Welcome to the Onshape forum! Ask questions and join in the discussions about everything Onshape.

First time visiting? Here are some places to start:
  1. Looking for a certain topic? Check out the categories filter or use Search (upper right).
  2. Need support? Ask a question to our Community Support category.
  3. Please submit support tickets for bugs but you can request improvements in the Product Feedback category.
  4. 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.

Nitty Gritty details of free plan.

2

Comments

  • hawkuhawku Member Posts: 2
    edited August 2015
    Hi Bruce.  Yes, it is the latter.  You have 100MB to create up to 10 owned private documents. 
    Hi Darren,

    Almost all of my actively used documents are over 100 MB or near 100 MB.

    This simple shape prototyping document is 226MB:
    https://cad.onshape.com/documents/9df6938c2abc4747bad7c658/w/4c47145062b9455ba48a7af1/e/f9a2df5ffa5a4a57bc908783

    This simple enclosure is 70MB:
    https://cad.onshape.com/documents/ab4d1e79694e491f9f64bf10/w/a367daa6fa1d40ea82d43be6/e/28c82e76cc4a46bb8c81a572 

    I had to share all of my documents to public to have a little room in the private space.
    My storage info says "0 of 5 Active private documents, 7 MB Private storage, 900 MB Total storage" but i don't have any private documents.
    EDIT: That 7 MB was in the Trash folder.

    Am i doing something wrong?
    I don't understand how the limit is going to be 100 MB for 10 documents. I can accidentally create a document larger than 100 MB by messing around with simple designs for a few hours.


    - Mikko
  • Darren_A_HenryDarren_A_Henry Onshape Employees Posts: 66
    Hi @hawku

    You are doing everything correct.  By making the documents public, you have given yourself more space for private work.  

    Since you are not using version control, I suggest you manually copy the workspaces in some of your older private documents and delete the originals.  For example; your Simple Enclosure that is 70MB will reduce to about 2 MB when you make a copy.  Onshape allows you to restore to any point in the documents history, which is a great feature, but due to its nature requires storage space.  In a copied workspace, you preserve the features of the model, but purge the restore points. Your Formula Wheel will shrink from 226MB to 9MB.  (NOTE:  There is a delay in the size calculations when you make a copy.  I suggest making a copy then waiting 5 minutes to see its new size)

    With the strategy of making some documents public, and creating copies of workspaces to reduce document sizes, you may be able to continue working in within the limits of the Free Plan.

    I hope this helps.  You have very nice designs.

    Darren
  • juan_avilesjuan_aviles Member Posts: 78 ✭✭
    Hi @hawku



    Since you are not using version control, I suggest you manually copy the workspaces in some of your older private documents and delete the originals.  
    Hi Darren,

    I just did this, but didn't realize the 'trash' also counts towards your total.  After making my copies and deleting the originals, I was actually over the 100mb limit.  I had to empty my 'trash' in order to see the savings.  Thanks for the tip though...I didn't know about making copies to reduce file size.
  • hawkuhawku Member Posts: 2
    Since you are not using version control, I suggest you manually copy the workspaces in some of your older private documents and delete the originals.
    Thanks Darren. That shrunk down my storage requirements a lot.

    It would be nice to have a "Clear History" feature for your document version control.


  • labernlabern Member Posts: 33 ✭✭✭
    hawku said:
    Since you are not using version control, I suggest you manually copy the workspaces in some of your older private documents and delete the originals.
    Thanks Darren. That shrunk down my storage requirements a lot.

    It would be nice to have a "Clear History" feature for your document version control.


    I have already made a Improvement request to clear and help reduce the file sizes. Give it a vote and it may come to life.
  • 3dcad3dcad Member, OS Professional, Mentor Posts: 2,475 PRO
    One issue is also if free user creates a new document and shares it among other free&pro users. It might lead to situation where you don't even use onshape for months and your limits run out while other collaborators use the shared document. You can't remove yourself from share if you are the owner.

    This could be situation for example if you ask for an offer from company who uses Onshape: Free user creates document and shares with shop to have an offer, then shop makes changes and maybe recreates the whole design to suit their production (this is one of great benefits Onshape provides).
    I think you got the point.

    @darren_henry What do yo think of this situation?
    //rami
  • Darren_A_HenryDarren_A_Henry Onshape Employees Posts: 66
    Hi @3dcad

    I understand your scenario as the following:  you create a private Document, and share it with others.  Then your peers, maybe a manufacturing shop, do significant amount of work in your Document and their changes take you past the 100MB limit without you revisiting the Document.  

    The answer here is simple.  You should use Onshape Professional, at least for the duration of the project.  You are using all the capabilities that make Onshape a better choice than traditional CAD.  You can collaborate freely with anyone you choose, use version control without worrying about data storage limits, and control access.  You will never mess around with sending copies of files, or worry about compatibility.  You get commenting, notifications, and can easily restore if you don't like your colleague's changes.   You can check progress on you phone or tablet,  and lets face it everyone will be happy not to deal with system crashes.  Time is valuable.  

    Remember you can pay month-to-month with Onshape Professional.  In the FAQs we discuss what happens to your data if you downgrade during periods when you are not actively designing in Onshape.

    Darren
  • 3dcad3dcad Member, OS Professional, Mentor Posts: 2,475 PRO
    edited August 2015
    Hi @3dcad
    ...

    The answer here is simple.  You should use Onshape Professional ...

    Darren

    @darren_henry  Okay, I will then =)

    ps. For these cases, it would be nice if document owner could have 'remove me from share' too. Otherwise shop needs to make a copy for their archive and it would be without versions and history.
    //rami
  • dennis_20dennis_20 Member Posts: 87 EDU
    @3dcad, In order to "remove me from share" if you were the owner of the document then that ownership would have to be transferred to someone else, wouldn't it?  Perhaps "Transfer Ownership" would have to be initiated by the owner and accepted by someone before "Remove me from share" could be executed.
  • 3dcad3dcad Member, OS Professional, Mentor Posts: 2,475 PRO
    @dennis_20 You are right, maybe 'Transfer ownership' could replace my idea of expanding 'Remove me..'

    I could see other use for transferring ownership too; if you are selling designs, I think buyer should be the owner after deal is made.

    I would also like to see individuals (free plan) taking a shot to create say a kitchen cabinetry and then move the ownership for me (pro) and keep themselves in share and I would then finish the design with standard parts and nice renderings and stuff that takes it way over 100mb.
    //rami
  • 3dcad3dcad Member, OS Professional, Mentor Posts: 2,475 PRO

    Hi @3dcad

    I understand your scenario as the following:  you create a private Document, and share it with others.  Then your peers, maybe a manufacturing shop, do significant amount of work in your Document and their changes take you past the 100MB limit without you revisiting the Document.  

    The answer here is simple.  You should use Onshape Professional, at least for the duration of the project.  You are using all the capabilities that make Onshape a better choice than traditional CAD.  You can collaborate freely with anyone you choose, use version control without worrying about data storage limits, and control access.  You will never mess around with sending copies of files, or worry about compatibility.  You get commenting, notifications, and can easily restore if you don't like your colleague's changes.   You can check progress on you phone or tablet,  and lets face it everyone will be happy not to deal with system crashes.  Time is valuable.  
    ..

    Darren
    Let's assume I'm an individual, who learned Onshape in school, building a house and Onshape has become the cad of the universe. House project takes about a year to finish.

    I will create some basic sketch of house and send it to 'house factory' - they need pro plan for handling this type of requests and they are using Ons for modeling too.
    Then I share house plans for construction workers, electrician, plumber, ventilation guy, gardener and they all add their plans and offer into my document. They need to have pro plan of course.
    Then I share plans with interior, cabinetry, kitchen, bathroom, balcony, etc. designer - they all need pro plan.

    So for my one project, a dozen of companies justifies their Onshape pro plan and pay happily ever after - you still think I own you $1200 for the year?   ;)  B)
    //rami
  • Darren_A_HenryDarren_A_Henry Onshape Employees Posts: 66
    If you share with someone, the document size does not count against their disk storage limits.  If all your suppliers have less than 10 private documents, they can access your massive design using our Free Plan.  

    I like your future scenario.  Let me add to it.  Everyone is using Onshape, and given our speed of evolution, I am sure the capabilities are on par if not greater than all other traditional CAD.   You are getting a bargain at $1200/year.  Just think, you do not have to create one copy to share with all those people.  You do not ever worry about file compatibility.  You never get bounced emails stating you have exceeded file limits.  Everyone is commenting and collaborating on the correct data.  Now, you are at the house, and something does not look right.  No need to argue, just pull out your phone and show the contractor the design.  Problem solved.  

    You look out your window and you remember.  You remember the time before Onshape.  A time of blue screen crashes, and once a year updates with little useful capabilities. The old CAD only ran well on your computer in the office or and on that heavy laptop you used to carry around, but that's it.  How many days were wasted installing service packs?  How many times did you crash and lose hours of work.  You smile.  You made the right decision.  $3.28/day is worth it!

    Darren


  • 3dcad3dcad Member, OS Professional, Mentor Posts: 2,475 PRO
    The good old days  :'(
    //rami
  • imagineeredimagineered Member Posts: 57 ✭✭
    @darren_henry - FYI, there's a bit more to file compatibility than what OnShape are offering at the moment.  Also, with the STEP file export bug still being worked on, this is a concern
  • david_sohlstromdavid_sohlstrom Member, Mentor Posts: 159 ✭✭✭
    Now you have a group of model engineers that like to design model IC engines that have lots of parts and need lots of jigs and fixtures to build them. They are a close neat group and do not want to make there models public. They do not make any money off the design and each member of the group will build his or her own engine.

    Because of the complexity of the design it is very easy to exceed the 100mb limit. They are mostly retired and on fixed income so $1200 a year is out of the question.

    What do you tell these people. Sorry we do not have a paid plan that you can afford so you can use our great software to design your engines.
    David Sohlstrom

    Ariel, WA
  • Darren_A_HenryDarren_A_Henry Onshape Employees Posts: 66
    @david_sohlstrom

    Hi David.  If each of your members own a document and share with the others, you can literally share your private storage across the group.  If this is not an acceptable solution,  I still maintain that the $1200 per year is a fair price for doing heavy CADDing.
  • _Ðave__Ðave_ Member, Developers Posts: 712 ✭✭✭✭
    Actually it appears(correctly me if I'm misunderstanding whats been stated) that if one person in the group went pro then he could act as the hub for all of the other free members.
  • david_sohlstromdavid_sohlstrom Member, Mentor Posts: 159 ✭✭✭
    This is all well and good but we are talking about a group that does not make any money off of there designs and are on fixed incomes so $1200.00 is a big chunk of money.
    Now if OnShape could see there way to offer a plan for say $25 to $30 per month that would be a different story all together.
    David Sohlstrom

    Ariel, WA
  • _Ðave__Ðave_ Member, Developers Posts: 712 ✭✭✭✭
    @david_sohlstromIf my theory is correct and you had only 5 in your group that would amount to only $20 per month
  • david_sohlstromdavid_sohlstrom Member, Mentor Posts: 159 ✭✭✭
    Right that is assuming that all 5 want to stay in the group long term and they all get along 100% of the time. If 4 of the 5 leave and the fifth is left holding the bag. Yes I know he can drop back to free but what happens to the 10gb of projects they had going and how do you divide up things what if the other 4 want copies of all of the projects. How do they then work with them.
    David Sohlstrom

    Ariel, WA
  • _Ðave__Ðave_ Member, Developers Posts: 712 ✭✭✭✭
    Dave I checked out your you tube vids. Very cool wheel boat your building. Did you design it in Onshape?
  • david_sohlstromdavid_sohlstrom Member, Mentor Posts: 159 ✭✭✭
    The vessel was built by Mike Jones. I designed, built and installed the engines. No Onshape did not exist when I started designing the engines. They were modeled in alibre/geomagic. My part of the project took over 2 years. 
    There is no way I could design such a project in OnShape I would hit the 100mb limit in no time. What you don't see are all of the jigs and fixtures I had to design and build to machine the parts. Some day I need to get all of them together and take a photo of them.
    Next up are Z drives for model tug boats that again would burn up 100mb is no time at all.
    David Sohlstrom

    Ariel, WA
  • navnav Member Posts: 258 ✭✭✭✭
    Hi @david_sohlstrom based on @da_vicki `s comment I looked you up in YouTube, very complex designs nice, congratulations  ;)
    Nicolas Ariza V.
    Indaer -- Aircraft Lifecycle Solutions
  • andrew_troupandrew_troup Member, Mentor Posts: 1,584 ✭✭✭✭✭
    @david_sohlstrom
    I'm not sure that a group such as you describe can look to outsiders to make all their problems go away. This applies particularly to such problems as "inability to get along"  ...

    Unless you develop a serious interest in Onshape's problems with a "middle tier", it might be a bit unrealistic to expect a reciprocal interest in the detailed problems you describe above.

    Just one of those Onshape problems, it seems to me, is probably a show-stopper on its own: how to devise a pricing tier (or other rescue remedy) to meet the diverse needs of hobbyists in such a way it would not also be perfectly viable for many businesses - including toolmakers, small engineering shops, and jobbing/contract operations generally - who do not require simultaneous access to a large amount of private data.

    Such businesses are also much less likely than major players to be put off by questions of long term custody and access to IP
    , because their input to a given project or product is short and finite. 

    Those small businesses are currently paying a lot more for the likes of Solidworks than they would for an Onshape Pro subscription. Onshape which will suit their needs much better in every respect, so it seems to me they're a shoo-in as paying clients at the full rate.

    It would, however, become an instant no-brainer for them to opt instead for the middle tier which you advocate, slashing Onshape's revenue to a third or a quarter, for one of the most promising market segments

    This seems to me particularly problematic for cash flow in the crucial early phase after launch, when Onshape does not yet have the chops, or the perceived solidity, for the big boys.

    If Onshape cannot generate that cashflow, it will cease to be available to anyone. Are the needs of the niche players you advocate for, comparable in priority to that "greater good"?
  • david_sohlstromdavid_sohlstrom Member, Mentor Posts: 159 ✭✭✭
    Yes the model is very complex. Helps that I was a marine engineer in a former life. It takes a 10 channel RC radio to run the vessel. 5 channels for navigation and 5 channels for the boom on the bow. I also designed and built the 3 drum winch for the boom.
    David Sohlstrom

    Ariel, WA
  • david_sohlstromdavid_sohlstrom Member, Mentor Posts: 159 ✭✭✭
    Andrew
    I see your point and will drop my bid for a middle tier plan. If I have a small project that may fit within the constraints of the free plan I may try and use OnShape to design it.
    David Sohlstrom

    Ariel, WA
  • andrew_troupandrew_troup Member, Mentor Posts: 1,584 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Thanks, @david_sohlstrom , and kudos
    Thoughtful consideration of an opposing point of view happens so rarely on the internet that I think it reflects great credit on your open-mindedness.

    I do have a great fondness for the groups you describe: if I hadn't spent my boyhood devouring "Model Engineer" I would not have taken the path I did. My keen interest in models was short-lived, but I developed a passion for machine tools which never left me. And (as a result) I am currently associated, as a go-to guy, with several retired folk who've taken up model engineering late in life.

    I really do hope that some of the movers and shakers in that community find a way to participate in the Onshape ecosystem, and if we (meaning you and I and other interested parties) can see a way to meet their problems without undermining or unduly complicating the Onshape business model, I'm sure we would find a receptive ear.
  • david_sohlstromdavid_sohlstrom Member, Mentor Posts: 159 ✭✭✭
    Andrew
    I have bound volume reprints 1 to 8 of Model engineer. I go back and look through them from time to time.

    Dave
    David Sohlstrom

    Ariel, WA
  • matthew_menardmatthew_menard Member Posts: 96 ✭✭✭
    @david_sohlstrom

    It would, however, become an instant no-brainer for them to opt instead for the middle tier which you advocate, slashing Onshape's revenue to a third or a quarter, for one of the most promising market segments

    I feel that this is ignoring those who wouldn't pay for the pro license at all though.  You would be slashing revenue by 1/2-2/3 with a middle tier only if 100% of your customers went from the pro to a middle tier.  There are a number of users who are priced out of the Pro subscription that still want to give Onshape their money.  The big competitor to OnShape is able to put out a more feature rich program at the price point of the theoretical middle tier price, with the option of it being free if you make less than $100K.  This is what drives my feeling that there is in fact room for a middle tier for OnShape.  In another thread I mentioned my theory that it would be easier to get a 1 million user base with $30/mo subscription fees than $100/mo subscription fees.  Also, I understand that the ~$1200/yr is what people are used to paying for just for annual service contracts, but it seems like many companies stretch out a single seat as far is it will go.  By providing a lower cost option, a company may decide to increase their capacity from one to three seats if it covers the same overhead. 

    Obviously I'm not a business person, so I could be completely wrong in a number of my assumptions above (such as, one million users is probably a little optimistic).  I do however, hope the business people in charge of guiding the company succeed, because I think we as CAD users all benefit from the competition that now exists between the new and old companies.  In the meantime, I will be continuing to use the free subscription to keep my CAD mind from being locked into a single ecosystem and becoming stagnant. 

    Thank you, OnShape for at least maintaining some form of free tier (even though in this day and age anything that measures storage in MB seems a little hokey) and I wish nothing but success to you all.
  • michael3424michael3424 Member Posts: 688 ✭✭✭✭
    Andrew
    I have bound volume reprints 1 to 8 of Model engineer. I go back and look through them from time to time.

    Dave
    You would have liked the bound collection of ME's I had dating from 1898.  It was incomplete but there were a total of 2400+ issues in the collection and it was interesting to browse the articles.
Sign In or Register to comment.