Here is a link to the academic proof of status requirements:
You do need to study at a university (or equivalent, check the previous comment for the details) but you don’t need to actually study Rhino at university
This conversation brings up the concept of Value and how there is a range in its perception.
When i was doing production work in direct competition internally with Catia, my output far exceeded Catia and there was huge output to input($) ratio disparity. Rhino was an exceptional value.
The Value to a student in a country with a with low income per capita is going to be seen a personal expense that may or may not pay off in time. The value in the case is an immediate negative.
If the software were completely free (the only value to the student) the difference is then cost to the employer in the potential future. When software companies offer free student access its with this in mind.
I would like to know more about users perception of Value & how that has affected your use of the software.
In general I think it’s fair to say we are increasing value at all levels.
I am from Chile. Somewhere in the middle of the scale of development. The fact that rhino isn’t free for students is a major drawback for student adoption. It doesn’t matter how much revit or autocad will cost, they can get the job done for free while at school. And the students get caught in the trap. That’s it.
And that’s exactly why giving it for ‘free’ is an illusion and pretty much a crime imo. At the school I work, there are plenty students that could afford Rhino, yet there is only a very small minority that will buy. But they do spend a couple thousands on a laptop and a phone and eat every day at the schools’ restaurant and smoke cigarettes.
The value of Rhino, or any other software for that matter, for students is low no matter the price because first, they don’t know it, second, they see no immediate way to make money with it, and third, all things software, (including ebooks, movies and music) in the end are intangible, and therefore have the potential to be obtained for ‘free’, even if it means downloading it as a pirated version.
Well, that’s not entirely it, actually. The responsibility here is also largely that of the schools and teachers themselves. I outlined in this post the possibility for a school to provide Rhino licenses free to their students for a cost to the school of only 3$/€ per student per year.
The problem is that the schools also succumb to the marketing tactics of Autodesk providing free software to students and educational institutions in the hopes of making them addicts later. “Oh, it’s all free, that’s great…!”
Its a pitty. Rhino would be much better suited for arch students than any BIM software. You learn a whole lot more when you have to draw things yourself, instead of inserting pre-made stuff in Revit.
I don’t think this thread leads anywhere… But its interesting that we constantly drift apart from the obvious fact that poor people having a much harder time in investing money in “expensive” software. Its clear to me that for many people Rhino is “inexpensive”, a good value. And yes Rhino is one of the cheapest general-purpose CAD around. But just because the others are worse, it doesn’t make Rhino cheaper for a person with poor background. For the majority of people on this planet 1000€+ is a lot of money. And there is a lot of room in between free and that sum.
Students are perfect examples, its not always clear who is really poor, you might not recognise this person. See you don’t see that person on the cafeteria, that person might have an expensive notebook (bought used, and by already spending a lot of savings) or such a person did not even manage to attend the university in first place. Its not just academcis using Rhino. The first years in university I managed to live from a total income of 500€ in Germany. I don’t know how I made it, but I definitly did not spend my money on technology. Even 200€ would have been a problem. But at least we had labs…
What do you guys think is going to happen if you are not managing to pay the price? You either use “force” or you switch to alternatives. Maybe even leaving the business… But its a loss in any case. I can imagine the overhead for McNeel (at least I think so), but maybe there is a win-win in providing alternative solutions for the “3rd” world (whatever this means).
…bro… that really sounds like a conspiracy theory.
What you said, true or not, doesn’t help the discussion.
Let’s try to stay on thread.
Currently most people learning software not from universities but from online where it takes 1 month to learn the software so a good appraoach should be to give the student license to anyone for 100 dollars (equals to coaching fees) for 6 month so in between he can learn for 1 month and earn some money from freelance work. After 6 month if he find it worthful he can pay the remaining amount to own the software. i think it will make sense as per current situation.
An online RHINO school that trains you how to use Rhino AND tests your learning as you progress. Extend the STUDENT license cost to all enrolled.
The training website would be provided by McNeel or an appointed representative of McNeel. The price of the software could be amortized over the training period.
Proficiency in Rhino unlocks continued access and certification for jobs listed on the website.
This can already be done by a reseller or an authorized Rhino trainer by sharing their lab license with the trainees (up to 30 simultaneous people) and all for free during the training session. However taking an online training course does not qualify one as a full-time student for buying an educational version.
Understood, just got caught up in the “blue sky” moment. Was told by an exec (customer) at a very large MAC CAD software company back in 2000 that their biggest competitor on the PC side attained its massive size by giving software away to students at low to no cost. He was telling me they wished in retrospect that they had done that also. I’m amazed at how fast 25 years goes by. 