I’m still with a no operative computer but I get sad reading this. A web based software can do nothing against a desktop one (in my opinion, for sure).
Take a look a Google Spreadsheet, it has no possible comparison to OpenOffice or Excel, and I work with all of them, working alone and in team (in my opinion again), I will keep with 2017 so far.
A post was split to a new topic: Download manager says “Forbidden” when trying to download SketchUp Make
Not STL importer. =(
I’ve been using Sketchup for years, however I’ve never had an account here and I’ve made one just to say how disappointing this is. Sketchup Free is in no way a substitute for Make, and Pro is simply too expensive for the average hobbyist. The loss of effective keyboard shortcuts, plugins, extensibility, and customizability in no way makes up for ‘instant access’ (on good internet only) models. I have never found Sketchup’s native functionality to suit my needs, and have always relied on a host of plugins to accomplish what I want. Sketchup Free simply doesn’t do what I need it to.
And I have just started teaching myself Ruby.
Please reconsider this approach. Either by making a more affordable option for users to upgrade to Pro, or by continuing to support and develop Make. I’ve used Sketchup for so long, I find myself seriously perturbed by this.
4 Likes
Yet you can afford a computer (one to run SketchUp well costs more than SketchUp) and an Internet connection.
I am now talking mostly about people in the “first world”.
I started using SketchUp Pro when there was no free version available, and I purchased it mainly to use as a toy. The license I own personally has not yet earned me any money (I also have access to SU at work). Many westerners have a large collection of toys, many much more expensive than mine.
SketchUp Pro costs about half of the price of a decent bicycle.
At work, when I take a single flight to a worksite and back, I use much more money than the cost of a single license of SketchUp Pro.
Many people use more money than the cost of SketchUp Pro to buy a mobile phone while a phone that works perfectly to place calls and send text messages costs a tenth of that.
You can buy something like 7 computer games for the price of SketchUp. I don’t play computer games. I play with SketchUp.
Why are people happy to spend money on all kinds of gadgets but not software? What makes physical objects more valuable than pure information? Would SketchUp seem more valuable if it still came on a DVD?
14 Likes
3 Likes
Like most things, you 'll hardly hear when something is working, most accounts on (any) forum are made because something is broken. (It would be nice to see more accounts being made for sharing positive vibes, though)
If one has been taking advantage of SketchUp Make for years, one might reconsider that approach as well.
the privacy is already here, just easier to do by ignoring your Make EULA and adding plugins…
future piracy will come with the additional concerns for trojans, etc… which will deter many of the current casual pirates…
john
As long as they don’t do it with Pro, that is my biggest worry at the moment.
1 Like
He is talking about what would happen if sketchUp Pro would change to a web based app…
I’ve used SketchUp Make for years and now use it mainly for 3D printing projects. I’ve never paid, nor would I pay, for the Pro version. It is good free software but, in my opinion, has too many flaws to spend money on.
1 Like
So you happily steal the ability to print.
I’m constantly stunned by the fact that people believe they have a right to free software.
How many things do you give away for free!
3 Likes
Sounds like entitlement to me.
I don’t see how this makes sense. Spend a day or two to disable pro features from the free version or spend months to write and test a separate application for a web page. Instead of updating the program for windows 7, windows 10, and mac OS now the developers have to not only write the web app and associated web pages but have to test them on and bug fix them for chrome, firefox, edge, and internet explorer. I have been using this program since google sketchup 6 was the current version available and since then there hasn’t been any radical change on how i use the program in all of the years i have been using it. That’s why it doesn’t make sense to me to stop supporting a product that people have been using for years when all you need to do is disable the pro features. This move isn’t cost defective since trimble would need to spend more on their legal department to combat piracy.
1 Like
A large majority of schools have switched to Chomebooks or iPads and everyone else has a browser…
IMHO, catering to this market makes a lot of sense…
the last two versions have added a great deal of internal functionality purely to support Pro features…
if you turned them all off you end up with a copy of v17 Make…
it’s still available…
john
1 Like
I agree with you, I think the sketchup´s ruby console and the 3dwarehouse makes the difference among other free and more powerful 3d modelers like blend.
The sketchup became a universal tool and library of models beyond the google brand, Trimble brand because of the 3d warehouse/ruby console. The sketchup tool itself is only a simple and unattractive tool for professionals.
And they only have so many 3d models because of sketchup make and the thousand of teenagers, children, personal users and self employed architects designers .
The companies that earn contributing to the 3dwarehouse are companies of furniture, lighting, etc because 3dwarehouse is a free advertising site. And the best models are usually downloaded and bought physically.
The clients usually wants the same furniture(the beaultiful ones) they saw in sketchup model.
The people off Trimble can make a effort and think other ways to make profit, as WhatsApp, facebook, google, etc estimulating a social network with models, to turn it self sustainable.
They can’t´t see that the money isn’t in the sketchup but in the 3dwarehouse. Many people would pay for a model of a new car, furniture, if it costs cents, like music in the iTunes or monthly, like Spotify.
Erik(from Brazil)
sorry about my English(with the help of FREE google translator).
Not to mention the IT department. When I told the IT director of my school it was time to teach my class this year so we needed to either update the copies of SU Make on all 14 iMac’s in the computer lab, or try SU for Schools, I don’t have to tell you which he preferred or how long it took him to think about it.
It would be great even if they put a realistic price on Make for hobbyists like myself. Say $100/yr subscription or something I could justify for non-profit-generating use.
I’ve used Make for years, even building a tiny house directly from print offs of my model. I live out in the woods with an “ever-so-reliable” internet connection that is completely foreign to city dwellers. Sketchup has been one of my go-to blackout activities for years. It’ll be a shame to change that.
I feel as though most people are accustomed to paying some form of subscription fee. We all recognize that paying the devs and allowing a business to profit are key to allowing us to enjoy great products. It just seems they have forgotten about or even cut out the mid-level user, with Free targeted at entry-level users such as students, and Pro priced well above what most of us can justify for non-profit-generating use.
4 Likes
Anssi,
A DVD would not help cover $700. The customer (the one with the money) decides what toys they want to buy, not someone else (like capitalism vs. progressives-socialism). If you or anyone wants to understand why many hobbyists, are unwilling to spend the money you have spent, you need to see things differently. Using your personal cost-benefit considerations only applies to you. Your post (and many others) in essence is deriding a potential customer for their personal cost-benefit choices. That sure would not convince anyone I know to become a customer for anything.
I also find people are people west or east.
All the best,
Charles Sloane
5 Likes
Caroline,
Since you’ve asked for feedback, here’s mine:
I suspect this will most hurt those who have committed to SketchUp, but have not yet made enough progress to warrant commercial use or simply the cost of potential commercial use. I worked in SketchUp for years before bringing it to my boss and saying, “hey, I’ve developed some skill in this software and I think we could use it here.” and getting permission to purchase a commercial license. It’s been an amazing thing for our organization.
Early on, I don’t think having to use this browser based version would have slowed me down. I didn’t even check out extensions or dynamic components for years.
SketchUp does need a lower priced commercial use option and I think the browser version could be a great path forward for that. Ideally I would like to open up SketchUp use to my colleagues where I create and maintain the assets and environments we work within, and they can essentially just move things around and make notes. That functionality isn’t worth $700 a person. I’m under the assumption that such use is allowed at $10/mo for Trimble connect though, but I’m not sure if even that’s the case. Regardless, I need to dummy proof that environment with dynamic components, so SketchUp browser version just isn’t there yet for our organization.
To me this is a needed step, so you can focus efforts on this browser based version. Similar to other browser based software, I do think you need an offline option, like Google Apps for Business. It’s designed for connected online use, but you can still knock out work on a plane.
I’m excited to see what’s coming with SketchUp Free, but I’d really like to see something like follows:
SketchUp Free - developed as is, a nice solution for those new to 3D modeling, as I was years ago. It would have been fine for me then.
SketchUp Commercial User - browser based, around $10 a month, able to make use of scripts and dynamic components and with offline capabilities. Hobbyists could use this and be happy, but many commercial users would also find this great for their colleagues who may benefit from interacting with a model, but will never be developing a model. It would be great if Pro users could then setup environments for these users to keep things simple, like locking things to the Z-axis with dynamic components, etc.
SketchUp Pro User - no matter what I’ll be a SketchUp Pro user forever now. I have almost a decade of time into this software and I’m psyched about your new reporting functionality. I need software that can make use of the specialized hardware purchased for development of 3D assets and renderings. More and more though, I need to include colleagues in my process who have no interest in 3D modeling. I’m good with the Salesforce model, a small per user fee for folks who need access to something, but perhaps just for an approval workflow, etc. I survive at the moment because I don’t need approvals, etc, but as we grow and I want others in the same environment, I’ll want to engage in that process, but won’t want to spend $700 for a person that for the most part uses dynamic components I dummy proofed for them and can do their entire job with move tool, dynamic component options and reporting.
Basically I think this is an exciting and painful step forward. It would have been great if it could have been done with access to scripts and dynamic components from the start, but that will take time. I do think it’s needed though, but certainly that functionality warrants the right to charge a fee. Folks are starting to use your software in some weird ways. I want to use it as a configure, price, quote utility, thus why I’m excited about your new reporting functionality. So basically I want to make it really really really easy for a colleague to create a layout that automatically quotes a program, builds a pack list and provides a rendering sales tool. My goal though is to require little to no learning from that colleague. They would just use the move tool and dynamic component dialogues. It would be great to have that middle ground solution for folks who basically develop an environment for non-modelers to still make use of SketchUp in their workflow.
Also, it would be easy for you to take on CPQ companies with your new web-based interface now. Do you want to spend $125k implementing a solution with someone else? Or leverage your existing models and some dynamic component info to get the same functionality for a much reduced cost?
Thank you,
Aaron
2 Likes