blender extensively, I can confidently say I much prefer Blender for most modeling tasks, retopology, etc. It also has some very wonderful UV unwrapping tools. If you haven't used Blender recently, you might want to take another look at it. It is a radically different tool than it was two years ago.
I've used it in the last month. Maya's weak point is also modeling (although it is used for modeling quite a bit for some reason). Manual 3D modeling is also basically a solved problem. It is everything that comes after that that can throw a wrench into the process.
I was an intern at what was formerly Discreet in Montreal during some layoffs in the mid-2000s. While profitable, we weren't hitting the magic 10% profit number and Autodesk decided that wasn't good enough.
People's lives were turned upside-down and dehumanized so that we could be a better part of a global 'portfolio' of these mid-sized acquisitions turned divisions. Transfers to other divisions or retraining weren't offered.
After that, I didn't want to go back. I went to work on Apple's video stack instead. Simply put, Autodesk is inhuman, and not in a malicious sense, they just don't consider human factors.
UX and UI before that was a thing - it was one of the best software packages to use, but was 20 years ahead of its time...
Context -
You could keep the same view of your model - but you could swap between tools (the way you interacted with the model - and all your menus etc on either side by hitting the F keys.. it allowed super fluidity. Then they had nurbs and clay and all sorts or stuff... what killed them was that MAYA was better at rendering (I THINK, i may be wrong - its an old code sir, but I think it checks out))
Wooow, that site is so awesome I want to make a site and imitate the "poking through" style. Also the bar across the top with options, (I don't remember much from '97) but that seems pretty innovative for the time as well.
Along with this, one of their unfortunate "policy" type moves is wanting a copy of everyone's data. :(
So, anyone using Fusion 360, literally has to store the data in Autodesk cloud. There is no option to keep confidential/private data out of it (by design):
Fusion 360 is a product that crashes often, sometimes several times a day (it varies). More crashes on OSX at the moment than Windows, but YMMV.
They want us to store potentially extremely valuable data in their cloud... and we're supposed to believe the server side software will be of higher quality than the client side software (which crashes).
Also worth noting, Autodesk has no bug bounty nor similar sensible way to reward disclosure of security bugs to them. They really, really don't want to know.
To me, forcing customers to keep stuff in their cloud at the same time as sticking their head in the sand re: security... that's not going to end well. :(
I work at AutoDesk and here is my unofficial opinion. Your data is secure. They take cloud security very seriously. They undergo standard, external audits to verify that security standards and processes - the same kind of standard audits that other vendors go through. Check the AutoDesk Trust Center for more information.
The points you make may be accurate but they have no bearing on the security of all our customer data stored with us. I take its confidentiality and security very seriously and I believe my co-workers do the same.
One way they had invested in the future was in student and education discounts for their products. In high school and college, Autodesk was everywhere. It was probably the most effective sales tool they had!
Autodesk once had best office layout. Individual glassed in office with room for desk/chair and even 2 chairs for visitors. Even junior workers one had them. Returning to it would be some good investment for the future.
To clarify, their revenue isn't getting slashed by 2/3rds as Bass implies. Autocad perpetual license + 3yr support = $6000. Annual subscription price is $1700 (or $2500 if paying monthly). So revenue over 3 years is a little lower. Of course he doesn't say how many customers are forced into a subscription who don't get maintenance on some/all seats or don't always upgrade.
26 comments
[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 66.3 ms ] threadThe thing is, they differentiate themselves from open source offerings by having a massive ecosystem and guaranteed compatibility across your whole production pipeline because everyone else is using them as well. Just as Microsoft have with Office and Adobe have with Creative Cloud, Autodesk have a degree of market dominance because of community and networking effects, regardless of any features or usability or pricing issues. However, unlike Office or CC users, there are probably relatively few professionals using Autodesk products who operate in isolation or only need to share data within their own small group, which makes it much harder for any disruptive newcomer to challenge their position.
This is unfortunately untrue. In fact saying that this is untrue is downplaying it, this could not be further from truth and is ridiculous to even consider. Anyone who has used all of these programs knows how incredibly awkward blender is to use. Even moving an object around or saving a scene is a disaster so forget about cranking through shots in a studio under a deadline.
If blender was better, studios wouldn't pay thousands for licenses of other closed software. They do though, and that should tell you something. Animation studios large and small don't have money to burn but the truth is that the tools make a huge difference in productivity and blender is not even in the same league as commercial tools.
People's lives were turned upside-down and dehumanized so that we could be a better part of a global 'portfolio' of these mid-sized acquisitions turned divisions. Transfers to other divisions or retraining weren't offered.
After that, I didn't want to go back. I went to work on Apple's video stack instead. Simply put, Autodesk is inhuman, and not in a malicious sense, they just don't consider human factors.
Their old website from 1996 was WAY ahead of its time
http://web.archive.org/web/19970719164505/http://www.softima...
The way they showed things "poking" through the background really had me.
I went to school at Mesmer Animation Labs in Seattle in 1994 before 3D animation was a thing at any school...
Fond memories of SGI and the O2 as well....
Context -
You could keep the same view of your model - but you could swap between tools (the way you interacted with the model - and all your menus etc on either side by hitting the F keys.. it allowed super fluidity. Then they had nurbs and clay and all sorts or stuff... what killed them was that MAYA was better at rendering (I THINK, i may be wrong - its an old code sir, but I think it checks out))
So, anyone using Fusion 360, literally has to store the data in Autodesk cloud. There is no option to keep confidential/private data out of it (by design):
Fusion 360 is a product that crashes often, sometimes several times a day (it varies). More crashes on OSX at the moment than Windows, but YMMV.They want us to store potentially extremely valuable data in their cloud... and we're supposed to believe the server side software will be of higher quality than the client side software (which crashes).
Also worth noting, Autodesk has no bug bounty nor similar sensible way to reward disclosure of security bugs to them. They really, really don't want to know.
To me, forcing customers to keep stuff in their cloud at the same time as sticking their head in the sand re: security... that's not going to end well. :(
The points you make may be accurate but they have no bearing on the security of all our customer data stored with us. I take its confidentiality and security very seriously and I believe my co-workers do the same.
The points I made seem (to me) directly relevant to the security of customer data.
Honestly curious. :)
I'd argue that having your data on the cloud is pretty much giving away ownership. Companies don't want to do it.