EAGLE License Recommendat ion

Hi James, et. Al --

I've sent a number of variations of this email over the last few days, so

let me share it and solicit people's feedback.  This is some of what

we're doing to make this model a bit more user-friendly and I want to be

clear, there is an eagerness to get this right, whilst still ensuring we

hit our objectives.  Constructive comments are welcome.

Firstly, thank you for your email and insights; it's clear that you've

thought deeply about this and I appreciate your honest, unfiltered

feedback. I've watched and responded on the various forums where I felt it

might help but the response means we can't hit every post, unfortunately.

The subscription debate is a tough one for sure, and one we didn't take

lightly, I can assure you. We toiled for some time along with the support

team and the development group to decide just when to make the move. To be

sure, it doesn't sit well right now with some folks, however let me try and

give you some context for "why?" we made the decision and what capabilities

the tools already provides (or we're working on) to ensure you have lasting

SW to work with yourdata...

Firstly, from the outset we knew we've wanted to integrate EAGLE's

capabilities with MCAD, MFG, Cutting (CAM), etc to provide something far in

excess of any 'ECAD<>MCAD' solution on the market. After all, this is a

deep part of Autodesk's history and the value we bring to the table, and

the company has been centered around 3D CAD, even when done in 2D (for

example Autocad) for 25+ years. Thus, we have been looking long and hard at

what it takes to build 'whole products' and this acquisition of an

electronics solution marks just the beginning of a process that'll take us

in some wild directions. That being said, we are working on this and will

continue, hybridizing EAGLE's schematic and PCB capabilities with an MCAD +

MFG workflow that we hope will prove second-to-none.

That being said, all of our tools are subscription and with me having been

a relatively new addition to Autodesk (I ran product at Supplyframe which

owns Hackaday and 15 years w/Altium before that), this was a decision that

was made before my time... Still, I support it. (Not just being a lemming,

I support this 100%.) The argument / debate is largely about making tools

available if/when you need them and providing a continuous stream of

updates / value that's achievable when you consistent revenue stream to

fund R&D. It's a curious model for ECAD, to be sure, however it doesn't

come without us taking a huge hit in those first few years!  (We lose

substantial annual revenue as we move customers over, as you might

imagine.) 

Now to be sure, subscription has the potential for revenue 'upside', but I

want to be 100% clear: even if I doubled EAGLE's revenue tomorrow, I

wouldn't move the Autodesk needle even ½ of 1%. At a ~$17B market cap,

EAGLE's revenue is not why we acquired it and we are not the evil overlords

come down to squeeze every last cent out of EAGLE's most loyal users (it

was my decision to make, and I wasn't focused on the incremental revenue).

What motivated the acquisition were really two things: 1) the core

capabilities on which we could build what we're endeavoring to build and 2)

the community. Now of course the latter (at least on public forums)

probably appears frustrated at the moment  I assure you, it stresses me out

too (nobody is losing more sleep than me over the change!)  but truth be

told, the vast majority of EAGLE users we not inclined to upgrade to the

latest and greatest version. Why? Perhaps because they never felt they were

getting enough value, version to version, for this to make sense?

Regardless of the reason, the bulk of EAGLE users are on v5 or v6...Not v7.

Whether we like it or not, I have to operate on the facts.

So with all of that in mind, we want a license model which aligns to the

larger Autodesk so we can integrate EAGLE (in a hard way...not a "passing

files back and forth" way) into Autodesk's larger platform, which is both

subscription and thriving.  So the question was: when to rip off the band

aid? And what could we do to make it hurt a little less.

With regard to that last item, here's what we've settled on thus far for

ensuring you have legacy SW and versions and data available to you:

1) The free version shouldn't expire and will only require a connection the

first time you open it.

2) The free version should open files of any size and layer count and allow

you to place NEW objects anywhere within the extents of the free version.

3) The free version should allow you to output files (gerber, PDF, NCDrill,

etc) of any size or layer count, regardless of the license you have.

4) Any paid license should automatically roll over to the free version

if/when your license lapses.  (working on this)

5) Every version of the free software will be made available for download

outside of the normal update system.

6) We will not own your data and will continue to publish an XML file + DTD

for all eagle file types.

7) We will expand the EAGLE API (coming soon-ish) to ensure users have

access to EAGLE's datamodel via Javascript, Node, etc., to ensure a pipe

out of EAGLE is easy to implement.

8) We will continue to make all legacy and new versions available for

download.

9) We will provide you a license of an earlier, Cadsoft version of EAGLE

with the purchase of subscription (this is as-is, with no support

implied...it will match your current tier...some work to make sure we get

this right just yet, but it's coming).

10). We'll look to build an exporter to the legacy version 6 format and

ensure, for the first time, backwards compatibility.

I know that's a mouthful but I wanted to be sure and stress that we're

trying really hard to make this work in a way that works for the user. My

background is as an engineer and I live in this community in a real way

(not as some passive marketing ***), thus I'm hoping that having built

consumer products, I'm covering many of the bases with this strategy.  (And

believe me it hurts when my friends call me out and tell me I'm squeezing

them or locking away their data or that I just dont "get" it.)  Still, I'm

sure there'll be gaps. Some are unavoidable, some perhaps just oversights

on our part.

What I'd love is if you all could, in a constructive way, look thru that

list and let me know whether you think there's more than you already knew

today (which means I needed to get onto the forums and discuss this in

greater detail) and also, what you think about some of these items as a way

forward (although perhaps suboptimal...are they meaningful?).

I really DO value your feedback and I can assure you, I'm working my tail

off to make sure we demonstrate value to users like yourself and others who

have shown such an obvious passion for the product. It's not easy to be

parsimonious and also explain the "whole" view, so this is an email I may I

have sent in various forms to different people and it's all changed a

little each time as I go thru it, just to ensure I make the salient points.

I didn't want to send a half-hearted reply widely for fear I end up under

the microscope with every troll in Trollville pushing their agenda with my

words.   But this is where we're at and I can tell you, that we will

continue with subscription as we move forward, though we are making

attempts to be concessionary and meet the community half way.

Thank you.

Best regards,

Matt

--

I solve problems.

--

EAGLE support forums at http://www.eaglecentral.ca :: Where the EAGLE community meets.

Hi James, et. Al --

I've sent a number of variations of this email over the last few days, so

let me share it and solicit people's feedback.  This is some of what

we're doing to make this model a bit more user-friendly and I want to be

clear, there is an eagerness to get this right, whilst still ensuring we

hit our objectives.  Constructive comments are welcome.

Firstly, thank you for your email and insights; it's clear that you've

thought deeply about this and I appreciate your honest, unfiltered

feedback. I've watched and responded on the various forums where I felt it

might help but the response means we can't hit every post, unfortunately.

The subscription debate is a tough one for sure, and one we didn't take

lightly, I can assure you. We toiled for some time along with the support

team and the development group to decide just when to make the move. To be

sure, it doesn't sit well right now with some folks, however let me try and

give you some context for "why?" we made the decision and what capabilities

the tools already provides (or we're working on) to ensure you have lasting

SW to work with yourdata...

Firstly, from the outset we knew we've wanted to integrate EAGLE's

capabilities with MCAD, MFG, Cutting (CAM), etc to provide something far in

excess of any 'ECAD<>MCAD' solution on the market. After all, this is a

deep part of Autodesk's history and the value we bring to the table, and

the company has been centered around 3D CAD, even when done in 2D (for

example Autocad) for 25+ years. Thus, we have been looking long and hard at

what it takes to build 'whole products' and this acquisition of an

electronics solution marks just the beginning of a process that'll take us

in some wild directions. That being said, we are working on this and will

continue, hybridizing EAGLE's schematic and PCB capabilities with an MCAD +

MFG workflow that we hope will prove second-to-none.

That being said, all of our tools are subscription and with me having been

a relatively new addition to Autodesk (I ran product at Supplyframe which

owns Hackaday and 15 years w/Altium before that), this was a decision that

was made before my time... Still, I support it. (Not just being a lemming,

I support this 100%.) The argument / debate is largely about making tools

available if/when you need them and providing a continuous stream of

updates / value that's achievable when you consistent revenue stream to

fund R&D. It's a curious model for ECAD, to be sure, however it doesn't

come without us taking a huge hit in those first few years!  (We lose

substantial annual revenue as we move customers over, as you might

imagine.) 

Now to be sure, subscription has the potential for revenue 'upside', but I

want to be 100% clear: even if I doubled EAGLE's revenue tomorrow, I

wouldn't move the Autodesk needle even ½ of 1%. At a ~$17B market cap,

EAGLE's revenue is not why we acquired it and we are not the evil overlords

come down to squeeze every last cent out of EAGLE's most loyal users (it

was my decision to make, and I wasn't focused on the incremental revenue).

What motivated the acquisition were really two things: 1) the core

capabilities on which we could build what we're endeavoring to build and 2)

the community. Now of course the latter (at least on public forums)

probably appears frustrated at the moment  I assure you, it stresses me out

too (nobody is losing more sleep than me over the change!)  but truth be

told, the vast majority of EAGLE users we not inclined to upgrade to the

latest and greatest version. Why? Perhaps because they never felt they were

getting enough value, version to version, for this to make sense?

Regardless of the reason, the bulk of EAGLE users are on v5 or v6...Not v7.

Whether we like it or not, I have to operate on the facts.

So with all of that in mind, we want a license model which aligns to the

larger Autodesk so we can integrate EAGLE (in a hard way...not a "passing

files back and forth" way) into Autodesk's larger platform, which is both

subscription and thriving.  So the question was: when to rip off the band

aid? And what could we do to make it hurt a little less.

With regard to that last item, here's what we've settled on thus far for

ensuring you have legacy SW and versions and data available to you:

1) The free version shouldn't expire and will only require a connection the

first time you open it.

2) The free version should open files of any size and layer count and allow

you to place NEW objects anywhere within the extents of the free version.

3) The free version should allow you to output files (gerber, PDF, NCDrill,

etc) of any size or layer count, regardless of the license you have.

4) Any paid license should automatically roll over to the free version

if/when your license lapses.  (working on this)

5) Every version of the free software will be made available for download

outside of the normal update system.

6) We will not own your data and will continue to publish an XML file + DTD

for all eagle file types.

7) We will expand the EAGLE API (coming soon-ish) to ensure users have

access to EAGLE's datamodel via Javascript, Node, etc., to ensure a pipe

out of EAGLE is easy to implement.

8) We will continue to make all legacy and new versions available for

download.

9) We will provide you a license of an earlier, Cadsoft version of EAGLE

with the purchase of subscription (this is as-is, with no support

implied...it will match your current tier...some work to make sure we get

this right just yet, but it's coming).

10). We'll look to build an exporter to the legacy version 6 format and

ensure, for the first time, backwards compatibility.

I know that's a mouthful but I wanted to be sure and stress that we're

trying really hard to make this work in a way that works for the user. My

background is as an engineer and I live in this community in a real way

(not as some passive marketing ***), thus I'm hoping that having built

consumer products, I'm covering many of the bases with this strategy.  (And

believe me it hurts when my friends call me out and tell me I'm squeezing

them or locking away their data or that I just dont "get" it.)  Still, I'm

sure there'll be gaps. Some are unavoidable, some perhaps just oversights

on our part.

What I'd love is if you all could, in a constructive way, look thru that

list and let me know whether you think there's more than you already knew

today (which means I needed to get onto the forums and discuss this in

greater detail) and also, what you think about some of these items as a way

forward (although perhaps suboptimal...are they meaningful?).

I really DO value your feedback and I can assure you, I'm working my tail

off to make sure we demonstrate value to users like yourself and others who

have shown such an obvious passion for the product. It's not easy to be

parsimonious and also explain the "whole" view, so this is an email I may I

have sent in various forms to different people and it's all changed a

little each time as I go thru it, just to ensure I make the salient points.

I didn't want to send a half-hearted reply widely for fear I end up under

the microscope with every troll in Trollville pushing their agenda with my

words.   But this is where we're at and I can tell you, that we will

continue with subscription as we move forward, though we are making

attempts to be concessionary and meet the community half way.

Thank you.

Best regards,

Matt

--

I solve problems.

--

EAGLE support forums at http://www.eaglecentral.ca :: Where the EAGLE community meets.

On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 21:55:00 -0800, Matt Berggren

<technolomaniac@gmail.com> wrote:

Firstly, from the outset we knew we've wanted to integrate EAGLE's

capabilities with MCAD, MFG, Cutting (CAM), etc to provide something far in

excess of any 'ECAD<>MCAD' solution on the market. After all, this is a

deep part of Autodesk's history and the value we bring to the table, and

the company has been centered around 3D CAD, even when done in 2D (for

example Autocad) for 25+ years. Thus, we have been looking long and hard at

what it takes to build 'whole products' and this acquisition of an

electronics solution marks just the beginning of a process that'll take us

in some wild directions. That being said, we are working on this and will

continue, hybridizing EAGLE's schematic and PCB capabilities with an MCAD +

MFG workflow that we hope will prove second-to-none.

Matt,

Has it occurred to you that there is a significant percentage of the

Eagle user base that simply doesn't want all that complexity and cost?

I suspect I'm close to typical.  I run a 4 person (variable number of

contractors too) manufacturing company that manufactures induction

heaters.  We introduced our first product, the Roy induction heater in

2009 and that's when we bought Eagle.  I've kept it up to date until

now.

I do all the design work except for some mechanical work that I hire a

contractor for.  Our needs are minimal and for that we use QCAD.  It's

closed source but it runs on Linux and its native file format is DXF.

To me there seems to be an obvious solution to this problem.  Keep

Eagle as a stand-alone product just like it was and at the same time

incorporate it into you complex and expensive product.  Backfit

stand-alone Eagle with applicable significant new features as you

develop them for the integrated product.

In this manner you can service both the small user who doesn't want

and/or can't afford the complexity of your integrated product and you

can service your traditional customer base with the integrated

product.

I know that AutoDesk has gotten so large that it doesn't have to give

a sh*t about what us small customers want.  We small companies can't

be that way.  If a customer will pay the price, I will incorporate a

special feature into even an old board, spin a few and modify the

firmware accordingly.

The design files are under source code control so I can go back and

fetch the design files with little effort.  I keep every version of

Eagle on our machines so it's simply a matter of firing it up and

making the mods.

To protect against old versions not running on an upgraded OS, I have

a large gun safe in the building's basement.  Inside are laptops

loaded with the environment it takes to run the old versions.  Thus if

Canonical makes changes to Ubuntu that break old versions, I can still

use the laptop to make the changes.

Your current scheme of renting new versions breaks this method of

operation.  Thus if you continue on your current path, I much change

packages.  KiCAD is my choice.

Understand that I don't WANT to change.  I'd like to continue in my

current familiar work environment.  But you're currently forcing my

hand.

Why don't you give my proposal consideration and then adopt it?  That

way everyone would be happy.

John

John DeArmond

http://www.neon-john.com

http://www.tnduction.com

Tellico Plains, Occupied TN

See website for email address

technolomaniac wrote on Tue, 31 January 2017 00:54

What motivated the acquisition were really two things: 1) the core

capabilities on which we could build what we're endeavoring to build and

2) the community. Now of course the latter (at least on public forums)

probably appears frustrated at the moment  I assure you, it stresses me

out too (nobody is losing more sleep than me over the change!)  but truth

be told, the vast majority of EAGLE users we not inclined to upgrade to

the latest and greatest version. Why? Perhaps because they never felt

they were getting enough value, version to version, for this to make

sense?  Regardless of the reason, the bulk of EAGLE users are on v5 or

v6...Not v7.  Whether we like it or not, I have to operate on the facts.

Matt,

This argument that not enough users had upgraded to v7 is hugely

frustrating to hear.

Version 7 offered incredibly poor incentive to upgrade for existing users.

I mean seriously, so little. And I say this as someone who did upgrade and

has been using it!

Given that most designs don't realistically allow use of the full

autorouter and that the hierarchical design feature was far too basic and

restrictive to offer much (again, as someone who determinedly uses this

feature!) why exactly would people upgrade to v7?

You've spoken about the exciting features you're planning to add to Eagle

moving forward - if they're truly worthwhile, people will upgrade for them

regardless of whether or not they're on subscription.

technolomaniac wrote on Tue, 31 January 2017 00:54

we are not the evil overlords come down to squeeze every last cent out

of EAGLE's most loyal users (it was my decision to make, and I wasn't

focused on the incremental revenue).

This is very interesting to hear, since I assumed that it was a decision

forced on you by Autodesk. Clearly not.

Matt, I'd really like to hear a response to James Morrsion's proposal that

a perpetual license be available in some form in addition to subscription.

I mean, I'm trying to give you money here, and you're making it impossible.

It's crazy.

--

EAGLE support forums at http://www.eaglecentral.ca :: Where the EAGLE community meets.

technolomaniac wrote on Tue, 31 January 2017 05:54

Hi James, et. Al --

 

I've sent a number of variations of this email over the last few days,

so let me share it and solicit people's feedback.  This is some of what

we're doing to make this model a bit more user-friendly and I want to be

clear, there is an eagerness to get this right, whilst still ensuring we

hit our objectives.  Constructive comments are welcome.

 

Firstly, thank you for your email and insights; it's clear that you've

thought deeply about this and I appreciate your honest, unfiltered

feedback. I've watched and responded on the various forums where I felt

it might help but the response means we can't hit every post,

unfortunately.

 

The subscription debate is a tough one for sure, and one we didn't take

lightly, I can assure you. We toiled for some time along with the support

team and the development group to decide just when to make the move. To

be sure, it doesn't sit well right now with some folks, however let me

try and give you some context for "why?" we made the decision and what

capabilities the tools already provides (or we're working on) to ensure

you have lasting SW to work with yourdata...

 

Firstly, from the outset we knew we've wanted to integrate EAGLE's

capabilities with MCAD, MFG, Cutting (CAM), etc to provide something far

in excess of any 'ECAD<>MCAD' solution on the market. After all, this is

a deep part of Autodesk's history and the value we bring to the table,

and the company has been centered around 3D CAD, even when done in 2D

(for example Autocad) for 25+ years. Thus, we have been looking long and

hard at what it takes to build 'whole products' and this acquisition of

an electronics solution marks just the beginning of a process that'll

take us in some wild directions. That being said, we are working on this

and will continue, hybridizing EAGLE's schematic and PCB capabilities

with an MCAD + MFG workflow that we hope will prove second-to-none.

 

That being said, all of our tools are subscription and with me having

been a relatively new addition to Autodesk (I ran product at Supplyframe

which owns Hackaday and 15 years w/Altium before that), this was a

decision that was made before my time... Still, I support it. (Not just

being a lemming, I support this 100%.) The argument / debate is largely

about making tools available if/when you need them and providing a

continuous stream of updates / value that's achievable when you

consistent revenue stream to fund R&D. It's a curious model for ECAD, to

be sure, however it doesn't come without us taking a huge hit in those

first few years!  (We lose substantial annual revenue as we move

customers over, as you might imagine.) 

 

Now to be sure, subscription has the potential for revenue 'upside',

but I want to be 100% clear: even if I doubled EAGLE's revenue tomorrow,

I wouldn't move the Autodesk needle even ½ of 1%. At a ~$17B market cap,

EAGLE's revenue is not why we acquired it and we are not the evil

overlords come down to squeeze every last cent out of EAGLE's most loyal

users (it was my decision to make, and I wasn't focused on the

incremental revenue).

 

What motivated the acquisition were really two things: 1) the core

capabilities on which we could build what we're endeavoring to build and

2) the community. Now of course the latter (at least on public forums)

probably appears frustrated at the moment  I assure you, it stresses me

out too (nobody is losing more sleep than me over the change!)  but truth

be told, the vast majority of EAGLE users we not inclined to upgrade to

the latest and greatest version. Why? Perhaps because they never felt

they were getting enough value, version to version, for this to make

sense?  Regardless of the reason, the bulk of EAGLE users are on v5 or

v6...Not v7.  Whether we like it or not, I have to operate on the facts.

 

So with all of that in mind, we want a license model which aligns to

the larger Autodesk so we can integrate EAGLE (in a hard way...not a

"passing files back and forth" way) into Autodesk's larger platform,

which is both subscription and thriving.  So the question was: when to

rip off the band aid? And what could we do to make it hurt a little

less.

 

With regard to that last item, here's what we've settled on thus far

for ensuring you have legacy SW and versions and data available to you:

 

1) The free version shouldn't expire and will only require a connection

the first time you open it.

2) The free version should open files of any size and layer count and

allow you to place NEW objects anywhere within the extents of the free

version.

3) The free version should allow you to output files (gerber, PDF,

NCDrill, etc) of any size or layer count, regardless of the license you

have.

4) Any paid license should automatically roll over to the free version

if/when your license lapses.  (working on this)

5) Every version of the free software will be made available for

download outside of the normal update system.

6) We will not own your data and will continue to publish an XML file +

DTD for all eagle file types.

7) We will expand the EAGLE API (coming soon-ish) to ensure users have

access to EAGLE's datamodel via Javascript, Node, etc., to ensure a pipe

out of EAGLE is easy to implement.

8) We will continue to make all legacy and new versions available for

download.

9) We will provide you a license of an earlier, Cadsoft version of

EAGLE with the purchase of subscription (this is as-is, with no support

implied...it will match your current tier...some work to make sure we get

this right just yet, but it's coming).

10). We'll look to build an exporter to the legacy version 6 format and

ensure, for the first time, backwards compatibility.

 

I know that's a mouthful but I wanted to be sure and stress that we're

trying really hard to make this work in a way that works for the user. My

background is as an engineer and I live in this community in a real way

(not as some passive marketing ***), thus I'm hoping that having

built consumer products, I'm covering many of the bases with this

strategy.  (And believe me it hurts when my friends call me out and tell

me I'm squeezing them or locking away their data or that I just dont

"get" it.)  Still, I'm sure there'll be gaps. Some are unavoidable, some

perhaps just oversights on our part.

 

What I'd love is if you all could, in a constructive way, look thru

that list and let me know whether you think there's more than you already

knew today (which means I needed to get onto the forums and discuss this

in greater detail) and also, what you think about some of these items as

a way forward (although perhaps suboptimal...are they meaningful?).

 

I really DO value your feedback and I can assure you, I'm working my

tail off to make sure we demonstrate value to users like yourself and

others who have shown such an obvious passion for the product. It's not

easy to be parsimonious and also explain the "whole" view, so this is an

email I may I have sent in various forms to different people and it's all

changed a little each time as I go thru it, just to ensure I make the

salient points.

 

I didn't want to send a half-hearted reply widely for fear I end up

under the microscope with every troll in Trollville pushing their agenda

with my words.   But this is where we're at and I can tell you, that we

will continue with subscription as we move forward, though we are making

attempts to be concessionary and meet the community half way.

Thanks Matt,  I appreciate the full response.  It's obviously nuanced with

a lot of considerations on many sides.

And sorry for the delay.  I've been a bit busy, plus I wanted to make sure

that I digested what you were trying to say.

No one is saying that EAGLE shouldn't charge money for using the software,

we all recognize the link that there should be between revenue and future

development.  However, this is now the second major revision that has been

released where the large majority of design effort has been into licensing

schemes that add zero value to the user.  Sure, they may have import to

the Farnell/Autodesk.  But the company exists to serve its customers, not

the other way around.

I'm not interested in "access to EAGLE's datamodel via Javascript, Node,

etc, ...".  Maybe others are and maybe this is the piping you need to

integrate with your MCAD tools in Autodesk.  But this is piping, not

features.

Instead of going through your response line by line, let me enumerate some

requirements for professional use of EAGLE and then I'll see how your

suggestion stacks up.  These are situations that I don't think were

addressed before:

A. Work with Multiple Versions of EAGLE at the Same Time

This is an absolute must for a design bureau:  The main issues here:

1) license requirements that a user delete previous versions of EAGLE

within a certain number of days

2) being able to service customers with various versions of EAGLE

And for background, it must be understood that CAD professionals don't just

upgrade their tools for the latest version without a lot of consideration

and testing.  While new versions may mean new functionality, they also are

a risk for new bugs.  And unknown bugs cost professionals money and time

when boards don't come in and work like they are supposed to.

That goes for the version that a design bureau would use internally.  It

also goes applies to clients, who often go through their own internal

version of the same decision.  Clients can also have other tools and

processes built around particular versions of EAGLE and just jumping to a

new version of EAGLE can sometimes break those.

ANALYSIS:

I don't see anything in your response that addresses the license terms that

we need to delete older versions of EAGLE.  You have stated in another post

that this wouldn't effect any versions before V8 (though I'm not sure that

is true since Autodesk bought CadSoft and likely acquired all their assets

and liabilities too, so while you say it doesn't apply I'm not sure

Autodesk lawyers would agree, especially when Autodesk accountants discover

how many licenses this might apply to if no one upgrades to V8).

The ability to save out in older formats is helpful and a feature I have

advocated for over a decade.

B. Guarantee Being Able to Edit My Data in Native Version of EAGLE a Decade

or Two in the Future

If I have to make a change to a real system in the future I need to be able

to do it with the exact version of EAGLE that it was made with e.g. V6.5,

V8.1, etc.

If I have to load the data into a different version of EAGLE then we have

the introduction of potential sources of error:

1) bug in converting data file from old version to new version

2) bug in new program effecting any part of the design (polygons fill

differently, ends of copper wires have different shapes, more/less

resolution on unit conversion, ....).

3) but in new program in generating output files

When you're dealing with a very old design, there is a lot of detail that

you no longer have in the short-term memory.  So you want to make sure that

only what you intend to change changes.  Using a different version of

software introduces other variables and the more variables you have the

more work it is to do this and to verify the design.  And the more

time/cost it takes to do the job.

And remember, we design safety critical systems with EAGLE.  This is no

toy, it is used for Professional work.  So this needs to be taken

seriously.

ANALYSIS:

I don't see anything in your statement that addresses this directly.  We

have the issue of deleting previous versions along with reliance on

internet connection to Autodesk servers that have no obligations to

continue to operate.

C. Running EAGLE No Matter What Externally Goes Wrong

This is basically the issue around EAGLE stopping to work after 14 days if

it can't call home.  Here is a list of things that could keep me from being

able to use EAGLE:

copper communication line gets cut to my house, I live in the country,

there aren't many other optionsDDOS attack on my ISP, internet is

downcorporate firewall blocks EAGLEAutodesk decides that EAGLE isn't

profitable and maintaining server is losing money, so they shut it downmy

country (say China) decides that my packets can't leave country to

Autodesk's serversI'm in a location with no internet access (secure

facility, wilderness, ...)....

Some of the things above could be temporary, but not necessarily. The point

is, I have to be able to work no matter what happens.  There are simply too

many things that can go wrong and cut me off from using EAGLE V8

currently.

ANALYSIS:  I don't see anything here that addresses this directly.  I

suppose being able to save out in old version and then load it up could

work.  But V8 has already created a structure that isn't backward

compatible with the reusable modules, and I expect more of this in the

future.  So there doesn't seem to be any way you can guarantee that this

method would be error-free and wouldn't just end up causing me more work.

My experience with this is that it might work for the most simple case, but

boards I design are rarely the simple case.

You've also suggesting to maintain the persistent license model for (older

versions of) EAGLE in PARALLEL with the new subscription model!  I thought

the old system was inefficient and cost lots of support turmoil--now you

have all of that and the subscription issues.

D. Working within the Legal License Constraints

Any professional design house wants to be using legally licensed software.

At least around here, the cost of getting caught with pirated software is

high.  There are many reasons for wanting to be legit, having support being

probably number one on that list.

This argument that you can somehow fall back to the free, non-commercial

licence in the future is non-sense.  By saying that, you are essentially

condoning using EAGLE outside of the legal terms.  If someone is going to

do that (on your recommendation) then they might as well just crack EAGLE

Ultimate and be done with it.  Both are outside of using EAGLE according

the license.  So why pay ever.

This is a nonsense argument and I'm surprised it hasn't been detected by

your team of lawyers.

ANALYSIS:

This is a fail.

The suggestion to use the Free, non-commercial license is laughable for any

business.  You are asking us to use your software illegally.

CONCLUSION:

I don't see anything here that allows a professional organisation any sort

of comfort with the licensing model.  There have been some small steps made

but the root problems are still in place.

Autodesk has made the same mistake that Farnell did:  They pushed out a

major licensing change without actually asking the people who would have to

pay for it.

I have used EAGLE for 2 decades and distributed EAGLE for one decade, so I

know the market.  Would it really have hurt Autodesk to reach out to a few

of us in the EAGLE community to consult to make sure you got it right?  Ed

and Jorge could have given you 5-10 contacts right off the top of their

heads.  I learned about Farnell's license attempt the day it came out (even

as a distributor I didn't get any advanced notice) and I told them that day

that it was going to be a fail.  At least Farnell had the sense to back

down and revert.

I'm not saying that Autodesk has to revert to exactly the way things

were.  BUT THE ISSUES ABOVE ARE REAL and no amount of hand waving or "trust

us" is going to make them go away.  Many, many businesses that make money

using EAGLE are not going to commit to this sort of scheme.

New Proposal

You didn't specifically address why my initial proposal wouldn't work.

Having some time to contemplate, I realize one deficiency from Autodesk's

point of view:  With my previous recommendation, one could purchase a one

month subscription, terminate the subscription, and then get lifetime use

of that software forever.  So obviously that is likely not looked upon

favourably by Autodesk, though I'd wish they'd just come out and say that.

If someone purchases a two-year license they get a perpetual license.  When

their two-years are up, if they continue to subscribe (monthly) they

continue to get updates and support.  If they choose to not subscribe then

the lose both updates and support but the version of EAGLE that was

licensed when they discontinued the subscription will work as a perpetual

license.

Not being connected to the internet would be considered the same thing as

not subscribing.  So for the first 2 years you would not need to connect

and EAGLE would continue to work fine.  After the two years, if

subscription is dropped then the perpetual license kicks in, no need to

connect then either.  You would only need to connect to update and reset

the latest version of EAGLE that your perpetual license would pertain to.

This is good for Autodesk:

- 24 month subscription is better than 1 month -- guaranteed money

- 24 months to get enough new functionality to convince customer to go to

monthly subscription

(As an aside, please don't tell me how monthly subscription money is better

than a lump sum.  If Autodesk can't figure out how to take a lump sum in

one pocket and hand it out internally as if it was a subscription then

maybe they should just get out of business altogether.  Plus you get

interest on that money, so it's even better.)

This is good for customer

- guaranteed, native access to edit data forever with a legit license in

the native, specific version of EAGLE

- being able to walk away after 2 years means that Autodesk has to actually

work to convince you to shell out more money in the future (see last 3+

years where there really wasn't any particular reason to upgrade for most

people)

- it solves all the issues I outline above

You've already committed to a perpetual license in some cases, so this

proposal is the best of both worlds I think.  I don't think there is any

value in creating a system to license V7--that seems like wasted work.

Anyone who wants V7 already has it and new people aren't going to think

that is much of a value, especially as the functionality and compatibility

begins to separate.

I look forward to your response.  If this proposal isn't acceptable, I'd

like to hear why.  I think this is a great "half way" to address the

issues that Autodesk has stated and maintain a usable licensing scheme for

its customers.

Cheers,

James.

--

James Morrison  ~~~  Stratford Digital

http://www.stratforddigital.ca

--

EAGLE support forums at http://www.eaglecentral.ca :: Where the EAGLE community meets.

On 31.01.2017 06:55, Matt Berggren wrote:

Hi James, et. Al --

 

I've sent a number of variations of this email over the last few days, so

let me share it and solicit people's feedback.  This is some of what

we're doing to make this model a bit more user-friendly and I want to be

clear, there is an eagerness to get this right, whilst still ensuring we

hit our objectives.  Constructive comments are welcome.

 

Firstly, thank you for your email and insights; it's clear that you've

thought deeply about this and I appreciate your honest, unfiltered

feedback. I've watched and responded on the various forums where I felt it

might help but the response means we can't hit every post, unfortunately.

The subscription debate is a tough one for sure, and one we didn't take

lightly, I can assure you. We toiled for some time along with the support

team and the development group to decide just when to make the move. To be

sure, it doesn't sit well right now with some folks, however let me try and

give you some context for "why?" we made the decision and what capabilities

the tools already provides (or we're working on) to ensure you have lasting

SW to work with yourdata...

 

Firstly, from the outset we knew we've wanted to integrate EAGLE's

capabilities with MCAD, MFG, Cutting (CAM), etc to provide something far in

excess of any 'ECAD<>MCAD' solution on the market. After all, this is a

deep part of Autodesk's history and the value we bring to the table, and

the company has been centered around 3D CAD, even when done in 2D (for

example Autocad) for 25+ years. Thus, we have been looking long and hard at

what it takes to build 'whole products' and this acquisition of an

electronics solution marks just the beginning of a process that'll take us

in some wild directions. That being said, we are working on this and will

continue, hybridizing EAGLE's schematic and PCB capabilities with an MCAD +

MFG workflow that we hope will prove second-to-none.

That being said, all of our tools are subscription and with me having been

a relatively new addition to Autodesk (I ran product at Supplyframe which

owns Hackaday and 15 years w/Altium before that), this was a decision that

was made before my time... Still, I support it. (Not just being a lemming,

I support this 100%.) The argument / debate is largely about making tools

available if/when you need them and providing a continuous stream of

updates / value that's achievable when you consistent revenue stream to

fund R&D. It's a curious model for ECAD, to be sure, however it doesn't

come without us taking a huge hit in those first few years!  (We lose

substantial annual revenue as we move customers over, as you might

imagine.)

Now to be sure, subscription has the potential for revenue 'upside', but I

want to be 100% clear: even if I doubled EAGLE's revenue tomorrow, I

wouldn't move the Autodesk needle even ½ of 1%. At a ~$17B market cap,

EAGLE's revenue is not why we acquired it and we are not the evil overlords

come down to squeeze every last cent out of EAGLE's most loyal users (it

was my decision to make, and I wasn't focused on the incremental revenue).

 

 

What motivated the acquisition were really two things: 1) the core

capabilities on which we could build what we're endeavoring to build and 2)

the community. Now of course the latter (at least on public forums)

probably appears frustrated at the moment  I assure you, it stresses me out

too (nobody is losing more sleep than me over the change!)  but truth be

told, the vast majority of EAGLE users we not inclined to upgrade to the

latest and greatest version. Why? Perhaps because they never felt they were

getting enough value, version to version, for this to make sense?

Regardless of the reason, the bulk of EAGLE users are on v5 or v6...Not v7.

Whether we like it or not, I have to operate on the facts.

 

So with all of that in mind, we want a license model which aligns to the

larger Autodesk so we can integrate EAGLE (in a hard way...not a "passing

files back and forth" way) into Autodesk's larger platform, which is both

subscription and thriving.  So the question was: when to rip off the band

aid? And what could we do to make it hurt a little less.

 

With regard to that last item, here's what we've settled on thus far for

ensuring you have legacy SW and versions and data available to you:

 

1) The free version shouldn't expire and will only require a connection the

first time you open it.

2) The free version should open files of any size and layer count and allow

you to place NEW objects anywhere within the extents of the free version.

3) The free version should allow you to output files (gerber, PDF, NCDrill,

etc) of any size or layer count, regardless of the license you have.

4) Any paid license should automatically roll over to the free version

if/when your license lapses.  (working on this)

5) Every version of the free software will be made available for download

outside of the normal update system.

6) We will not own your data and will continue to publish an XML file + DTD

for all eagle file types.

7) We will expand the EAGLE API (coming soon-ish) to ensure users have

access to EAGLE's datamodel via Javascript, Node, etc., to ensure a pipe

out of EAGLE is easy to implement. 8) We will continue to make all

legacy and new versions available for

download.

9) We will provide you a license of an earlier, Cadsoft version of EAGLE

with the purchase of subscription (this is as-is, with no support

implied...it will match your current tier...some work to make sure we get

this right just yet, but it's coming).

10). We'll look to build an exporter to the legacy version 6 format and

ensure, for the first time, backwards compatibility.

I know that's a mouthful but I wanted to be sure and stress that we're

trying really hard to make this work in a way that works for the user. My

background is as an engineer and I live in this community in a real way

(not as some passive marketing ***), thus I'm hoping that having built

consumer products, I'm covering many of the bases with this strategy.  (And

believe me it hurts when my friends call me out and tell me I'm squeezing

them or locking away their data or that I just dont "get" it.)  Still, I'm

sure there'll be gaps. Some are unavoidable, some perhaps just oversights

on our part.

What I'd love is if you all could, in a constructive way, look thru that

list and let me know whether you think there's more than you already knew

today (which means I needed to get onto the forums and discuss this in

greater detail) and also, what you think about some of these items as a way

forward (although perhaps suboptimal...are they meaningful?).

 

I really DO value your feedback and I can assure you, I'm working my tail

off to make sure we demonstrate value to users like yourself and others who

have shown such an obvious passion for the product. It's not easy to be

parsimonious and also explain the "whole" view, so this is an email I may I

have sent in various forms to different people and it's all changed a

little each time as I go thru it, just to ensure I make the salient points.

 

 

I didn't want to send a half-hearted reply widely for fear I end up under

the microscope with every troll in Trollville pushing their agenda with my

words.   But this is where we're at and I can tell you, that we will

continue with subscription as we move forward, though we are making

attempts to be concessionary and meet the community half way.

 

Thank you.

 

Best regards,

 

Matt

Hi Matt

I have a suggestion for you to consider.

Can you please make an offline option to validate licenses by giving out

some key that can be typed in? This could happen on a remote pc and the

key could be passed by a phone either as voice or text message, or even

on a post-it note.

It would also be nice if a customer could call your support desk and ask

for this code in case all your friends or colleagues are at sleep when

you need it.

Taking the online requirement out of the equation will add some comfort imo.

Hi Matt,

This can not be, after expiring the license period that the software will falling down to a free version.
The free version is a toy for children, for playing with this at school.

I have a small company and I need to work with professional tools.
We are a development house and work in contract with our customers.
After expiration of the license period, the update must be terminated and the software must work with the last full version.

And!!!
How often does AutoDesk update the tool over time?
once twice? Or more? Usually once a month?
Then the price would be ok, about 500, - EUR per year (but NOT, if only one update per year appears!).

Anything else would be a corruption of the given agreement.

Yes, I know about companies that extend time, depending on gameplay and promises ...
Lobbyism is a contemptuous game of liars.

I know about AutoDesk in the story.
I have come from the PCAD area since 1985.
In history, this was a debacle with the hardware dongles.
Now we have a debacle with the software dongles.
Today, the dongle is called "subscription".
And we have to connect the "AutoDesk dongle" over all other dongles.
Yes! At that time, the hardware dongle of AutoCad did not work properly if this was not the first on the COM port.

At that time, the business unit was separated and everyone was able to decide which product was best for their projects.

Today, a giant company delivers everything and, moreover, completely overpriced, with some "logical" explanations..
"Eat, or die!" ... It has the monopoly.

Statement:
1) with the free version, we can not create parts with all layers.
Some parts are simple, but some are so complex that we need more layers.
Some parts may be larger than the circuit board area of about 80 cm 2.
Some parts can be mounted in the middle layers, e.g. Heatpipes or cooling devices or mounting devices.
Some parts can be used in HF ranges. So you need shielding or specific contours.
And so on ...
This is the minimum of the PCB standard. -> All layers with the! Standard board!
Once again - I do not think about a toy version of PCB, I think about minimum standards.

2) Dimension:
Now we have all the other facial areas we can see.
What is standard? - for you, for me, for the others?

AutoDesk is a global player (your dimension) that has billions of dollars of profit.
I am just an engineer (my dimension)  who lives in a small area, in a small town with about 1.5 million inhabitants.
And I struggle every day to get projects for my small company in this city.
I am not a global player.
Of course, I also work hard with the contract with my clients, the companies are much bigger than mine.
I can not sleep like you! I do not believe you can not sleep well.

Now, what is standard? - Standard is what we define together. -> ISO Agreement.

With the Eagle 6 the standard was a circuit board with 160x100 with up to 6 layers.
Now!!?? Realize this please - now it is 160x100 with only two layers.
Impressive! This is a step back, no step forward, in version 8 !!!! "Uff ..."
I had to wait with my version 6.6.0 Professional license for a serious upgrade, surpassed version 7.
Because this version was a disaster, now hoping that the version 8 brings an absolutely good upgrade.
Nothing! "Buh" nothing. All of them can be found in version 6, merging into version 7.5.0.
And the top, all manuals are only available in version 7 with the Eagle 8.

Who then sorted the symbols in the sch also in the pcb?
The group button is the first button, top left, on the right side I see the move button.
The Group button is always activated after you stop an action (for example, other work, such as routing).
What is the theater?
Also, I found out that version 8 is also a bug; At the beginning. - ok, I also found some goodies.

My suggestion:

- Standard dimension, routing range:
16m² (4mx4m) is too much for mostly projects. And we have to pay for it, but we never use it.
Wow, realize these :: 16sqm .... a panel, or wall. 4 m high and 4 m wide and 1.6 mm thick.
Then forward the device, then mount the devices to the board. Keep up. Mount on one or two sides?
- sorry, how can this handle easy? - because Eagles name is "easy to use cad software".
16sqm ... you can also be 6m long, 2.5m wide, or other what you want.
Well, most users or companies work with smaller PCB than 16sqm.

If you have a standard PCB area that can be mounted in a 19 "housing I can feel happy.
For example. Backplane, 2HE, 3HE or equal.

I can live with a PCB standard up to 2sqm, but with all layers.
We need layers!
! Most CAD software have this dimension as standard. !
Or a 4sqm circuit board, a 1/4 between the 16sqm as per unit.
With these steps you can have two or three categories.

What I will say - 16sqm can be divided into smaller units of the cost category.
A panel with 2sqm or 4sqm can be handled more easily than a 16sqm panel.

- Free Version; Toy Version:
A EURO card. => 160x100 with up to 4 layers.
With this version, every user can work as "fast and dirty".

- !! A fair license policy. If the period has expired, then the last valid update version must work 100%.

I have no problem agreeing to pay a yearly subscription and pay annually,

but we must not be treated as stupid and punished by reducing the quality to a toy.

Otherwise, I can not comply with my agreements.
For me this can mean closing my company because then my clients go away with the argument "buy a qualitative product".

What happens if I am on holiday and can not work with Eagle for over 30 days?
What happens if the CAD-PCs are connected to the LAN but can never be connected to the Internet?
There are many companies where the PCs are installed in the safer area.
Yes, because of plant espionage these PCs may never reach the Internet.
Have you already thought about it?

Yes, this is a complex issue.
!!! AutoDesk can not decide and should not decide !!!

We are now living in the 21st century, not in the Middle Ages. - So - please apply a standard today.
I do not know a company that resets their products after the end of the period to a toy version !!!
That's cheating! To the customer. It is a real paternal and childish.
I have no problem with current agreements, but the already achieved standard has to be adhered to.
Best to be improved for loyal customers.

I'm with you with agreements, yes, but I work for my company, not for AutoDesk.
I would be delighted if Cadsoft, ups AutoDesk, thinks about people working together, not machines.
All must live, even survive.
With reason you can achieve much more than just the argument "" money "".

Best Regards,

Gerald

---

technolomaniac wrote on Tue, 31 January 2017 00:54

9) We will provide you a license of an earlier, Cadsoft version of

EAGLE with the purchase of subscription (this is as-is, with no support

implied...it will match your current tier...some work to make sure we get

this right just yet, but it's coming).

Will this be a perpetual license like version 7 is now?  Or, do you mean I

would have to rent your regular newer Eagle, and then I get the right to

run version 7 only as long as I keep paying the subscription?

On a different but related topic, is version 7 still available today as a

perpetual license for a one-time fixed cost?

--

EAGLE support forums at http://www.eaglecentral.ca :: Where the EAGLE community meets.

Be it open source or proprietary software, be it a perfect tool free of

flaws or missing features, or an old-fashioned cumbersome piece of code;

doing designs on which my reputation, my income and my clients depend

and for which I must be able to answer for / modify them in a decade

from now;

for this I do need tools I own and I can continue to use unchanged, or

backup and reinstall, or freeze together with the design data (and OS

and machine if necessary), indefinitely and without any reliance on the

support / goodwill / future payment / bare existence of outside parties.

So, renting such software is unacceptable for me.  Period.

So, I will keep the existing perpetual Eagle V7 licenses (regretting the

money spent for the upgrade from V6) and go looking for a suitable

replacement over the next 1-2 years.  I'm sorry about Eagle, liked and

used it for decades, but such is life.

Hans

Am 31.01.2017 um 06:55 schrieb Matt Berggren:

That being said, all of our tools are subscription ...

..., this was a decision that

was made before my time... Still, I support it.

So, by saying "it's not going subscription" you were intentionally

misleading us, you already knew the opposite?

THANK YOU VERY MUCH!

On 31.01.2017 06:55, Matt Berggren wrote:

1) The free version shouldn't expire and will only require a connection the

first time you open it.

It would be a start if it doesn't need to connect to internet at all.

It's a big no-no for many users. You can gather download statistics by

making it obligatory to fill in a form on the webpage before one can

download the installer.

2) The free version should open files of any size and layer count and allow

you to place NEW objects anywhere within the extents of the free version.

If that aimes on "maintanance" of existing projects, you can bet the

change to be made to the PCB is in the corner that is not covered in the

"free" routing area. How about layer restriction.

I guess this is of no help.

3) The free version should allow you to output files (gerber, PDF, NCDrill,

etc) of any size or layer count, regardless of the license you have.

Thats what it did all the time, so no big news.

4) Any paid license should automatically roll over to the free version

if/when your license lapses.  (working on this)

Ok. Still say licenses should not expire, but I guess the promise you

made half year ago regarding perpetual licenses is void anyhow.

5) Every version of the free software will be made available for download

outside of the normal update system.

Was like this before, so also no big news.

6) We will not own your data and will continue to publish an XML file + DTD

for all eagle file types.

Was like this since V6 I guess, so also doesn't impress me much.

7) We will expand the EAGLE API (coming soon-ish) to ensure users have

access to EAGLE's datamodel via Javascript, Node, etc., to ensure a pipe

out of EAGLE is easy to implement.

I guess adding some features to the ULP will be enough. You should

rather work on more important features like a push and shove router and

online DRC checking which is asked for since years...

8) We will continue to make all

legacy and new versions available for

download.

I guess that is the same as number 5)

9) We will provide you a license of an earlier, Cadsoft version of EAGLE

with the purchase of subscription (this is as-is, with no support

implied...it will match your current tier...some work to make sure we get

this right just yet, but it's coming).

Let me get this straight: That means if I get a one month subscription I

get a perpetual license for V7.7 of the same feature set for free? I

guess you just won 10000 new EAGLE V7.7 users.

10). We'll look to build an exporter to the legacy version 6 format and

ensure, for the first time, backwards compatibility.

Sounds great, especially regarding 9)

Markus

Matt Berggren wrote:

Hi James, et. Al --

 

I've sent a number of variations of this email over the last few days, so

let me share it and solicit people's feedback.  This is some of what

we're doing to make this model a bit more user-friendly and I want to be

clear, there is an eagerness to get this right, whilst still ensuring we

hit our objectives.  Constructive comments are welcome.

 

Firstly, thank you for your email and insights; it's clear that you've

thought deeply about this and I appreciate your honest, unfiltered

feedback. I've watched and responded on the various forums where I felt it

might help but the response means we can't hit every post, unfortunately.

 

The subscription debate is a tough one for sure, and one we didn't take

lightly, I can assure you. We toiled for some time along with the support

team and the development group to decide just when to make the move. To be

sure, it doesn't sit well right now with some folks, however let me try

and give you some context for "why?" we made the decision and what

capabilities the tools already provides (or we're working on) to ensure

you have lasting SW to work with yourdata...

 

Firstly, from the outset we knew we've wanted to integrate EAGLE's

capabilities with MCAD, MFG, Cutting (CAM), etc to provide something far

in excess of any 'ECAD<>MCAD' solution on the market. After all, this is a

deep part of Autodesk's history and the value we bring to the table, and

the company has been centered around 3D CAD, even when done in 2D (for

example Autocad) for 25+ years. Thus, we have been looking long and hard

at what it takes to build 'whole products' and this acquisition of an

electronics solution marks just the beginning of a process that'll take us

in some wild directions. That being said, we are working on this and will

continue, hybridizing EAGLE's schematic and PCB capabilities with an MCAD

+ MFG workflow that we hope will prove second-to-none.

 

That being said, all of our tools are subscription and with me having been

a relatively new addition to Autodesk (I ran product at Supplyframe which

owns Hackaday and 15 years w/Altium before that), this was a decision that

was made before my time... Still, I support it. (Not just being a lemming,

I support this 100%.) The argument / debate is largely about making tools

available if/when you need them and providing a continuous stream of

updates / value that's achievable when you consistent revenue stream to

fund R&D. It's a curious model for ECAD, to be sure, however it doesn't

come without us taking a huge hit in those first few years!  (We lose

substantial annual revenue as we move customers over, as you might

imagine.)

 

Now to be sure, subscription has the potential for revenue 'upside', but I

want to be 100% clear: even if I doubled EAGLE's revenue tomorrow, I

wouldn't move the Autodesk needle even ½ of 1%. At a ~$17B market cap,

EAGLE's revenue is not why we acquired it and we are not the evil

overlords come down to squeeze every last cent out of EAGLE's most loyal

users (it was my decision to make, and I wasn't focused on the incremental

revenue).

 

 

What motivated the acquisition were really two things: 1) the core

capabilities on which we could build what we're endeavoring to build and

2) the community. Now of course the latter (at least on public forums)

probably appears frustrated at the moment  I assure you, it stresses me

out

too (nobody is losing more sleep than me over the change!)  but truth be

told, the vast majority of EAGLE users we not inclined to upgrade to the

latest and greatest version. Why? Perhaps because they never felt they

were getting enough value, version to version, for this to make sense?

Regardless of the reason, the bulk of EAGLE users are on v5 or v6...Not

v7.

Whether we like it or not, I have to operate on the facts.

 

So with all of that in mind, we want a license model which aligns to the

larger Autodesk so we can integrate EAGLE (in a hard way...not a "passing

files back and forth" way) into Autodesk's larger platform, which is both

subscription and thriving.  So the question was: when to rip off the band

aid? And what could we do to make it hurt a little less.

 

With regard to that last item, here's what we've settled on thus far for

ensuring you have legacy SW and versions and data available to you:

 

1) The free version shouldn't expire and will only require a connection

the first time you open it.

2) The free version should open files of any size and layer count and

allow you to place NEW objects anywhere within the extents of the free

version. 3) The free version should allow you to output files (gerber,

PDF, NCDrill, etc) of any size or layer count, regardless of the license

you have. 4) Any paid license should automatically roll over to the free

version

if/when your license lapses.  (working on this)

5) Every version of the free software will be made available for download

outside of the normal update system.

6) We will not own your data and will continue to publish an XML file +

DTD for all eagle file types.

7) We will expand the EAGLE API (coming soon-ish) to ensure users have

access to EAGLE's datamodel via Javascript, Node, etc., to ensure a pipe

out of EAGLE is easy to implement.

8) We will continue to make all legacy and new versions available for

download.

9) We will provide you a license of an earlier, Cadsoft version of EAGLE

with the purchase of subscription (this is as-is, with no support

implied...it will match your current tier...some work to make sure we get

this right just yet, but it's coming).

10). We'll look to build an exporter to the legacy version 6 format and

ensure, for the first time, backwards compatibility.

 

I know that's a mouthful but I wanted to be sure and stress that we're

trying really hard to make this work in a way that works for the user. My

background is as an engineer and I live in this community in a real way

(not as some passive marketing ***), thus I'm hoping that having built

consumer products, I'm covering many of the bases with this strategy.

(And believe me it hurts when my friends call me out and tell me I'm

squeezing

them or locking away their data or that I just dont "get" it.)  Still, I'm

sure there'll be gaps. Some are unavoidable, some perhaps just oversights

on our part.

 

What I'd love is if you all could, in a constructive way, look thru that

list and let me know whether you think there's more than you already knew

today (which means I needed to get onto the forums and discuss this in

greater detail) and also, what you think about some of these items as a

way forward (although perhaps suboptimal...are they meaningful?).

 

I really DO value your feedback and I can assure you, I'm working my tail

off to make sure we demonstrate value to users like yourself and others

who have shown such an obvious passion for the product. It's not easy to

be parsimonious and also explain the "whole" view, so this is an email I

may I have sent in various forms to different people and it's all changed

a little each time as I go thru it, just to ensure I make the salient

points.

 

 

I didn't want to send a half-hearted reply widely for fear I end up under

the microscope with every troll in Trollville pushing their agenda with my

words.   But this is where we're at and I can tell you, that we will

continue with subscription as we move forward, though we are making

attempts to be concessionary and meet the community half way.

 

Thank you.

 

Best regards,

 

Matt

One thing missing from your post is anything about platform support.

Presumably Autodesk will support Windows, but how about Mac and Linux moving

forward? Jorge has given some assurances there, but it would be nice to see

it on your list as well. Integration with other Autocad products would be

nice, but is only viable for me if those products will run on my Linux

workstation.

Bob