"After more than 20 years, Autodesk has opted to not renew our AutoCAD reseller contract. We will stop selling AutoCAD as of February 1, 2006," writes Bob McNeel, one of the nicest and smartest guys in the CAD business.
Autodesk's move comes as no surprise, and was expected by industry pundits. McNeel's Rhino software competes with the preliminary design environment to be added to a future release of AutoCAD. As well, once a year, Autodesk renews dealer contracts -- nor not. So every dealer is on tenderhooks each January.
Bob continues, "Since our Rhino related business has grown to be more than ten times larger than our AutoCAD related business, the AutoCAD business will be missed but not uncomfortable. While we are disappointed, we are also grateful for the opportunity that Autodesk has provided us over the past 20 years. It has been a profitable and exceptionally educational experience."
He notes that his company has 150,000+ Rhino users, 3,000+ Rhino developers, and 750+ Rhino resellers. Future plans include developing new products code-named Toucan and Brazil for Rhino for design, engineering, fabrication, and manufacturing projects.
I'm surprised the Autodesk hasn't made an attempt to but Mcneel out. Rhino has some great tools I'd like to have available for use in Inventor and AutoCAD.
Posted by: Donovan | Jan 12, 2006 at 06:01 AM
Donovan:
It's more than likely that Autodesk managemen sees the Alias acquisition as filling their need for surface modeling software. (Incidentally, Autodesk took a run at the surface modeling market in 1993, when they bought MicroEngineering Solutions. It didn't work out too well.)
In any case, I don't know that McNeel would sell. His company has an employee stock ownership plan, and though a buyout would make his associates some money, my belief is that the culture shock would destroy the very things that make the company successful. (There was already significant culture shock with the Alias acquistion, even before it closed.)
Bob, and the people that work with him, have a great time doing what they are doing. Why change something that works?
Posted by: Evan Yares | Jan 12, 2006 at 09:55 PM