Autodesk software now completely free for every school worldwide

Yes, if you’re a student or a teacher, you can now get all Autodesk software for free.

By the initial look of things, it looks like the use of Blender for any sort of education is about to disappear completely unless dramatic measures are done by Ton and co. (such as conforming certain aspects to be closer to the industry standard and implementing features that professionals have been asking for years). The point being on why one would use FOSS at all if the industry leader is simply giving you their software.

Granted, chances are a number of students are not going to be able to afford the software and will have to move to something else once the schooling is done, but Autodesk is really stepping up their game in terms of the availability of their software and listening to feedback from customers (the latter becoming something that Ton and co. may have to take lessons from if they really don’t want to go back to being completely irrelevant to the industry, that being back to the same square they were on when Blender first became open source).

So what can the Foundation do, and what is Blender’s fate if nothing changes?

So now everytime someone at Autodesk farts we will have a doomsthread like this? :slight_smile:

I don’t know which countries are now additionally included in this program, but afaik they had the student program for some time now. All you had to do is register an account and select the university/faculty you were attending in your country(probably the same process now, minus selecting the faculty?). I don’t think Blender was selected(if it was) by teachers because it was free, but because of it’s usability(like I said before, Autodesk had the student program for some time now).

I think you need to be aware that we’re entering a new era in 3D, an era where the fact that Blender is free is not seen as near as big an advantage as it once was.

That advantage may have even been one reason why Ton and co. have been able to grow the userbase while having a philosophy that states things like ‘we create our own standards’, because it obviously did not translate into a product that people wanted to buy during the NaN days. Now the commercial companies are creeping in on this advantage and the perception that the Blender devs. (metaphorically) duck for cover whenever the concept of industry standards are mentioned is more likely to become a major risk.

Well I think this sentiment might be missing the point entirely. Why do you think a large company like AD is taking such drastic measures to ensure the software is available?

We can argue till the end of time about what an “industry standard” is. And who will/should use Blender, and if/when large studios will adapt… yada yada yada.

I say it does not matter. The fact is, Blender is being used. By a lot of people. And it does not have to be large studios for this to have an impact on the decisions of a large company like AD.

There is a huge and diverse market out there. And a lot of what you see happening in the software industry is because Blender is here and being used.

Talking about a response to AD?

I think the other way around is already happening.

The future of software is more access to more people. Blender is already there. And a lot of people use it along with other software. Such as myself. I also use Maya and many other AD products. As well as other commercial products.

Blender is doing fine and in many ways spearheading a lot of what you see out there as far as licensing choices that are now starting to appear that are - in my opinion - a response to Blender’s availability.

I think by now, the question that Ton should answer is this…

If the top commercial offerings become free, would Blender still have enough to offer in terms of tools and usability to encourage the vast majority of users to stay around and help by way of donating, submitting patches, and making awesome artwork and animation?

If the answer is no, then something needs to change, this could be letting the community have greater influence on development, this could be improving the patch review process to not disenfranchise potential contributors, this could be weakening the copyleft imposed by the GPL, this could be conforming controls more closely to the rest of the industry, anything to turn that answer to say ‘yes’.

It’s been like that for years now. I was a student of 3d animation for 4 years, started in 2009. All the computers had Maya and Max- signed with a student license. We all got that license to use the software at home if we want to- for free.

Thing is back in 2009 Blender had advantages over maya. it still has. The reason I started using it was not that it is free.
It was just better at uv unwrapping. We were not allowed to install any new software at uni computers, which were quite useful as a render farm. But since blender does not need to be installed, I could run it off a flash stick. It’s ease of installation/run over maya was another plus. Autodesk software tends to take very long to install, you have to also deal with flexnet licensing crap that is a sheer pain in the ass. Honestly it is easier to crack their software than to license it (not saying I did heheh).

Granted Maya caught up on that front (better modelling tools now and uv unwrap) , it still has some disadvantages. Small things I got used to in blender, just make it feel nicer to model and texture my stuff in.
Maya is a pain to use for simple things. Blender just does simple things better.
Also blender is all in one package solution. With autodesk you still have to jump between their software (and buy more software of course) to do stuff. You need to move stuff between mudbox and maya, between maya and whatever they now have for compositing, and also matchmover. Blender just has all that in one and its simple to use and consistent somehow.

With autodesk products- you have to learn all the different programs they acquired over the years - with all the different interfaces.

Yeah they are stepping up their game. Getting real aggressive with the Maya LE (on steam), trying to get the indie developers with their deals- this is what can really hurt blender- since indie developers seem to be a big part of its professional user base. And maya is better at:

  • Mel scripting and python - allow maya users to easily automate their pipeline and write tools/ repeat actions
  • Better animation toolset- still king in animation
  • Better resource management and asset management. Better file referencing system.
  • better performance in terms of playback
  • better compatibility with game engines - its viewport supports cgfx and hlsl shaders, as well as glsl. You can directly compile them inside maya and view your character the way it will look in the game. They also added the ability to make such shaders with nodes, import and export them.
  • Better compatibility with game engines- this time thanks to FBX and the fact they own it and wont play nice about it.

For some reason I thought the student version of Maya or whatever was already free. Though not being a student, and not having much interest in Autodesk software anyway, I never did actually look.

Student use yes. Schools still had to buy. And a student version could not be used in labs or group projects. That was the school license before. Now that is free.

only way blender can win at this game is by continuing evolving in what makes it better than autodesk stuff. Those little features that are really crap in maya, but awesome in blender. Those put Blender in the hands and pipeline of maya/max users.

If the software is actually awesome, of course people will pick it up and use it over maya or max.

And the open source nature allows more drastic changes. I dont know if you have noticed but maya’s interface or design hasnt changed that much over the last decade. They cant afford to make their paying user base relearn, cant afford to be bold . As a result we see it evolve like a blob- with old stuff still there and new stuff on top - inconsistent with the old.

The real issue with schools and Autodesk is the status of autodesk in industry. They can easily back the claim that their software is industry standard. That alone is enough for schools to always pick maya and max over blender. They want their students to learn the industry standards.
To get blender in schools, you need to get industry to use it more and back the claim that it is also a standard.
Get schools involved in its development for starters- its open source aint it? Thats one thing autodesk cant do. Let others play with their code.

Until Blender’s animation tools can match or surpass Maya’s I don’t think it would make sense for any studio or school to change. Blender Foundation does make some wonderful character animations with their software though.

What animation tools is Blender missing vs Maya?

Yes … but still not able to open the gates of heaven …

ps: some printer tools+precision tools in Blender … ulala !!! huge diffffeerrrence sir, o yes.

Motionbuilder is a class act animation program, but …

Like was said, earlier, since 2009-2010 anyone with a student e-mail account and proof of school attendance at a high school or college level could get Autodesk products free. So not much has changed. And how much has autodesk advanced in those last five years?

In five years, by comparison, Blender has improved quantum leaps. Also, with the free versions do you get any of the plug-ins free, the plug-ins which make 3ds more user friendly or give that polish? Does it come with a reliable fast renderer, or will you have to get Brazil or Vray to get good output in a reasonable time.

I do feel this wider emphasis about AD free student versions is an attempt to undermine open source competitors like Blender. But I’d also be surprised if people started deleting their copies of Blender and jumping ship to Autodesk.

I’m sure the boards of directors of many schools are very happy with this news - now they can award themselves higher bonuses due to all the software savings they’re about to make.

Ace, I like some on here had thought that was the case for years. So you not only have your program in many large studios but give it to the learning institutions. Oh, so when one of those same studios advertise for help the recent graduates just happen to be proficient in a Autodesk program. That was a stroke of genius on their part in my opinion.

Then you have smaller start up studios who simply can’t afford Autodesk on four workstations with plug-ins and the yearly upkeep. I think we both know who they turn to. So Blender fills a niche if you will. Damn, man Blender might always find itself filling that niche. And, doing it rather well I suspect.

And, when I say rather well I doubt if we could recognize a TV commercial done on Blender from one done in Maya. Now the workflow and time involved I can’t comment on. I guess Maya with all the plug-ins would still be the gold standard and why would that not be the case. My God man what does it cost to roll Maya out on a desktop with all the plug-ins.

I think without heavy commercial investment like Linux, Blender won’t get anywhere near a competitive industry standard. It’ll be used by hobbyists, smaller studios and in smaller roles, but it won’t break that ceiling. As much as we appreciate the BF’s hard work, it’s simply not enough to match pace with “the industry standard”.

Open source sometimes favors quality over quantity. Even though open source can potentially have more conitrbutors and developers, they’re not as focused a group as a commercial development team with deadlines and backing payrolls.

This snippet is from an article about the main linux problems on the desktop, but applies to FOSS in general:

Money, enthusiasm, motivation and responsibility: I predicted years ago that FOSS developers would start drifting away from the platform as FOSS is no longer a playground, it requires substantial efforts and time, i.e. the fun is over, developers want real money to get the really hard work done. FOSS development, which lacks financial backing, shows its fatigue and disillusionment. The FOSS platform after all requires financially motivated developers as underfunded projects start to wane and critical bugs stay open for years. One could say “Good riddance”, but the problem is that oftentimes those dying projects have no alternatives or similarly featured successors.

I guess the cover was getting bigger.

I knew because when I further my study for a degree back then (before I stop due to work) there are some uni listed, but not mine. So I guess the uni must take the initiative. And not all uni have .edu extentsion, or emails for their student (another long rant). Anyway an official letter and student card scan solved the issue. I guess now the coverage is more country and even more school, I guess. Or maybe more easy, one eye closed.

I mean they know Houdini have free version for everyone. So I guess its a matter of wink wink nudge nudge. Maybe some of them planned to do something, but higher up says no, so this is middle ground.

I think that developers could be drawn into blender, if it focused harder on a being a one stop game making pipeline,

Thank you for all your work on harmony Mahalin btw.

Faster production of devoted coders for blender

  • -All in one coding tool, click go - Downloads selected build files (from a list in the program)
  • -Collaboration support tools - via multiuser blending -(see “verse”) as well as a irc chat app in said coding platform?
    • Documentation support in blender links directly to said tool. (I like a feature and want to understand it - right click ->open code platform)
    • less hostility to “newbs” … they are your future coders if you nurture and teach them.
    • Openness - Don’t reject proposals, refine them, and point out where they are infeasible, don’t ignore them.

Pitfalls I have witnessed

user proposes Idea for tool

tool is rejected based on user, not content,

-> I purposed -

Walking ragdoll support in game engine
Same as -

  • already coded a wrapper for the bge, it would just need adapting to the UI bullet integration. as well as rewritten - (it runs fine for me, but my game is a game not a tool)

VR handles for walking ragdoll input - ( controllers)
better F-curve support for game engine recording
UI VR tools

many of the ideas simply did not get a reply at all.

I imagine people making a actor, rigging him, then acting in the game engine, then rendering.

scenes could also be replayed in the game engine in “Camera man mode”

I also imagine multiple actors working in tandem in one scene, via multi-user mode…

add some of these bleeding edge features, and it will make blender stand out, as it’s own tool.

(3d studio and Maya don’t have a built in game engine right?)


site note I´m always shivering when I read Autodesks Eulas.
they are allowing themselfes to visit your home(s).
I had to install two tools of Autodesk for university and fully regret installing and being forced of using those tools
(for a short amount of time since I de-installed their tools in totaldisgust)

every sane person in university /school or the student himself/herself
should and must read those eulas before making the decision of getting their home invaded and the rights stolen to sell their own creations.

Autodesk is therefore no threat for Blender and its ridiculous to start these doomsday threads.

it ain´t working as long as you can´t earn money with their “free” tools - excluding their eulas which rip you of your rights.