I see that I need to correct some serious misunderstanding about the license consolidation. I am the Senior Product Manager for the RAM Structural System. I am the structural engineer that has directed the development of the RAM Structural System since we began it in 1988. Those that know me know that I am a fierce advocate for our users. Since RAM was acquired 14 years ago by Bentley I have continued to fight for changes when I felt our users were harmed by any Bentley practices or policies. For example, I pushed hard to have the overuse warnings implemented so that users could better able control their use and overuse. But this license consolidation was my decision. I believe strongly that it will benefit the vast majority of our users. I believe strongly that it will be better for our users than the current – may I say “haphazard” – licensing scheme of the individual modules. It is confusing to almost everyone, both inside and outside of Bentley. Clients often don’t clearly understand what capabilities they have and what they don’t. The inadvertent overuse sometimes occurred because the engineers using the program weren’t aware of what their company had purchased and what they hadn’t. I personally spent a lot of time explaining the licensing to our users, which kept me from my real responsibilities of working with our developers to make the program better. Even inside Bentley many didn’t understand what the various modules were, nor that they were merely part of the RAM Structural System. This resulted in mistakes and worse service to our clients. And tech support was affected even more than I was, which hampered their ability to provide a higher level of service answering the more important technical questions. I can’t express how disruptive, distracting, and how often, this issue was. Consolidation of the licenses is going to be better for us all.
We started posting a message on the main screen of the RAM Structural System on August 23 announcing the upcoming release of the new version and the license consolidation. Then on September 5 we posted a second message with specific details about the consolidation. These messages appear every time an engineer launches the program. The consolidation took effect two months later on November 4. At that time a marketing email was sent out to our users. The following week a second email was sent out from the Technical Support group to the main contact at each company, notifying them of the number of full licenses they have been upgraded to. Celt83 contacted us with concerns about the lack of notification. He pointed out that engineers that use the program may have seen the notifications, but they didn’t necessarily pass that information up to the administrators. Furthermore, through that discussion we also discovered that the Marketing email list only included those who actively use the program, it did not include administrators, which is why Celt83 had never received notification. That email as subsequently been sent out again, this time including administrators. Furthermore, we intend to re-send the email from Technical Support, this time including all administrators, not just the single person identified as the main contact. We appreciate Celt83 for contacting us directly with his concerns so that we could take corrective action.
Everyone got upgraded to the full RAM Structural System license, but no one is getting charged overuse charges for this upgraded RAM Structural System license through the end of the year, and our intent is to contact clients that haven’t properly set up the entitlement warnings and help them do so, so that they avoid any such charges.
Agent666 and JoshPlum both have it completely wrong. Using Celt83’s example that he posted on Nov 13 of a mix of module licenses, that example user has now been upgraded to three licenses of all of the modules; that is, they were given, free of charge, an additional 1 RAM Steel, 2 RAM Foundation, 1 RAM Frame Analysis, and 1 RAM Frame Steel Design. This is more than $9000 of free software. This year they would have paid approximately $3800 for the annual SELECT (update and support) agreement. The new cost for the annual SELECT will increase to $4800, but that increase will be phased in over a three-year period in order to avoid an abrupt increase. They have been upgraded to the full set of modules now but won’t see any cost increase until their next renewal, next year, at which time they have the choice of continuing or not; we are not forcing anyone to do anything. Note that most of our clients have a more balanced portfolio of licenses; those clients will actually see a 12% decrease in their annual SELECT costs. In addition, the cost of the full package has been reduced 35%, making additional copies more affordable.
With this consolidation, some users will be impacted. Some will see an increase in costs. But it all comes down to the value. With these changes in licensing, is the program still a valuable asset for you? Does it make your engineers more productive? Does it make you more competitive? For the price, is something else going to make better business sense? That is a business decision that you have to make, just like consolidating the licenses was a business decision that we had to make. I realize that while most clients are going to be happy with the change, it may not be suitable for everyone. I hope it isn’t the case, but RAM Structural System may not be right for some anymore. I would be sad if they left, but I understand it is a business decision, just like it was a business decision for Agent666 to switch to something else several years ago (for a reason that no longer exists). I am confident that those who stay with us will come to recognize the value of the change, if they haven’t already.
And finally, I need to respond to JoshPlum’s posts. You should know that he works for a competing software company. His comments are self-serving and hardly representative of those who have actually used RAM.
Allen Adams, P.E., S.E.
Senior Product Manager
Chief Structural Engineer
Bentley Systems, Inc.
