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.
What should always be free in Onshape?
3dcad
Member, OS Professional, Mentor Posts: 2,472 PRO
Currently, free account has all the same features as Pro. Maybe this is something Onshape want's to keep forever but if not, what should be free in your opinion? (please think for a moment before writing 'everything' - the truth is: nothing is free, it's just about who is paying)
I think having the exactly same set is good because they don't need trials or other hassle for new users. But I also think free account is too tempting at the moment and when having the tool set comparable to say SW it will be too good to be true. I really hope Ons will get a good share of paid users to keep it going in a long run..
When it's necessary, I wouldn't mind if there was some advanced features existing only in pro, but for collaboration it's essential to have same tool set. Maybe Ons could make it so that if one of the collaborators have Pro, those documents would appear with full set..?
Or like mobile apps run currently on newest features, you can edit but not create.
A question for us / those having a Pro version already: Why did you upgrade at so early stage?
My reason was simple, I'm (pretty) sure Ons will be our main package because they have addressed all our main needs (in future updates) and collaboration is just as easy as it needs to be with non-cad or just-a-little-cad colleagues. And I wan't to be able to learn how to manage all the documents without having limitations.
Also some other things to mention:
- multi-part studios with reusable sketches makes things so simple that it is already faster than our current familiar cad when starting from scratch
- Onshape people seem to have a pretty good sense on how to handle request or feedback - no overlooking or ignoring in that area. They have made me believe that they will fix also small things after big things have been implemented.
Any thoughts?
I think having the exactly same set is good because they don't need trials or other hassle for new users. But I also think free account is too tempting at the moment and when having the tool set comparable to say SW it will be too good to be true. I really hope Ons will get a good share of paid users to keep it going in a long run..
When it's necessary, I wouldn't mind if there was some advanced features existing only in pro, but for collaboration it's essential to have same tool set. Maybe Ons could make it so that if one of the collaborators have Pro, those documents would appear with full set..?
Or like mobile apps run currently on newest features, you can edit but not create.
A question for us / those having a Pro version already: Why did you upgrade at so early stage?
My reason was simple, I'm (pretty) sure Ons will be our main package because they have addressed all our main needs (in future updates) and collaboration is just as easy as it needs to be with non-cad or just-a-little-cad colleagues. And I wan't to be able to learn how to manage all the documents without having limitations.
Also some other things to mention:
- multi-part studios with reusable sketches makes things so simple that it is already faster than our current familiar cad when starting from scratch
- Onshape people seem to have a pretty good sense on how to handle request or feedback - no overlooking or ignoring in that area. They have made me believe that they will fix also small things after big things have been implemented.
Any thoughts?
//rami
Tagged:
0
Comments
When Onshape begin offering advanced tools, I intend to become a Pro user and try implant in the company where I work, but I think it will take about 5 years at minimum.
Perhaps partly by allocation of more server resources, improvements to caching on the local machine (to assist models to load more quickly after their first exposure to that machine, as only changes by others would need to load), partly by enhanced customisation options, but mostly by making extra-clever "front end" stuff available like (shudder! I hate the name) "wizards", for labour-intensive jobs, including multiple hole creation, multiple planes from a single command (for setting up lofts) and suchlike ... in other words, just offering pro subscribers faster or easier ways to arrive at an identical model.
I support the idea of the free version because a lingua franca is close to my heart, and that needs universal access. What's more, major commercial success requires major scale ... but I chose to upgrade to Pro because I have been waiting for years for someone to come up with a business model which solves the horrible upgrade treadmill with the associated inter-version communications blockages, and the plagues of new bugs with each new cycle.
Now that someone is doing it, I want to put my shoulder to that wheel in every way I can --
particularly given that Onshape also look set to solve many other stumbling blocks with state-of-art solid MCAD (in-context difficulties, mating laboriousness, and undue reliance on fussy, high cost and short-lived hardware/OS combos)
Furthermore, it is important that there be a healthy income stream, to enable injecting more resources to close the considerable gap between Onshape and the current heavy hitters. Those of us who come on board for commercial use are hitching our business, in the shape of ongoing access to our models, to Onshape's continued success, and that requires lots of pro users, each paying non-negligible subs.
I further believe that, to provide future-proof security, Onshape will have to come up with some form of defined "devolution" mechanism, set in place and perhaps administered by a separate trust, with a binding commitment to hand over (to Pro subscribers) an enduring, standalone modelling capability, along with live model files, in the event of Onshape having to shut down their online facility at some future date.
Dave
Ariel, WA
Now if Onshape were to add feature-rich CAM with continuous 4th axis capability at that $100/month price point, I'd give serious consideration to paying the Pro license fees on an on-going basis.
Got it. So I think you are saying that Onshape is really setup well for this. I would agree.
It is very a tricky thing to balance, obviously onshape have to make money so the free tier can't be too good, but on the other hand making it good enough it opens up a whole world of possibilities and future customers.
If it was made in an elegant way, I probably wouldn't mind. But I would still like to have that free 100mb account for showing stuff to customers without adverts.
Because in the long term, products get shaped towards the needs of those who pay for them, and I don't want to say any hint of Onshape accommodating the needs of commercial concerns, or anyone other than MCAD users.
Like those above, I think the lowest tier should be at least 1Gb of storage, and the next tier above that should be significantly less than $100/mo. I personally would probably pay $25/mo for my current hobbyist/moderate professional use of OnShape, and $50-100/mo for heavier professional use; depending on what features I need (like i don't really need Sheet Metal, Weldments, Mold, CAM, or CAE; and I could see how some of those could garnish more premium prices than something like Animation, which I think a vast majority of lower level users would use).
Also, you could possibly go to 2 active documents at a time for free accounts, and go up by 3's or 5's from there. Right now I'm using 1 Document for all of my different Hobby stuff (getting a little crowded with all of the tabs, but worth it, and I'm hoping for some kind of folder structure in the future), and using 2 documents for my professional stuff. If we get the ability to create a folder like structure inside the document, I could easily stay with 2-3 documents for the near future. And would be willing to pay a little more when I need more documents.
Whenever any advanced modules such as sheet metal, piping, mold design etc. gets included in Onshape, it should not be under free plan. But still tutorials for advance modules can be included in the free plan so that users will definitely get attracted to pay for it.
I don't think it is a good idea to limit access to "advanced" functionality.
A cornerstone of Onshape is the ability to collaborate with as many people as possible, and this means those people need to be fluent in the package as a whole, not just in a dumbed-down subset.
To be fluent in feature editing, they need to be able to incorporate those features in their own models, and unfamiliarity with tools is a stumbling block for creativity.