[Horus397]

Don't know if anyone sees this, has any interest, and knows an attorney that might be willing to investigate it, but I figured I would put it out there. It's been a little ridiculous with the way they've decided to name/promote their products over the last couple of years. It seems like their major point release cycles happen every six months or less and they are naming the product with the following year, thus getting two upgrade's per year while all along falsely promoting a product released, in say 2010 as a 2011 product.

While I know that car companies have a similar kind of release schedule they don't stamp a year label all over the product, packaging and promotion. Also, virtually no one buys a new car every year so they are really two distinctly different kinds of markets.

[Bjorn]

They are not doing anything illegal. Just because you're American doesn't mean you have to reinforce the stereotype of "suing the ass of everything".

[Horus397]

I'll respectfully disregard the anti-sentiment American sentiment of the last comment.

As I said I don't know for sure that it's illegal BUT I also don't assume that it's not illegal to manipulate consumers into believing their current software is out of date plus force them to pay for operation critical "software fixes" in order to profit from selling twice as many licenses of software per year either.

It definitely could be viewed as a potential racketeering case if someone really wanted to sit down and look at it with unbiased eyes. With AutoDesk releasing lots of buggy or incomplete features in every version and then basically forcing users to pay to resolve the problems in the next release that they created on an intentionally rushed development schedule it doesn't seem all that different from some crime syndicate rackets.

[Qitsune]

I think we should sue Adobe because Photoshop doesn't actually contain any shop.

Ok, seriously, there is a case to be made if you pay for something that doesn't work. I doubt there is much of a case for the naming.

[dman3d]

Yeah just naming me thinks.

[Bjorn]

Originally Posted by Horus397

I'll respectfully disregard the anti-sentiment American sentiment of the last comment.

As I said I don't know for sure that it's illegal BUT I also don't assume that it's not illegal to manipulate consumers into believing their current software is out of date plus force them to pay for operation critical "software fixes" in order to profit from selling twice as many licenses of software per year either.

It definitely could be viewed as a potential racketeering case if someone really wanted to sit down and look at it with unbiased eyes. With AutoDesk releasing lots of buggy or incomplete features in every version and then basically forcing users to pay to resolve the problems in the next release that they created on an intentionally rushed development schedule it doesn't seem all that different from some crime syndicate rackets.

Okey I'm sorry, I'm a bit grumpy today don't know what's gotten into me.

There's a thing called "caveat emptor", which basically makes the buyer responsible to check if there are any defects before buying the product -- With Autodesk standard 30 days trial on all their software this should be very much in effect. Also, the reason why they are not conducting racketeering is because they are not the 'only' solution. So if they create a problem, a competitor will fix it. To my ears, that is healthy competition

Shady business? Sure. Are they on their way to have a monopoly? Perhaps. Do they solve 99% of my problems? Yes Is it illegal? I'm afraid not.

[love2u]

Originally Posted by Horus397

I'll respectfully disregard the anti-sentiment American sentiment of the last comment.

On a personal note, I dare say that I like your discourse style. I appreciate anybody who refrains from using obscene and insulting language in cyberspace. You have earned my fullest respect for not allowing yourself to be drawn into verbal mudslinging.
However, I also think that you haven't really got a case against that company. So please do yourself a favor and don't waste your resources trying to sue them.

[Peter_Coene]

Last time I checked you could get a 2011 model car in 2010 too. Its the model of their product that they chose to put out on the market early for all those freaks out there who want the newest and best and want to get it 1st. Unless its going to make your 2008 version or whatever stop running you have not reason to complain about it.