Slashdot Mirror


Autodesk Embracing Open Source

Seba writes to tell us that Autodesk appears to be embracing open source with the recent donation of their web mapping technology to the open source community. From the article: "A snapshot of the MapServer Enterprise source code is available today through the new MapServer Foundation, an independent non- profit organization with the mission of supporting and promoting open source web mapping. The foundation's charter members include MapServer Technical Steering Committee members, the University of Minnesota MapServer Project, the DM Solutions Group, and Autodesk."

14 of 136 comments (clear)

  1. Autocad by dduardo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Great, so when are we going to see a native Linux port of Autocad?

    1. Re:Autocad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's sad that there is so much empty repetitive discussion about comment moderation..

    2. Re:Autocad by ZoTo · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not until they can get out of their API agreement with Micro$oft which stipulates that that AutoCAD must not be ported to any OS other than Micro$oft and even then, must be a currently supported OS (no DOS, Win9x, etc). Prior to this agreement, AutoCAD was ported to Mac and Sun as well as the DOS/Win3.x platform.

  2. Cool by rbanffy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No need to bash them or to compare their offer with gmaps... If it it good enough, it will stand on its own merits. If it is not, it will still depend on developer effort paid by Autodesk.

    Anyway, the more people benefit from this, the better for all of us.

    1. Re:Cool by Davorama · · Score: 4, Informative

      Most of the good stuff is not showcased for some odd reason.

      If you want to compare to google start with ka-map at http://ka-map.maptools.org/ but that's not the only interesting things going on.

      And realize that with these tools you get to render your own layers, not just lay data over google's background (maybe I'm not totally up on what all you can do with google's API though). Google has changed the web based GIS quite a bit but before them, mapserver was the best FOSS way to do it by far and it's still the way to do stuff where you need real control.

      --

      Davo -- Free speech, free software, AND free beer.

  3. Title is completely wrong by digitect · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The chances of AutoDesk embracing open source or anything like it is about as likely as their chief business cooperative, Microsoft.

    Everyone who is familiar with AutoCAD knows that AutoDesk is quick to embed any latest Microsoft technology and does everything in their power to de-stabilize their existing user base. Between file version issues and various Desktop modules, AutoCAD has become a house of cards that can now be replaced only by their recent Revit purchase. (Of course, before the purchase, they promised the user base that Desktop was the future--pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.) The entire product line has become an upgrade train, and since all their mid-range competitors have been squashed, no one can get off.

    This is quite sad because AutoCAD used to work on Unix. Much of the infrastructure still exists. (The archaic double-backslash or single forward slash path separators, for example.) Fortunately, the situation is so bad that there are many competing efforts to topple them. It will take some time, but an Open Source alternative could be derived from an emulator solution (IntelliCAD), a ground-up project (PythonCAD), a "ported" Apple solution, or an existing mature product (Cycas).

    But I am certain the title of this article is completely upside-down.

    --
    There is no need to use a SlashDot sig for SEO...
    1. Re:Title is completely wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Totally agree.

      It's really sad that Autodesk has gone from a stereotypical underdog -- a dozen guys in a garage struggling against the odds to make a CAD program that would work on an ordinary desktop PC -- to a cash-grabbing, customer-raping near-monopoly that would make even Microsoft blush with some of their underhanded sales tactics.

      Like this year's kick in their customers' teeth: "Buy Inventor, even if you're not ready for 3D yet, because we're giving it away really cheap as we retire AutoCAD 2002." Then, less than a month after the end of that promotion: "Inventor is now a subscription-only package. If you ever want an upgrade, you'll have to pay backdated subscription fees to the date when you purchased the Inventor package... and guess what? Because you bought AutoCAD 2006 as part of the Inventor package, you can never upgrade AutoCAD again without paying the exorbitant Inventor subscription fees."

      True story. They sucked their customers in, then they rammed them right up the Hershey Highway. An open source alternative cannot come too soon.

    2. Re:Title is completely wrong by optimus2861 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "It will take some time, but an Open Source alternative could be derived"

      I wish you were right, but I just don't see how. I don't believe the intersection of AutoCAD power users (primarily engineers and architects) and Open Source coders capable of writing an AutoCAD-like application (top-notch developers) is anywhere near large enough to take this on. There is virtually no "home user" base for AutoCAD, and developers who aren't also power users are going to have little appreciation for the kinds of things that an AutoCAD replacement would have to do. This isn't something you can hack together in a few months and start getting those engineers & architects switching to. It's got to be top-notch, polished, have all the needed features right away, and near-flawless cross-compatibility before any of the pros will even give it a look. And if you don't have the pros, you don't have anybody.

      As an engineer who does some AutoCAD work, I have to say I really think Autodesk's domination in the CAD field is even more than Microsoft's in either operating systems or office suites.

  4. Re:A little too late? by pagameba · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is actually completely different. Google Maps is a javascript API that allows you to integrate maps into your web-based apps. Its very cool. But you don't control the server side of this, the data it uses, nor can you change the source of the app. ADSK's software is full set of both server and client side code that you can use and deploy without restriction (okay, with restrictions of the LGPL) and use for whatever purpose (commercial, personal etc). Google has legal restrictions on the use of their API.

  5. From the mouth of Autodesk... by cutecub · · Score: 4, Interesting

    KQED FM's Forum program had Marcia Sterling, senior vice president, general counsel and secretary of Autodesk on their program recently.

    The discussion covered Intellectual Property in information technology.

    I'd be willing to bet, based on Marcia's responses during the discussion, that Autodesk is definately NOT embracing open source.

    Also represented on the program was the EFF and Stanford Law School.

    Link to Nov 21 Forum broadcast

    -S

  6. Re:A little too late? by imidan · · Score: 4, Informative

    The big deal about web mapping services for GIS shops is whether or not they work with the back end systems. In my state, more than 90% of the state, county, and local GIS departments run on ESRI software for their actual data services, so for them, putting data on the web with ESRI's ARCIMS web software is an easy way to go. Unfortunately, ESRI software is massively expensive. Fortunately, you can buy it in modules, so the web service is seperate from the database. Government agencies at all levels could probably benefit from open source web mapping tools, as long as those tools are compatible with the back end. Another very popular open source GIS web application is UMN's MapServer.

  7. Speaking as an 11 years Autodesk client... by Bullfrog · · Score: 4, Informative

    Autodesk is rapidly becoming a software rental company. Owning an AutoCAD license outright is possible, but upgrade pricing is more than their subscription pricing and every release you fall behind basically doubles the fee to upgrade. Once you are about 3 releases behind your permanent license reaches its "end of life" and is no longer upgradable, so you are forced to relicense the program at full fee if you want the latest version. Sometimes you are forced into the latest version by industry pressure. AutoCAD no longer writes to R14 format, only R12 DXF! So for the thousands and thousands of R14 users out there, open your cheque books and get with the program! Get new software! Stay current! Relearn (or ignore) the exciting new features. Oh, and you'll need new hardware too...

    What Autodesk are very, very good at is making money. They will not give up their upgrade gravy train, nor grant any rights to consumers that would disrupt that revenue stream. To keep their user base in line they have introduced the subscription model for upgrades. Skip subscription for a year or two and try to get back on and you'll be up for each year you skipped PLUS late fees. Stay on the subscription-go-round and you get a brand spanking new release every year, complete with MAJOR bugs and bloatware features like .NET integration. But guess what? You can only register and use the current version, so if it's out, you get it, and HAVE to use it. Too bad it may be bug-ridden and s-l-l-l-o-o-o-w-w-w, let alone not work properly with your customisations.

    To placate customers who are irrate at being force to use the current version, Autodesk graciously allow subscription clients to license the immediate previous release, but only while it remains the immediate previous release. Once a new release is out, you have to move up to the next previous release (which may or may not work with your customisations, etc.) If you require the use of any previous release they will, at their sole discretion, grant you temporary licenses to use a previous release (usually for 3-6 months at a time).

    And they wonder why piracy and abuse of their licensing is rife...

    Bullfrog

  8. Am I the only one? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Maybe people should do a little homework before [submitting,posting] and article... MapServer has been open source ever since the Univ Minnesota started it back in 1996. The story isn't that Autodesk is releasing a closed source software to the OSS community, it's that they are backing an open source software and community.

    I've been using MapServer for several years now, running it happily on various versions of RedHat, and lately a CentOS Linux box.

  9. Re:I thought MapServer already was Open Source by enjahova · · Score: 4, Informative

    MapServer was and is opensource. It was a project at University of Minnesota. What happened here is that a MapServer Foundation was created to oversee the project (like the Apache foundation). Autodesk is financially supporting this.

    The difference is that a more official structure, or foundation if you will, is given to a very necessary project. Now competition in GIS internet mapping should just be between MapServer and ArcIMS, and hopefully MapServer will catchup/surpass ArcIMS soon.

    http://mapserverfoundation.org/

    --
    "how can they call it a MINE if everything here is THEIRS?!?!" -Straight Jacket