Welcome to the Onshape forum! Ask questions and join in the discussions about everything Onshape.
First time visiting? Here are some places to start:- Looking for a certain topic? Check out the categories filter or use Search (upper right).
- Need support? Ask a question to our Community Support category.
- Please submit support tickets for bugs but you can request improvements in the Product Feedback category.
- Be respectful, on topic and if you see a problem, Flag it.
If you would like to contact our Community Manager personally, feel free to send a private message or an email.
How do you pitch Onshape to your CAD manager, general management...?
caradon
OS Professional, Mentor Posts: 300 PRO
So... Here's a question for you, fellow Onshape users...
How do you pitch Onshape to your CAD manager, general management...?
In our organization, SolidWorks is used as the main design tool. We also use EPDM for CAD and other docs (specifications etc.).
As a designer -who uses these tools every day- I clearly see the advantages of using a product like Onshape, even alongside SolidWorks.
However, my experience is that managers tend to be reluctant to run two separate 'CAD ecosystems' at the same time. I think the reasoning is: "Why operate and maintain two systems that do the same thing (read: are both design tools...)?".
Obviously, one advantage of OS is that it maintains itself...
What do you think?
I'm interested in your approaches to pitching Onshape.
Dries
How do you pitch Onshape to your CAD manager, general management...?
In our organization, SolidWorks is used as the main design tool. We also use EPDM for CAD and other docs (specifications etc.).
As a designer -who uses these tools every day- I clearly see the advantages of using a product like Onshape, even alongside SolidWorks.
However, my experience is that managers tend to be reluctant to run two separate 'CAD ecosystems' at the same time. I think the reasoning is: "Why operate and maintain two systems that do the same thing (read: are both design tools...)?".
Obviously, one advantage of OS is that it maintains itself...
What do you think?
I'm interested in your approaches to pitching Onshape.
Dries
Tagged:
0
Comments
1. As a CAD data viewing and collaboration tool for reviews and sales activities...as a replacement for the likes of WorkBench or standalone apps.
2. As a direct replacement for an existing CAD system based on reduced costs and easier management.
I think 1 is very doable now. I think 2 is a tough call in its current form as the toolset is too limited. The problem with having it as an extra CAD system to augment say SolidWorks is why? If you have designers needing 3D CAD the toolset must be up to scratch, and it must be fully compatible with the rest of the business. So reality is you buy another seat of SW.
This is the lesson to learn from Spaceclaim surely? They started off as "we are not competing" but that failed, so they switched to augmenting, and that worked for a limited range of customers.
The truth is, augmenting CAD is bought in to offer something you cannot do in your main system. Here we use SolidWorks and Rhino and Modo and VectorWorks and Keyshot. All have unique capabilities (relative to each other). Comparing the existing Onshape to SolidWorks, for geometry creation or the money earning tasks (modelling, drawings, data export) aside from (potentially) cost, why would you switch?
Tell them the world won't implode and they'll save tons of cash.
Spend your money wisely, thats what my grandmother told me.
I don't think OS will have subscriptions, those days are long gone.
Not sure I want to enter a conversation about pricing and hope this forum stays technical. It's not going to be easy to figuring out and I'm sure everyone has a lengthy opinion.
I guess in an around about way I'm saying it's time for subscription fees to go away. I mean who calls their var for technical assistant any more? Isn't finding the answer on the internet easier?
I look back through the years and there's been several times I've switched from a more capable CAD system to a less capable CAD system and have survived every time. I like what I see here and believe it's only a matter of time before I switch.
If you speak the Autodesk license language, than Onshape is definitely a subscription service.
Subscriptions for maintenance should indeed be a thing of the past.
Dries
So the secret to subscription is maintain development quality, keep the charges reasonable, offer more. And after a few years don't screw your customers, or they will move. Where are Think3 now?
Remember its privacy that you pay for. Clearly we are hoping that privacy is very important. But we felt this is much better way to go. One big advantage is it takes care of just about any scenario. From DIY & education to the professional markets...
So there is a lot more flexibility than the existing business models in the CAD world. ..... It seems reasonable to me (of course it does) to stop paying existing subscriptions, and decide when you want to start paying for the privacy in Onshape....
Joe
what happens if you stop paying, do all your private files suddenly become public? I think this needs to be very clear from the get go.
If you are using the free version, your models are public.. WIth the exception that even the free users will be granted a limited number of private documents. We have not decided how many yet, So for the sake of argument, lets say 5. So in the case a free user, they can also chose to make 5 of documents private at any given time....
If a professional user shares a document with a free user... the document is still private..... its the owner of the document that controls the permissions.... A professional user can chose to make their documents public. Buts its entirely up to them.
If on the other hand you are a professional user who chooses to downgrade your account.... Again this is a work in progress., we have not made any definite decisions yet...... So for the sake of argument, if you downgrade your account, perhaps, you will have to make some decisions such that you are conforming to the free account policies. Of course we will make this very clear. One option might be you could use some an archiving process for your documents so that you can conform to the free policies. There are other options as well.
You are not going to lose your documents. We are not going to hold your data hostage. It simply a balance of maintaining a very different and open access model... And at the same time, we have to make a business out of it...
We are interested in hearing your thoughts on this?
Coming from the SolidWorks world, of very restrictive licensing policies, I really like this model. Its elegant and satisfies most of the needs I have come across over the years.
If we get it right. I see a very likely scenario in the beginning. That is many companies can simply offset the current cost of maintenance towards gaining much more access to Onshape... Remember one the biggest reason the desktop CAD companies hold you over a barrel for maintenance is so that you are "compatible" with future versions of their own product... Onshape is always up to date. and it can serve this purpose very well be default. you could use Onshape for future compatibility issues.
Joe
Please remember that all of this should be considered confidential.
We're still working through the details, but let me share a few points:
1. The owner of a document controls the private. If she/he makes it private, it WILL remain private until she/he changes the privacy status.
2. ALL of the work you're doing today (during this beta period) is private today and WILL remain PRIVATE (irrespective of the number of documents), they will be grandfathered.
3. In the future the Free version will have the same capabilities of the Professional version (including unlimited creation of public documents), however there will be a limited number of PRIVATE documents available for free users (the specifics are being worked on). Professional users will be able to create unlimited private documents.
Thanks,
John
That's an interesting business model. It looks like it would be advantageous for component manufacturer's to place their models in Onshape - free of charge if they make them public. It looks like a 3D content central like thing, but far more capable as it has editing tools and other things.
thanks for clarification. Of course it goes without saying this is all confidential. I'm not at all concerned about work done in this beta period, it was more how Onshape handles future use scenarios. As I mentioned earlier I have used a rental license for our primary CAD system so I see the pros and cons.
The real issue I think is for teams where you may have 3 or 4 users. You might get a big project and look at bringing in extra hands, and the rental model allows this very easily. However, when the project is closed or a downturn occurs you will need to reduce the seats from say 5 to 3.
In that scenario, who owns the data? The current Onshape model is personal ownership and sharing rights. For this to work in an up and down economy there needs to be flexibility both ways.
taking my business, I would want all data owned by the business not a user. The business being any number of seats. Similarly, for others they might wish to transfer rights to data to another user.
finally, should a user wish to cease using Onshape they must be able to get the data. When we finished with Think3 we had to convert all 3D data to STEP. That was a major PIA. But the bigger issue was drawings. We saved all to dwg but that didn't retain the integrity of the drawing that well. Fortunately ThinkDesign, even after ending rental period reverts to a demo version you cannot save from. This at least meant we could open files and print out drawings (and ultimately recreate the data in VX or SolidWorks).
in larger businesses this is of course a non issue. They simply retain a single ongoing license of the old system. However for the SMEs this is not generally an attractive option.
sorry to bring a downer to this but these issues do need to be totally clear for all buyers from the very start. Companies will not give you a chance if they think their data might be tied up to users or locked out in some way, or worse, made public.
perhaps an option would be to have all ending user data silo'd and charge a nominal fee for long term storage so if they did wish to rejoin the fold again they could access it all? Alternatively allow ending users to assign the account to another user? Be interested to know what others think.
If you notice there is something called a company you can setup in your profile... after you setup a company, when you create a new document. You can make the company or the user the owner. Suffice to say that one of the purposes of this capability is to handle the ownership cases you state above.
I would recommend not using it yet... We have a few more projects we are working on. once they have been completed, I think it should meet your criteria about concerning ownership above...
Joe
I'm still curious about the Professional plans. Do you envision per user subscriptions or plans for unlimited users?
I imagine there can be:
*Individual user subscriptions (tailored to freelancers)
*Team plans (for say, blocks of 5 users) (tailored to small design studios)
*Enterprise plans (with unlimited users) (tailored to larger corporations)
As inspiration, I always liked ProofHub's pricing structure.
Not because of the price, but because every plan allows for unlimited users.
Dries
What's the public space going to look like? If there's millions and billions of files, a user will have privacy due to the shear number of documents. What if the public documents are mostly garbage data sets, then you'll have privacy by hiding in all the crap.
I like the idea that anyone can use OS without giving up a credit card number and this will help make it go viral. People use Google without paying for it, at least that's what they think. I hope OS figures this out too.
SW set main stream CAD pricing standard 30 years ago $4k & $1.3k/year and this has lasted for a long time. It's going to be interesting to see what John comes up with. Good luck John.
My $.02 worth since I have a lengthy opinion on this subject. The pricing, what ever it is should rise over time as more functionality is added to OS. This allows a customer to lock in rates. Early adopters will/should pay less than late adopters. It'll also help drive people to paying for something if they know they can lock in a lower rate. Think of it as locking in a low mortgage rate especially if you know rates are on the rise.
It's not clear on the difference between an individual and a corporation. Are they the same price? Can each produce secure data at the same price or is it based on the size of the storage space.
There's a defense contractor down the street that's paying $90,000/year in subscriptions. It never occurred to them that they could just stop paying these fees until I asked them 'why are you paying these fees?'.
Firstly, I have been, am on the manufacturers side with supplying 3D CAD data. Currently the big fad is BIM. Maybe Dries gets this as well, but we are constantly asked for Revit files, or Microstation files, or Archicad files etc. for the manufacturer this creates a serioues headache. Not all companies are huge. Many are niche suppliers with maybe 1 or 2 designers in house. Supplying data for reuse is a serious cost, and demanding payment to enter the party is not going to fly unless the party is the main player in town, and that is not Onshape.
30 years ago the datum in pricing was about £100k. SolidWorks/Autodesk/ intergraph settled in 18 yrs ago at £5000. I have heard Jon H state at the Develop3D conference a year ago that the day of the $4000 CAD system is over. I hope so.
the pricing model of ramping up cost for extra functionality is finished. I would not invest in another system that does this. I would rather invest in different specialist systems that offer specific functionality. The thing is, with a rental system you expect the functionality to improve over time, NOT stay static. This is precisely what Think3 did. The product did not change much in 3 yrs, then when it did they bumped up the price. That is CAD suicide.
Finally, the idea that you can hide your confidential data in the public maze does not hold water. Search by name? Boom.
Onshape has the potential to change the status quo. That means, worldwide standard pricing, direct sales (no VARs), everything in the core product, very clear marketing of the offer and an exit strategy for users.
Fully-featured mobile CAD = GOLD
If you Onshape guys nail that, then you can do to CAD what iTunes did to music & videos.
Dries
I would be happy to make a limited few of my CAD datasets public, or even creating open source stuff, especially if this kind of 'buys' some more professional 'space'/'functionality'... as in Thingyverse / grabcad .. its obvious that as 3D printers become consumer products its the data that will be the value. Conversely due to chinese copycats many datasets must be firmly locked down [how I HATE seeing so much of my blood sweat and tears in copycats on alibaba !!].
As a small biz (often just me) my CAD spend is relatively limited (think SW rather than fully featured Catia ! ).
However the work we do is often as complex as bigger co's who have say 50+ Catia seats. The irony of current professional CAD pricing is that big companies' end users, being more specialist, (data input, FEA, surfacing, mech, electrics etc) probably only use a tiny fraction of the power/modules of their seat and have no idea of the power ( or the massive cost !! ) of their cad seat.
By comparison to these specialists I probably only use, say FEA twice a year. But when I do use it I need 'full professional strength'. Now under solidworks/CATIA/creo (and other trad CAD packages) I'd have to buy loads of modules AND subscriptions $$$$$+ $$ each year... even tho they are only rarely used. The ideal option would be to have all these modules fully available (to gain skills and to integrate into workflow) but to somehow only pay for usage of the more specialists aspects eg FEA. If this is too complex another option to say 'rent functionality' or specialist modules when needed, by the month.
I'd love to hear more about OS business plan, and contribute to the discussion - it sounds excitingly disruptive :-)
Pay for use instead of pay for license does sound very tempting.
That would be a model that none of the traditional CAD companies can cater for, but sounds absolutely logical in the Onshape universe.
would make a lot of sense for rendering too...
Dries
I'm just trying to think of ways to subsidize Onshape. So you don't think a vendor library of parts would generate any revenue? Is there any value knowing all the engineers in the world? Is a rental model the only way to generate revenue?
$4000 cad price, my point, SW defined this 20 years ago and today it's still $4000. That's pretty good as far as CAD pricing goes.
One day there will be a price, let's say $25/month. In a year we'll have surfacing, machining and everything else wonderful, should the price still be $25/month? Why not $28/month. My point, is that the price stays the same for existing users. If I buy at $25/month, I always pay this. New users pay the new rate.
Search by name? that's assuming you know the name. I think you put a lot a faith in search. I suppose you could do a mashup, give me all companies with $1B revenue and then search to see if they have any files. Even this search isn't reliable. Don't get me wrong, I think most people will pay for privacy.
I totally agree with your last statement,