Through the Interface

The ADN program opens its doors

There is big news from the Autodesk Developer Network team: there's a new membership tier in town, and it's free!

Open doorADN Open is designed for people who are interested in developing with Autodesk software, but can't justify the expense of $1,000+ dollars per year in membership fees.

Over the last year or more, we've been investing significant resources to put in place the infrastructure to support this free tier of ADN:

  • Publishing a significant portion of our DevNotes – which were previously only available to ADN members – via our public DevBlogs.
    • The only exceptions will be deprecated or confidential material (we won't be posting beta information via our DevBlogs, for instance).
  • Increased presence on the API discussion groups
    • We're working on integrating our back-end infrastructure with the API discussion groups – so that we know when standard & professional ADN members have posted questions to the forums that we should answer. We're also making sure we spend more time in the forums to help address questions coming in from ADN Open members, too.
  • Making sure all our training material, DevTVs, etc. are publicly accessible via our Developer Centers

Which all adds up to the fact that many people for whom ADN was too expensive can now get the help they need to develop applications for Autodesk software.

There are still situations where companies will choose to pay for either standard or professional ADN membership, though:

  • Access to software – whether beta or released – for development purposes
  • 1-on-1 support from Autodesk
  • Pre-release information about Autodesk products, including an invitation to our annual DevDays tour
  • The ability to publish company and product information on Autodesk's Partner Products & Services website

And of course ADN Standard and Professional members will also benefit greatly from being able to use standard search engines (such as Google) to research issues without logging in to the ADN extranet.

Here's a comparison of the various membership tiers, to help you determine which is right for you:

 

   Open

       Standard

    Professional
Discussion group support        ●               ●               ●
Access to public KB content        ●               ●               ●
Access to NDA KB content                 ●               ●
1-on-1 support response time   3 business days   1 business day
Software for development use                 ●               ●
Company info on partner products                 ●               ●
Cost      Free 1,400-3,800 $/€   2,300-5,600 $/€

If you'd like to understand more about the rationale behind this change, I recommend reading this blog post by Stephen Preston.

photo credit: seagers via photo pin cc

  1. James Maeding Avatar
    James Maeding

    You should add in "Free access to theswamp.org" as well as "free access to Kean and Preston's blog". Both are more useful than the kb in my experience.

    Autodesk has always had the option to participate more in the DG's, and they would have to to make up for the experienced users that stopped following posts when NNTP was cut. Exposing the kb is useful, but you really feel this qualifies as a new ADN mebership level? I was thinking the personal help, and access to seats of acad for dev use, were the main things that made ADN ADN. Sorry for the downer post, but the people who develop on acad are not that interested in the marketing of things we kind of already have.

    Reply
  2. Kean Walmsley Avatar
    Kean Walmsley

    James,

    This is not about rebranding "what you already have": this is explaining how Autodesk is very deliberately investing resources in helping a different segment of our development community. Listing "free access to The Swamp" wouldn't be very fair as it's not something we're providing ourselves (although I do expect you to see more of a presence from Autodesk there than before).

    We are investing significant resources in posting on the DevBlog (which has Stephen's whole team behind it - not just himself) and providing support via the online forums. And much of the content you're seeing on the DevBlog is KB content, of course. If you look back 7 years or so - before we started our public developer blogs, such as this one - ADN had a very different resource allocation model. The shift to "free" started with the launch of this blog and the publication of recorded webcasts and DevTVs, and gathered momentum with "Plugin of the Month" and "My First Plugin" and now dedicated forum support. The way ADN allocates resources today is radically different from even 5 years ago.

    People place different values on different benefits they get from ADN. If you value development software and direct support highly, then ADN Standard or Professional will continue to be your best option.

    Kean

    Reply
  3. Steve Johnson Avatar
    Steve Johnson

    On reading your post title and introduction, I was very pleasantly surprised. I was hoping for a significant move towards restoring the free access to developer resources that once existed in the days when Autodesk used to boast about having 3,500 development "partners".

    The more I read your post, the more I was baffled. "Where's the beef?", I thought. By the time I got to the end, I was unable to work out any difference between an ADN Open member and not being one. Clicking on the link to the ADN Open site, the reason became clear; there is no difference because there is no membership.

    Don't get me wrong, I applaud the move towards putting more information out there and greater Autodesk participation in public blogs and forums. Great to see. Well done, Autodesk. There should be more of it in non-developer areas, too.

    But to me, this ADN Open announcement looks *exactly* like rebranding what we already have. James is right. Spin like this is pointless and even counterproductive among the kind of people it's aimed at. Nobody intelligent enough to do CAD development work is likely to miss the lack of substance.

    Reply
  4. Kean Walmsley Avatar
    Kean Walmsley

    I think the misconception may be in the intended target audience for this program. People who are currently doing CAD development on a budget - and don't see the value in paying for ADN to get development licenses and direct support - aren't getting anything "additional", as such: just a much greater investment from Autodesk. Which is – as you’ve agreed – important.

    But this is not really about existing developers, as much as it is about the next generation of developers who are starting to do CAD-focused development (such as those working on mobile products, for instance). They are very often cost-sensitive and this new "membership tier" (for want of a better description) helps make it crystal clear that you can develop with Autodesk software without any up-front cost (other than the software, although this model is likely to be different with non-desktop software). Which is, in itself, a helpful clarification: I've heard it said many, many times over the years that you need to be an ADN member to develop with Autodesk software, which isn't true: all our SDKs are available for free*.

    Kean

    * There may be one or two that are not publicly posted, for one reason or another, but this is very nearly a true statement.

    Reply
  5. James Maeding Avatar
    James Maeding

    I would agree you don;t need to be an ADN member to develop, and I did so for many years. The adesk DG's and books out there were great. The single most signifigant change that would have made ADN more necessary was the degredation of the DG by the web-only interface we deal with now. It is impossible to do the basics of following replies in a thread. I have tried the liear and tree format and both seriously stink. The stink by your standards and anyone who experienced NNTP using outlook express or forte agent, and others. We are talking about the key portal to the info you advertise. I would suggest the first thing you could do to back up the claim that adesk is participating in the DG's more, is to read the posts here:
    forums.autodesk.com/t5/Autodesk-Discussion-Groups/bd-p/3011
    and get ahold of Eric Wright, and get the format efficient again. At a minimum, the headers should be one line per each, and have + signs to expand and see replies. One header per line, its just common sense and adesk has been educated on the issue many times. This would be a huge win-win as both sides need better reading abilities than offered. We are already giving up "off-line" reading, so revising the interface is really only half the battle. If I missed some better way to view the posts, let me know.
    thanks

    Reply
  6. Mohnston Avatar
    Mohnston

    I think this is great. I've been wanting more developer content for years. DevBlog is a great start. The discussion groups have been a tremendous help and it's good to see "Autodesk people" participating more there.
    I too am a little puzzled by calling it an Open Membership where there is no advantage of being a "member" vs. being a person looking at the content.
    Maybe I've been a member of the "Autodesk Developer Network" all along by virtue of my reading and participating in the discussions. I just didn't know it!

    The membership thing is semantics as far as I can see. The real important thing is that developers are getting more.

    For what it's worth I am an ADN member. (the paying kind)

    Reply
  7. Steve Johnson Avatar
    Steve Johnson

    As I've been doing development based on free APIs in Autodesk products for about a quarter of a century, this availability doesn't exactly come as a surprise to me. Sorry, I'm still not seeing anything other than empty marketing and rebranding-of-nothing-much here.

    Reply
  8. Kean Walmsley Avatar
    Kean Walmsley

    You're entitled to your opinion, of course (one I happen to respect a great deal).

    To summarise the way I see this: it's about communicating a shift in resource allocation away from a "costly" (in quotes because most ADN members tell us they value their membership highly) program to one that people can easily use to get started working with our technology when in a cost-sensitive environment.

    Focusing a significant amount of the ADN team's resource on purely public activities (primarily blog posting & forum support, but also other types of content) seems worthy of updated messaging - I personally see this rebranding as being far from empty.

    As you say, you started developing 25 years ago when Autodesk had a different support model for external developers. You probably cut your AutoCAD-development teeth getting online help via Compuserve and direct phone support from Autodesk. At least that's what many did, back in the day.

    This is about ADN entering a new phase of its existence, recognising the need for Autodesk to invest and provide a broad-based, scalable program that meets the needs of the next generation of innovators working with our software.

    Kean

    P.S. It may be easier to dismiss this tier because it's available for everyone without the need to register. But I fully expect that we'd have heard far more complaints from people if we'd imposed registration on people. This is not about being able to claim a broader base of developers: this is really about getting help to people in the most effective way, without putting up unnecessary hurdles.

    Reply
  9. James Maeding Avatar
    James Maeding

    I guess our comments show how well Autodesk has done, and is doing at letting us get at development resources without an extra fee. Is there a chance you could do a video on how you would research a technical issue? I have seen so many web pages by autodesk now, I wonder if I have misunderstood any transitions. I know the DG pages, and the ADN knowledgebase link, but no other adesk ones besides blogs. I feel like the ADN kb is the least useful. A support case with one on one help is always super useful though...thanks

    Reply
  10. Kean Walmsley Avatar
    Kean Walmsley

    It's not fully clear to me what you're getting at, but anyway: I'll pass on the request for this video to the ADN team (as I'm probably not the best placed to create this, myself).

    Kean

    Reply
  11. Steve Johnson Avatar
    Steve Johnson

    Actually, my Autodesk development history significantly predates my CIS:ACAD involvement, and then I was generally providing help rather than receiving it. I've never, ever had any direct phone support on any development issue. Not that I'm claiming guruhood here; you're 100 times the developer that I will ever be.

    I get the point. Things have changed somewhat. Autodesk wants to point that out. Fine. We'll just have to agree to disagree about the accuracy/honesty level of this particular way of getting the message across.

    I don't see the registration/non-registration thing as greatly significant, but it does clash with the language about "membership". You still need to provide all your details to download the ARX API anyway.

    Reply
  12. Kean Walmsley Avatar
    Kean Walmsley

    >>>You still need to provide all your details to download the ARX API anyway.<<<

    True enough, although I've never known that information to be used for anything. I didn't even think about that, to be honest.

    An interesting side note: the ADN tells me they'll be launching an additional "membership" benefit which I expect will help make this feel more like one (it will certainly provide a 2-way communication channel, which will be very helpful). No doubt implemented via existing social media infrastructure (such as a Facebook page).

    It should complement existing blog-related communication (which is primarily technical) with more program-/event-/business-related communication (ADN members currently receive this via the DevNews newsletter).

    Kean

    Reply
  13. Gaston Nunez Avatar
    Gaston Nunez

    Hi,

    I mostly agree with James Meading that ADN Open is something we already had, but I think that using a more fine grained membership scheme would be well received, as the jump from Open to payed ADN membership is too long. Perhaps some symbolic payment (in the $50-$100 range) with granted access to beta software and some other service from ADN may deserve a shoot.

    Reply
  14. Kean Walmsley Avatar
    Kean Walmsley

    Hi Gaston,

    I've passed your request on to the ADN team.

    Best regards,

    Kean

    Reply
  15. Dances With Elephants Avatar
    Dances With Elephants

    Gaston - good feedback! We (Autodesk) are still considering what more support we might offer "start-up" developers using ADN Open tools (forums, blogs, etc)to bootstrap their building a new business. Anyone can request beta access today (yes not quite as good as a paid ADN membership where you are 100% assured of beta access). The tricky part is some benefits require us knowing a lot more about a developer - so opening DevDays to ADN Open users would require they sign an NDA - and us do a little vetting of who they are. Maybe making a limited duration license of desktop products available - say a year instead of the current 30 day grace period? Again would really require us to get more information from the developer so we know they are a developer and not someone looking for free design software for a year. A lower cost ADN membership? I recall we had a $500 ADN membership ten years back. All things we/I am considering.

    I do feel a little "unfairly picked on" because we phased in delivery of ADN Open benefits (moderated forum where we are committed to answer all questions, DevBlogs that now have several hundred FAQS that used to be only available to paid ADN members, My First Plug-In API learning modules and more) over several months. If we had announced the coming future development support improvements under the ADN Open brand before we delivered the new benefits, would you think differently? We started delivering before we announced ADN Open to insure we could meet our commitments. Sigh.

    In any case, I appreciate your ongoing support, interest and investments in Autodesk technology! Autodesk would not be in the strong position it is without you and many others support/commitment.

    Reply
  16. Steve Johnson Avatar
    Steve Johnson

    I understand your point about the phased delivery reducing the impact of this announcement. However, there's nothing unfair about the criticism of this marketing method. Even if it were all delivered and announced on the same day, I would have still found "ADN Open" a somewhat misleading name.

    I suspect the same goes for anyone who remembers the cost going up from $0 to $500+ when the third party developer program was renamed to ADN. If you make an announcement with a name change that implies the cost of ADN membership is going back down from $1400+ to $0, and then people find out that's not really happening, you should expect some disappointment to be expressed.

    I guess people will get used to the name, as they have got used to others. Autodesk University? Worthy as it is, AU is not actually a university, strangely enough. AutoCAD WS? Useful to some, but not actually AutoCAD, strangely enough. ADN Open? Join the club.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *