New community edition (Release 2025)

I don’t want to unnecessarily bring this topic into the public eye if things were simply poorly planned or communicated. I understand that the decisions around the Open Release were mainly aimed at a few large target customers, and others may have been overlooked.
However, if some of these decisions were made with less than full transparency, I believe it’s important to raise awareness within the software community.

jsperling eli_donahue asebastian christopher_gillis 

Is it still to be expected that Aras will provide feedback here?
(I am aware that none of the people in cc are directly responsible, but I needed to include a few people to raise awareness.)

I want to quote Peter Schroer: "If there is something you’d like to tell us, let us know. We are not fragile."
I hope some of that mindset still remains!

Congrats on Aras’ impressive result in the latest Forrester Wave report! The report includes an interesting quote:

"Customer feedback. Reference customers [...] agree that it (=Aras) communicates clearly, fulfills its promises, provides great customer service, and resolves issues quickly."

Well… when it comes to the Open Release, I’d say the communication hasn’t exactly been crystal clear - and the promises? Still a bit of a work in progress.

The current promise is an Open Release that supports "50 enabled users". Is that really fulfilled?

Back then, when you had fewer than 250 users, Aras actually encouraged companies not to go for a subscription. I was personally assured that there would always be an Open Release I could rely on. So…where exactly is my Open Release?[emoticon:98f842990f454422aa6a04953955f9d9]

But besides my own personal story with Aras:

Of course, the Open Release and its few users may be lower priority. But the Open Release is often the first point of contact external users have with the software. What kind of first impression does it leave when the product doesn’t even meet its own stated specifications and promises? That’s definitely something that could be improved!

I have installed the Community Edition 2025 and my first impressions is that, they heavily worked with UI changes and it looks nice. Rest is same as before maybe need some more time to test. However RE package for Release 2025 is missing but I see packages for all other Modules

To outsource some work, I asked ChatGPT for its opinion on the open release. I think the result sums up the situation quite nicely. 

Used questions (not exactly the original prompts, but very similar):

- What do you know about the Aras Innovator open release? How were the limitations?
- Was it always just intended for testing?
- What is the current situation?
- Does this match to what was promised earlier?
- Was the swift executed well?
- What can they do to improve the situation?

We all know ChatGPT talks far too much. Here's the summary:

1. Historical Reality: Open Release Was Truly Unlimited

When Aras introduced the open release model in 2007, it was positioned as a fully functional, production-ready PLM platform. It came with no user limits, no licensing fees, and no enforced constraints on deployment scale. This wasn’t just for testing or pilot use—Aras explicitly encouraged real-world adoption, especially by smaller companies and early adopters. For over a decade, this model set Aras apart from traditional PLM vendors.

2. The Shift: Quiet Repositioning Over Time

In recent years, Aras has quietly redefined the purpose of the open release. It is now often described as intended for evaluation or testing only, rather than for production deployment. This recharacterization stands in contrast to the original messaging, and the change has been introduced without clear or direct communication to the user base.

As a result, users who initially adopted Aras under the impression of long-term free use are now being discouraged or prevented from continuing at scale unless they purchase a subscription. The open release still exists, but it is increasingly restricted, and its development path has diverged from the enterprise edition.

3. Was the Transition Handled Well?

Unfortunately, no—the shift was not handled in a transparent or structured way.

• Messaging has been inconsistent: what was once “free for unlimited users” is now described as “just for testing,” without acknowledgment of the change.

• There was no clear communication outlining how the open release would be limited going forward.

• Long-time users—especially those who adopted based on Aras’s earlier promises—have been left in a difficult position.

This change in direction may make business sense, particularly to convert large-scale deployments into paying customers. But the way the transition was executed eroded trust, especially among users who relied on the open model as a long-term strategy.

4. The Impact on Small and Mid-Sized Users

One of the biggest problems is that smaller organizations have no clear place in the current model. These companies are often too small to justify or afford a full enterprise subscription, yet they were previously encouraged to adopt the platform without limitations. Now, they find themselves without support, updates, or a defined future, despite continuing to use the system actively.

These users aren’t resisting change—they’re simply lacking a viable path forward that aligns with their size and needs.

5. What Aras Could Do to Rebuild Trust

To better support small and mid-sized users, Aras could take several steps:

• Introduce a formal Community Edition: free to use in production for organizations below a certain size, with clear scope and limitations.

• Offer lightweight, affordable support or add-on options without requiring full enterprise subscription.

• Clarify the future of the open release: provide a public roadmap, define what users can expect, and acknowledge the evolution in positioning.

• Re-engage the broader community through updated forums, documentation, and open communication channels.

These steps wouldn’t just improve adoption—they would also restore credibility with a user base that helped establish Aras’s reputation as an open and forward-thinking PLM provider.

I just realized that I haven't yet shared my collection of Peter Schroer quotes describing the idea behind Aras and the concept of the open release. Perhaps the new PTC leadership, with their background in traditional industries, wasn’t fully briefed on what made Aras so distinctive - fortunately, there are still many sources online!

Let´s start with this one: https://aras.com/en/blog/you-re-never-too-old-to-be-a-hacker

--

"After years of the same old, same old in the PLM industry, I knew there had to be a better way. We set out to create that at Aras. And I think we’re doing a pretty good job.

First, we created better technology. Modern, flexible technology that's designed to adapt to the way your business works, not the other way around. It helps a lot that it actually works too.

Then we hacked the PLM enterprise business model. I hate the sales approach taken by most PLM companies. It is excruciating and when it's over no one, especially the customers, feels very good about it.

At Aras, we don't sell PLM software. We give it away. And if you'd like a little help with it, you can buy some training or some consulting time from our staff of experts. And if you want support and upgrades and good stuff like that, you can buy an annual subscription. We put all the info you need up on our website and we let you make your own decisions. Simple? Yup. Effective? You bet. Refreshing? Absolutely. And it's fair."

--

I personally believe Mr. Schroer would be ashamed if he saw how the current user restrictions were implemented - with misleading communication and aimed at the wrong audience. The legacy was corrupted overnight - simply because the old industry didn’t recognize its value. But I assume they now prefer to spent more money on traditional marketing. I’m just waiting for the first print and TV ads to roll out.

Maybe someday they’ll be bold again: A carefully well-tuned open release concept could effortlessly attract new target audiences, just as it did in the past. But I assume modernization always takes time?

It's not exactly widely advertised, and it's not exactly open, is it? Still, something to try out.

I have to revise my earlier statement!

Release 2025 is strictly limited to 50 users – regardless of whether they are active or inactive!

Instead of 4 or 5 users, this version already reserves 6 (!!) users out of the box. So in reality, you're left with just 44 users – hoping none of them ever leave the company, since even disabled users still count.

It’s essentially a built-in EOL function / kill-switch! 

 kalainpk : I may have misunderstood your previous feedback. But thanks for testing anyway!

Small disclaimer:
Aras appears to be fully aware of the content and tone of this discussion, and seems to be fine with all aspects presented. There has been no censorship, moderation, or attempt to officially reframe or challenge any of the points raised.
Similar arguments were made during the Release 2024 discussion - particularly regarding user limits and other technical constraints - and those posts have also remained online without any censorship or negative feedback for over a year.

Since this is Aras’s own platform and they define the rules of engagement, they of course have every right to moderate or remove content they consider problematic.
The fact that they haven’t done so should be seen as a positive and intentional act of tolerance, which I’d like to explicitly acknowledge!