Migrating from Office to Advanced license

twosk

Hello, I have several questions regarding Migrating from Office to Advanced license:

Automation & Autorun - in office i can do unlimited autoruns with Advanced license I will only be able to do 10 autoruns / year / seat ?
what does it mean Reassignment is limited for named license?
Can i try different new license versions before i buy? I am interested in point cloud functionality, but it looks like i need an upgrade. however if I upgrade there is no downgrade option if the feature will not be useful.

tonigyllenberg

To answer your questions:

Automation & Autorun - in office i can do unlimited autoruns with Advanced license I will only be able to do 10 autoruns / year / seat?

That is correct, Advanced comes with 10 Autoruns/seat/year as a starting point. Soon there will be the possibility to purchase more runs if needed.

what does it mean Reassignment is limited for named license?

This means that the license cannot be reassigned multiple times to different members throughout the organization.

Can i try different new license versions before i buy? I am interested in point cloud functionality, but it looks like i need an upgrade. however if I upgrade there is no downgrade option if the feature will not be useful.

We do have the trial possibility existing, and the correct place to turn to is [email protected].

twosk

@tonigyllenberg said in Migrating from Office to Advanced license:

That is correct, Advanced comes with 10 Autoruns/seat/year as a starting point. Soon there will be the possibility to purchase more runs if needed.

but why? its not like it uses your servers or anything. Or is this online version of autorun, different from offline version in solibri office? I used to run autorun hundred of times in testing phase.

tonigyllenberg

@twosk Thanks for raising this, I understand why it feels confusing, especially if you’re used to running Autorun frequently.

The new tiers are designed to support different stages of the BIM journey, so some features like Autorun are included in a more limited, “introductory” way in certain packages.

It’s not about server usage or a different version, it’s simply how the feature is packaged and licensed compared to Solibri Office.

twosk

does autorun have a “test” mode in which user would adjust results to their likings and only then actual autoruns for different project would count?
I think limiting tool internal automatization which uses users CPU is unfair. its like limiting how many macros can be run in autocad.

tonigyllenberg

@twosk unfortunately there is no test mode for Autorun, but in case you’re not yet a member, our beta program is open to all license holders, and runs on Premium. It’s a great place to:

Test out new features (as well as existing features)
Try the Premium features like Point Cloud support and checks
Give feedback on our product developments

_c_

@tonigyllenberg Pay-per-use is usually employed for low-cost software, not for something already at the top of the price range in its category. That’s why it feels rather unfair.

@twosk Apparently, it’s a new Nemetschek policy. In Vectorworks (also Nemetschek), I am suddenly being asked to pay to use my own extensions. Otherwise, the application closes with a message along the lines of ‘Denounce unregistered third-party products’. It’s unbelievable.
I have been developing pascal and python extensions for Vectorworks since 2005. I don’t even sell them.

In the past, Nemetschek was keen to support power users, automation and sharing, but this is no longer possible. Never mind. Back to reality: While most people don’t need advanced rule checking aside from semantics and collisions, everyone needs automation.

This aggressive “marketing strategy” makes less powerful products far more interesting, as there are no hidden costs and full automation possibilities. At least we know how much we spend.

For those who are interested, a group is also forming within the BIM-Allianz as counteract to Solibri’s new unfair licensing to implement at professional level Bonsai, an IfcOpenShell IFC-Viewer, with write and check possibilities. It will be fun, and it won’t cost us anything.

JSN

I’m not a business strategist, so I won’t pretend to know the internal math here. But the answer to most questions here and the logic behind it seems simple: You do this because you (think you) can.

As @_c_ points out, the ball is now in the customers’ side - whether this ages well or turns into another Nokia success story is something we’ll only know in hindsight. I would say stategic moves like this only work “well” when customers have nowhere else to go or a very strong believers. Imho that’s a bold bet to make on a product that’s far from perfect, built on years of user feedback that consistently lost out to marketing priorities. Suddenly shipping long-requested features at this point now, right as the upgrade decision looms, doesn’t read as customer care but as a carrot timed to close sales.

I would say the people you’re testing this on are the worst possible audience. The openBIM folkes here are the ones who’ve spent years preaching open data, interoperability and low barriers to entry. These people, as I got to know them, might rather be the ones looking for alternatives instead of accepting there aren’t any …

Speaking about our situation, we’ve spent lots of time building standards, training engineers, working on templates, and developing API based extensions to make Solibri work for our actual project workflows. Hearing rumors now that we might have to pay to run our own extensions stings. But maybe it’s the wake-up call needed for our internal decision makers to finally justify why building in-house pays off and beats buying in and getting locked out. I really hope it’s not, simply out of respect for the long-standing users and their energy, nerves and time they’ve invested in this ecosystem. If that’s the case though, then thank you for making that argument for us!

Here’s the thing though: If someone walks into my house and starts talking in a way I don’t like, I think hard about how much longer they’re welcome. If it’s an old friend, a long-term partner, I am probably well advised to listen instead what might be the reason for it … However I think there’s little to be gained from discussing this any further in this place. The real conversation has to happen elsewhere where progress is made.

Just to be clear, this isn’t (only) about the price tag and why I think people are upset. It’s also about the stakeholders who use exactly these kinds of headlines to lobby against BIM in general … “expensive”, “unpredictable”, “vendor games” … We’ve been fighting that perception for years, and moves like this hand ammunition to their side. And honestly, it’s also about feeling played, because the communication around this has been way off from the start.

We have zero problem paying good money for good products. But we’ve stuck around for years despite plenty of things that weren’t okay - not because we were trapped, naive or there was no other choice, but it felt like it’s (slowly) heading in the right direction. That perception has changed.