Thanks for bringing this topic into the Forums discussion. You are correct that with the 2024 Release, we now limit to 50 named users. Also, we no longer distribute framework keys for previous releases. This impacts a very small portion of Community Edition (our new name for the free version of Innovator) users. Our position is that organizations using Aras Innovator to support large product instances should be on a fully supported subscription.
The Community Edition is (and always has been) intended to support developers to explore and experiment with Innovator; to support POCs and “try before you buy.” This kind of offering is unique to the industry.
Running mission-critical business processes on unsupported software is simply bad business practice. We encourage any organizations finding themselves in a situation where they cannot support their organization’s interests with this new change to reach out to Aras or a partner to evaluate how we can support them.
I think it is brilliant balance between encouraging organizations to explore the Aras Innovator platform at no cost while recognizing proportionate value to Aras for organizations that use it in production with over 50 users.
First of all, no other PLM vendor on the planet today provides a version of their software for evaluation or production use at no cost! It is stunning! Organizations get the benefits of years of work and access to frankly the most flexible platform available.
On the flip side, argue why an organization with more than 50 users should be entitled to no-cost access? If you have more than 50 users, you already are an organization with notable revenue. We regularly see a ratio of 1:5 or less for the number of PLM users to the number of employees. So, using that ratio, a 50-user operation will probably suggest 250 employees. That might further suggest the organization is probably doing about 50 million a year or more. They can't afford half-an-employee's annual salary for a subscription license of Aras?!
I would further argue, using the Aras OPEN platform in production is like starting a cocaine drip. You are ultimately cheating yourself in the long run. You'll get addicted, and quickly find yourself stuck in a rat's nest. For those that have been on the OPEN version for a few years or more, I would bet you have spent more money supporting the environment than what it would have cost you for subscription. Some of that expense was probably spent to improve functionality that Aras now provides to its current subscribers. Moreover, to upgrade now is going to be a significant expense.
What is the functionality comparison between the Community Edition and the Purchased Addition? Would like to know if there is a matrix as there was in prior releases.
some short questions that are maybe of general interest:
1. Let´s assume a user has following situation:
One production instance with Innovator 12 or 11
One test instance with Innovator 12 or 11
Installing Release 2024 (especially for testing purposes) should be possible without any problems in this configuration, right? Or is there something to consider?
2. Is the user limitation a hard or soft restriction (=does Innovator stop working if the user limit is exceeded)?
Thanks John. This makes sense and has been great for helping teams adopt Aras and get excited about it. This is one of the biggest reasons one of our business units moved to Aras.
I have a POC for a different business unit I've been working on a little bit here and there for a couple years now. As I prepare to share it with the broader audience here I think it'd really benefit from all the changes in the 2024 release. It is not easy to "upgrade" or move to new community editions though and bring "historical" data which is part of what value this POC brings.
Do you have any recommendations or options for the Community Edition users to keep their small instances or POC's current with the community?
2. The restriction is hard. I'm tried to install R24 in the test environment and filled it with fake users. As soon as the number of users, including the admin, root and other "system" users, exceeds 50, regardless of whether they are enabled or not, whether they ever logged in or not, only admin can login to this instance.
Thanks for testing! That´s an important information!
So users can't even use the 50 users unless someone identifies themselves as an Auth Admin or Super User. I'm surprised that not even the "logon_enabled" field is taken into account. It's like a built-in EOL function. Deleting historic users is not an option, as this would also require deleting data.
I see this release as experimental approach where they test out some ideas. They know their community isn´t Twitter - people don´t go crazy if you try something new.
Their own homepage still contains too many quotes from the founders that describe the basic idea and their motivation with the open release. Release 2024 doesn´t match from my POV. But why should they risk their credibility for the (Quote) "...very small portion of Community Edition [...] users"? Discontinuing the open release just wouldn´t make any sense.
I think we can found the motivation for this release in the history of 12SP9. It was a long running open release. An excellent version for users groups below 250 users that couldn't get a full subscription, but not the best one regarding demonstrating latest Innovator features. 12SP9 was a rock solid version, but with outdated UI compared to I14 and it didn´t include new fancy features like the TOC Editor or all the other quality of life improvements.
Release 2024 is offered clearly for marketing (show the latest and greatest you have) and testing. But it wasn´t intended as true open release. That´s why it has the inbuilt limitations regarding users and lifespan.
Year 2025 is just around the corner. I expect some finetuning in the whole concept. I am curious how they will solve this balancing act.
