Why not just bring back SU: Make? The web browser version is an amazing tool but not a replacement.
People are going to find they can’t do what they used to do and so they’re either going to leave or pirate pro, neither of which will make you guys money. You could sell SU: Make for a small yearly price even.
John, thank you very much for the discussion on this topic, and thank your management for allowing you to participate. As a former engineer on a CAD program (Analog Artist) I know that dealing with customer complaints can be stressful to the point that management may decide it’s just not worth the effort.
I am still skeptical about the future of Make, but I will stick with it and hope that it is maintained over the years. I also like the idea of a small annual fee to cover the cost of these efforts.
SketchUp has never been open source software.
The definition of open source is:
denoting software for which the original source code is made freely available and may be redistributed and modified.
An example of open source software is Apache Open Office.
Okay, well fair enough, I might not know the correct definition of open
source vs freeware. For the purposes of my complaints, I don’t see a
significant difference, as I certainly never expected SketchUp to spring
out of thin air.
As it happens, my work does actually pay for a SketchUp pro license for my
use, as I’m in architecture and we use it now and then. I think this is an
appropriate situation for SketchUp to be paid for - we certainly shouldn’t
be making money off of a free software, without some kind of renumeration.
What would cause me to personally pay for SketchUp would be some meaningful
improvement in the performance of the program, which I’ve seen fairly
little of over the years. If SketchUp pro was actually more powerful, more
capable of production, I’d feel compelled to get my own copy for use at
home. If we’re talking about SketchUp Make… I’m not sure I believe it
should be paid for on principle, as the whole point was that it should be
made available to everyone. One solution would be to raise the price of
pro, and if need be, improve the performance of the program in a way that
uniquely and meaningfully benefits professionals.
That’s my take, I understand some of you don’t agree, but I would hope that
this isn’t a ridiculous perspective.
My opinion is that you are in your right if you are using Make at home for personal projects and for learning.
However, if you are doing company work at home then you should have the company purchase a license. Having said that - do realize that you are allowed to put 1 copy of SketchUp Pro on 2 computers under the same user license. Please remember that if you upgrade your computer then you need to uninstall before you upgrade. If the computer actually dies - then you need to get a hold of the company that you purchased the license from to straighten things out.
I do personal projects at home, including conceptual architectural stuff for my own interest, and prototyping/planning fabrication projects which are only ever hobby-level, never sold. I would never use Make to work for the company from home, for the reasons you stated. I would also not use the home pc with a Pro license to do company work because they didn’t pay for the machine, and it’s performance belongs to me.
I also wouldn’t use the company pc for personal projects, for similar reasons.
You’r claims are so preposterous they get hilarious. For the first time I wish this forum had a laugh reaction similar to that of Facebook. Sadly your rudeness takes much of the fun out of your post.
SketchUp was never open source. Nor has it ever been freeware.
There have been a lot of updates since version 8. The Ruby API has had many fixes and updates and the Ruby version has been updated making plugin development much smoother. The performance has improved a lot over the years allowing for a whole new type of models to be drawn. Accessibility has improved by allowing users to change colors. The good things about SketchUp like the simple and easy to understand modeling tools and the simple conventional user interface has stayed very similar.
I can agree that everyone that can access SketchUp Free on a proper computer could just as easily have installed the Make version. However Trimble wants to give access to SketchUp on Chromebooks and other almost-computers. While I’m absolutely not a fan of such closed systems they seem quite common in schools (poor students) meaning having a web version actually opens up SketchUp to a large number of new users.
Maybe you should read up on what open source means before calling a software open source (tip: it has to do with the source being open). A proprietary closed source program doesn’t magically become open source just because a community uses it to make documents that they then share freely with each other. This is a ri-f*****g-diculous claim! By that definition about every code editor would be open source and every office suite be open source because of the amount of documents created in them that are available for free.
The textures in SketchUp DO change from version to version but that’s irrelevant. Adding a few new textures (and removing a few existing to retain a small installer file size) is nothing compared to the work put into actual changes of the software itself. That’s like saying a car model hasn’t been updated for years because the bumper sticker is the same (even though it isn’t).
A lot can be said about the chose to going web based, as well as the user interface of SketchUp free, but being angry and rude because they no longer give you something for free, as well as just being plain wrong on point after point is ridiculous.
Julia, you seen to be very worked up by my post. I’m sorry if I’ve caused
you any undo stress by my having of opinions. This seems to be a problem
many devoted SketchUp users face, even at the risk of detriment to the
product they so adore.
I have already noted my own incorrectness in calling SketchUp “open
source”.
In a technical sense I suppose you could argue that it is not freeware,
although I think that betrays that you are fundamentally missing my point.
Which is: the free version of SketchUp was instrumental in strengthening
the community because it was still reasonably useful. It is not so any
more. If that fact did not qualify SketchUp as a freeware, then I honestly
don’t know what would.
As an aside, let’s not be pedantic and simply recognize that we are losing
significant functionality because the company wants to force us towards an
expensive software purchase.
Forgive me if I have not bothered to study your response as closely as
apparently you have done my own. I only have time to express my passionate
opinion, not to argue your convoluted one.
I love how none of you can really argue my actual point, so you choose to
niggle pedantically about my use of terminology. You must be great at
parties.
Make 2017 didn’t loose any functionality, is that your actual point?
I’m quite surprised how you are expecting to be taken seriously after starting off by calling people assholes and being just plain wrong on point after point.
I, just like you, am not pleased with the move to web, and I think the product managers have seriously underestimated how hobbyists use SketchUp. Furthermore I think the SketchUp Free interface has been dumbed down to a level where it is harder to understand than a conventional interface, and I struggle to understand how today’s SketchUp Free users are expected to become tomorrow’s paying SketchUp Pro users with the user interfaces being so different.
However, I’m trying not to be rude about not being given something for free anymore (or technically, not being given free updates anymore as SketchUp make 2017 is still available). Being given someone else’s software for free is not a human right. We should be thankful there was a SketchUp Make in the first place.
I presume we enjoy different kinds of parties.
I agree with you on the actual points you just made. I find it interesting that devotees such as yourself feel so personally affronted by the fact that someone might express a passionate opinion in passionate terms.
I do not agree with much of his “venting” and certainly not the cussing, … but …
To be fair, … he did not. Here is the quote:
… to which Anssi replied …
It has however, (just like FreeCAD and others,) been built atop many open source libraries and an open source CAD modeling framework called Open Cascade.
This information is required by these open source licenses to be “prominently displayed”. So find your SketchUp “Help” menu, and from it open the “About” dialog, … and click the “prominent” open source credits link to open the local "opensourcecredits.html" file in the SketchUp folder, and become informed.
But … open source code if licensed to allow it, can become the basis for closed source applications.
SketchUp’s GUI interface (and other innovations) are proprietary modules in addition to and separate from the open source “bones”.
The length of this thread surprises me. But it should stay up & running until there’s nothing up with Sketchup Make - bump.
I would not want to stick around if I found the going terse for my liking, never mind laden with profane expletives - they are wasted words, passion isn’t spewing descriptions of body parts and their functions. I agree with the poster however - nitpicking pedantry over the choice of words stalls what can be a speedy process. I note this post doesn’t begin with that all important checklist of exactly what is being addressed and a respectful nod to the [tacit] community rules - I refer to a post I once made that will likely find it’s spiritual home on Sketchfab or Blender, or just somewhere where reading it again is not a problem, for once it becomes clear, it doesn’t need reiterating, nor asking for it to be, or any craziness.
But this pile steams more.
The only thing that beats it is the SU2017 version, that now requires OpenGL3.0/> and above which is something I could not sufficiently research to get a solid answer before the purchase decision - I just got a decent refurbished i5 laptop to replace the one I had that was forever stuck at SU2016 for just that reason, but this one also has <OpenGL3.0, and with very little hope of changing it without an additional cumbersome external graphics card dock, I’m looking now to return and replace it as soon as possible - but since I opened this post, I realised it’s probably not worth it.
I have used Sketchup at home to plan for materials in projects I would never have started without such a modelling tool, the experience has been beneficial to others too, the last thing I created was a proposal for a development at the local allotments - I’m now landscaping a plot there based on the SU design concept I presented at a committee meeting - times like that I wish I was a pro, wouldn’t have won me that ‘contract’ as it was just my idea to use a pond liner on a plot that nobody sticks at long enough to make it work - a volunteer effort, but again with the allotment gardening and wider local community in mind as it will be an idyll for people to come enjoy - I will tell them how it all started on Sketchup - but be less inclined to say how easy it is to get and use, because I do not want that to be proven wrong.
I guess I would have ‘turned pro’ eventually myself - but affording both the computer and the software is prohibitive, so I know exactly where Sketchup has gone wrong because I recommended it at every turn and I know there are building supplies and timber merchants, online stores and all sorts of other retailers and stockists that have seen an upturn because people can realise the idea in their mind easier and actually commit to making something they would otherwise have allowed to lapse when the magnitude of it weighed heavy on their thoughts and they had no tool for pouring it all out…
…If things ever go back to the way they were for SU - it will be because it’s the best business sense - Google just needs to know which pies it’s fingers are in. I know I’m not buying a £900 phone.
What does Google have to do with it?
I’m done with my post on this thread, if nobody here wants it, Google can have it.
I don’t normally weigh into these sorts of discussions but maybe I can contribute something constructive to this argument from my dual perspective.
I’m an architect and Sketchup trainer in Australia. I run my architectural practice solely with Sketchup and I teach other architects and building designers how to use Sketchup for their own work. Thing is, I would probably have never got into Sketchup in the first place if Sketchup Make was not freely available to practice on and explore back in the Sketchup version 7 days.
Before putting down $700, people who are conscious about money (and most people are) will want some assurance that they are going to be able to use the program and produce something that is of value. While 30 days is a standard software evaluation period, it is not a lot of time when you are juggling projects or other duties - learning new software will always take the backseat. Many students will start out with good intentions but then key projects need finishing/bills need paying/reality takes over and before you know it the evaluation period is over. Perhaps a 60 or 90 day evaluation period should be considered.
There has also been much said in other threads about Make users using the software for commercial purposes. It is a useful standalone program (I am sure they have probably considered this) but maybe Trimble could consider charging something in order to at least recoup a bit of revenue from it - say $50 - and call it Sketchup Lite. Nearly “everyone” knows Sketchup by name so I think it would be reasonable to charge something rather than just give it away. As these forums show, you definitely can’t rely on people to only use Sketchup Make for non-commercial purposes.
And while it has been noted that Sketchup Free is available for anyone with an internet connect to use, its interface is too dissimilar to be of much use in learning the Pro version. To do real work you need real software on a real computer - I kind of feel that it is the wrong direction and a bit of a waste of time.
While I can’t see the future, losing Make could quite likely damage the popularity that Sketchup has enjoyed for many years simply because evaluating the software is much less appealing and inconvenient.
That’s just my opinion though.
He actually posted this preposterous definition of open source in a later comment.
I know I read it once. It did not need reposting 
I referred to his opening comment (which was correct in the open source aspect) and the immediate response, which was wrong. (Which then caused him in defending himself to “invent” these strange definitions.)
