I’ve been reading quite a few posts on this forum from SketchUp users who are considering leaving SketchUp because of the continuous increases in the cost of the Pro subscription. I’d like to start a discussion about this issue.
One question has always puzzled me, and I’d be interested to hear what other users think.
SketchUp is a fully functional standalone application. It works perfectly well without LayOut, and many users never use LayOut at all. So why is every SketchUp user required to pay for a product they may never need?
In my case, I don’t use LayOut, and I suspect I’m far from the only one. I wouldn’t be surprised if a significant percentage of SketchUp users are in the same situation.
Wouldn’t it make more sense to offer two subscription options?
SketchUp only at a lower price for users who don’t need LayOut.
SketchUp + LayOut at the current price for those who rely on both applications.
This would give customers more choice and make SketchUp more affordable for users whose workflow doesn’t include LayOut.
What surprises me most is that I rarely see this topic discussed. Is there a reason why the community hasn’t pushed for a standalone SketchUp subscription, or have I simply missed previous discussions?
Interesting point.
The rationale behind LayOut’s existence is no longer what it was when it was first created. It came about because of what fans wanted: to use SketchUp without being forced to use AutoCAD (or similar software), where the UI experience isn’t quite the same.
Today, with the subscription model, BIM, and the imperfect workflow between SU and LO, one thing is certain: the price of the SU subscription—whether with or without LO—will keep rising as long as enough users remain locked in. We are a long way from the original fan requests.
Another point : the SketchUp + LayOut workflow hasn’t been adopted by all professional SketchUp users. I’ve rarely seen it used (as you).
the flaw in your logic is that by removing layout, trimble would reduce the price of sketchup.
they won’t.it’s part of the package, you pay for it whether you use it or not. why would they ever offer a deal that would bring less money for the same product ?
when you rent photoshop, you also get adobe bridge. I never used adobe bridge. but it’s part of the deal.
well, many pro users actually use layout in some capacity.
most professional sketchup user I encounter use layout in some capacity.
… I guess your sketchup killer will not contain a layout killer then.
yeah, every now and then, then the usual trimble haters come around because they smell blood (oh hey alan, long time no see). some people come back, some don’t.
overall, most people on this forum don’t care, it’s not a train station, no need to announce your departure. and if they have found reasons that makes them leave sketchup, what are we, simple users, gonna do about it, and why should we bend backward to try to keep them around ?
it’s not a cult. they are not giving up their nationalities or abandoning their families. they are just moving to a different software.
I didn’t post anything on adobe’s forum when I decided to not renew my subscription. should I have ?
Yeah, I thought the same thing. There should be separate subscription options: one for SketchUp only and another that includes the full suite. I always disable LayOut when updating SketchUp.
That’s a poor comparison. Adobe Bridge is free, so you are not paying for it as part of the Photoshop subscription. Adobe also allows users to subscribe to Lightroom or Photoshop separately. In other words, Adobe does offer different packages depending on which products you actually need.
I think calling them “Trimble haters” is a bit unfair. Some people may dislike Trimble, but others are simply long-time customers who are frustrated by the repeated price increases. Raising concerns about pricing doesn’t automatically make someone a hater.
I don’t think that’s a good comparison either. Whether you chose to post on Adobe’s forum was your personal decision. Other users may want to explain why they’re leaving, and that feedback can be valuable to both the community and the company. It doesn’t automatically mean they’re seeking attention or that their opinions don’t matter.
I’ve been saying the same thing for years now. We need a reasonably priced version of desktop SketchUp for the non professional user. Something that can still install extensions but is not as full featured as the Pro version. Yes, Layout should only be available in the Pro version. SketchUp Make should be resurrected but this time don’t give it away for free.
You might have a point here, but I’ll give my opinion. From many years I regarded Layout as some sort of “thing” that comes to fill a space in a bundle. But then one day, my boss asked me to look further into it, for a client we had who wanted to document very complex projects in millimeters. That was a turning point for me and I can’t picture myself having to work without Layout nowadays. I tell you more: spending due time creating your custom scrapbooks and templates is an absolute game changer. You’ll never open Autocad again without feeling discomfort. Using Sketchup + Autocad is far from practical, while using Skp + Layout is more practical and straightforward to document projects professionally. And that might be the reason why both softwares are bundled, because its intended to be a complete tool, but split in two. I also thing that maybe the idea of including Layout along with Skp is the best way for developers to test the software and get feedback.
Using AutoCAD + SketchUp, or Revit alone, is more common in larger firms where workflows are highly standardized. The SketchUp + LayOut combination appears less common and is typically found in smaller practices.
It may well be a matter of firm culture. That said, there are also technical limitations or problems in SU+LO that can make the workflow unreliable—such as broken links between SU geometry and LO dimensions (despite the adoption of Persistent IDs), some problems with viewports, and so on.
I believe the real, underlying, recurring problem isn’t Layout, but the price of the desktop subscription—and the subscription model itself, which creates a host of other issues beyond just the cost.
As an architect, I started using SketchUp many years ago, primarily because of how easy it was to create 3D models. It allowed me to produce excellent presentations for projects that I designed in my dedicated architectural CAD software (DataCAD/Spirit).At one point, I watched an impressive YouTube demonstration of LayOut and thought, “I have to start using this.” Since it was included with my SketchUp Pro subscription, it seemed like an obvious next step. I invested a considerable amount of time learning it—following tutorials, reading documentation, and experimenting. Altogether, I probably spent several weeks trying to integrate it into my workflow.For context, I’ve been working with CAD software for nearly 40 years, almost exclusively in a vector-based environment.The point where I gave up was when I realized that producing dimensioned construction drawings in LayOut became extremely slow—and in some cases almost unusable—as the project grew. The recommended solution was often to switch the viewports to raster rendering. While I understand that a hybrid vector/raster workflow may work well for many users, it wasn’t the way I wanted to work. On top of that, I struggled to produce drawings that met European DIN standards, particularly with dimensioning.
My personal experience does not mean that LayOut is a poor application. On the contrary, I recognize that it is a powerful tool, and I’m sure it has received many improvements since I last used it.
The point I wanted to raise is different. My argument is simply that there are reasonable grounds for offering two pricing options: one for SketchUp only, and another for SketchUp + LayOut. Users who don’t need LayOut shouldn’t have to pay for software they never use, while those who rely on the complete package could continue with the current subscription.
The original argument is flawed. Sketchup always was and has always been the Pro product. Back when it was @last it was a fully pro commercial product. Google gave away a version in an ill fated attempt to have users build a 3d world for them. It didn’t work and if Trimble hadn’t bought it it would have been taken out the back, shot and buried in a shallow grave like everything else that google failed with.
At some point layout was added as a ‘paper space’ addition. It has never been a standalone drawing packet.
So, selling sketchup without layout at a discount is a step back in commercial terms. Sketchup is the product, as you are all aware because it is the bit you want, layout is a bonus addon.
No sensible business would ever consider what is being suggested here.
They could offer layout as a standalone product at a reduced price, I’m sure it would be a huge seller.
Calling LayOut a “bonus add-on” doesn’t change the fact that it has its own development costs. Every SketchUp Pro subscriber helps fund LayOut whether they use it or not. The question isn’t whether LayOut has value. The question is whether users who don’t need it should have the option to subscribe to SketchUp without it.
Which is the very point I addressed. The full subscription is paying for layout. Removing that by selling just sketch up at a reduced price is unsustainable.
Back when it was @last software, SketchUp was a standalone product, without LayOut. LayOut appeared with version SU6 as a beta product, then was finalized in versions 7 and 7.1.
It wasn’t called “Pro” and was very limited in its initial version; essential features were added right up to version 4. The “Pro” designation was introduced because a free version was released via Google, which expanded the user base.