Home Designer 2026 and beyond will be subscription based

[Renerabbitt]

34 minutes ago, mthd97 said:

very last version of the software perpetually

I get to keep X15.. The last non subscription version

[jwbassgarl]

7 hours ago, Renerabbitt said:

"I'm not sure why you don't want to wish me well, generally a good natured fellow that tries to help the community".

 

My comment was meant for the company, not you as an individual. I thought my wording made that clear, if not, then my apologies to you. The rant was strictly for CA.

 

 

[mthd97]

12 hours ago, Renerabbitt said:

I get to keep X15.. The last non subscription version

I wasn’t aware of this change. I appreciate you sharing this with us as I now better understand the licensing policy of Chief Architect in going forward.

[DW-1-6]

This is too bad!

I purchased this software for personal use 3 years ago upgrading every year and last year going from Home Architect to Home Designer Pro 2025. The only reason I went with this software was that they had purchasable versions for a reasonable price and loyalty upgrade pricing every year. I was just looking now to see about upgrading to Home Designer Pro 2026 and discovered they went to subscription.

Sad that they want to keep their hand in your pocket forcefully instead of making good software and updates you want to purchase. So I will not be making any further purchases of Chief Architect software.

 

They had their subscription base professional version for people who use it for business.

[BalutFX]

On 12/2/2025 at 4:28 AM, Renerabbitt said:

I get to keep X15.. The last non subscription version

 

Did something change for Premier SSA subscribers?  I thought CA was allowing SSA upgrades and perpetual licenses as long as the SSA was kept current.

 

[Renerabbitt]

1 hour ago, BalutFX said:

 

Did something change for Premier SSA subscribers?  I thought CA was allowing SSA upgrades and perpetual licenses as long as the SSA was kept current.

 

I have never asked chief this as I have never planned on stopping my subscription. They should update their terms because that info is counter to the terms on the website

 

[mthd97]

From at least January 2025 Legacy SAA auto renews for perpetual license holders who are paying the fee each year. Please see this post in ChiefTalk.

 

https://chieftalk.chiefarchitect.com/topic/44788-legacy-software-licenses-ssa-renewal/

 

CAX15 was the last perpetual version you could buy and after that it is subscription only. But some Chief Architect users still have renewable perpetual licenses as long as they keep paying the yearly fee. When they stop paying the yearly fee they are left with version that they stop paying at. Whatever that maybe at the time.

 

I am not aware that this arrangement has changed as yet.

 

I think that is a very fair arrangement at present for longtime users.

[BalutFX]

4 hours ago, mthd97 said:

I think that is a very fair arrangement at present for longtime users.

Yeah, I think that’s what bugged me the most about the switch to subscription for the Home Designer line. No ability to grandfather in to the perpetual license (at least for the 2026 version) and no substantial discount, other than the limited Black Friday upgrade (which I did decide, for now, to use). 

[ChiefPeter]

Late to the party I just discovered that HD Pro has moved to subscription only and with a heavy price increase. We used to pay around $120 for the annual upgrade of the HD Pro perpetual license. Now the annual subscription fee is $450. In other words, CA can lose 75% of the HD Pro customers and still have the same income from HD Pro.

CA is doing this to increase their income. There is no benefits in it for the customers, on the opposite the customers lose their perpetual license in the process.

This can only mean that CA's strategy is not to be interested in the hobbyist segment and we have to look elsewhere. 

[mistertheplague]

Quote

This of course is accurate and typical of most JR suites. Last conversation I had about rough numbers was that the HD line was in the 2.5M total seat range and the Premiere line was in the 50K total seat range (though these numbers were given to me, I can't account for the accuracy). I already thought that there is a robbing-Peter-to-pay-Paul scenario for the development of the two products. The JR suite allows the Premiere line to be funded and secure more robust development, such as building the raytrace engine, and then they release some year-old features for the upper line. This is pretty standard. All educated guesses.

 

@Renerabbitt

Those numbers are interesting. You have to account for the differences between a DIY customer base and a professional customer base, however. 50K Chief customers x $2000 = 100 million bucks in revenue every year for Chief to be funded and to secure more robust development.

 

On the flip side, there's many more of us (at least there were LOL), but we're fickle because we don't use HD to make money for the most part. Even the folks I've encountered online who do use HD as part of their paying job (pretty much all contractors now that I'm thinking about it), don't use the program with sufficient regularity to justify a whopping yearly subscription cost.

 

You said yourself most of us nonprofessionals skip releases. I haven't upgraded since 2021, because why should I? I originally bought HD, despite the fact that it was already priced at an eye-watering premium compared with similar programs, to remodel our house. I wanted the ability to account for structure, framing, etc. and to be able to print plans for the local building department (which Chief Inc. throttles in HD in the most absurdly antagonistic way possible). It was $500 upfront for 2020 and 100-something to upgrade to 2021. 

 

Ray-tracing would be cool but if I'm being honest not only would I have to cough up for Chief Inc.'s new rentware, I'd have to buy a whole new rig to run ray-tracing, as my current PC coughs and moans when HD's running as is. 

 

But practically speaking, why would I pay full MSRP every year? I only own one house. In spite of my wife's best efforts I can only remodel the kitchen so many times. Even if I was a landlord the use cases for this software would dwindle.

 

A rentware model for a program like this only makes sense if you are using it regularly to generate revenue regularly as part of your business. In other words, if you're a Chief user. 

 

Quote

Honestly, I would guess they may lose 5–10%…just wild guessing, but the trade-off is that they have secured their core development funding at the start of the development cycle.

 

Really? You know more than I do but I would expect those numbers to reverse, for Chief Inc. to keep that many HD users. Because: see above. I assume this move is, as you said, intended to firm up predictable revenue estimates so they can plan -- which will likely mean the vast majority of the HD user base will be zapped but any who remain will produce reliable revenue numbers. 

 

I mean, look. You made solid arguments for why Chief Inc. might legitimately want this aside from it being a mere cash-grab, but at the end of the day the HD suite was always a weird unicorn-type product: considerably more powerful than anything else in the DIY home design space (though some apps might be catching up), but not really usable for architects, drafters cranking out x-number of as-builts every year, owners of design-build firms, etc. -- because of how thoroughly Chief Inc. has throttled HD for professional use. 

 

Chief Inc. may legitimately want to keep HD viable as a DIY tool and they may legitimately believe this move will not impact that. I have my doubts as it's always seemed to me that Chief Inc. views HD users with indifference bordering on benign contempt, as the colonial revenue generation model you outlined in your comment illustrates. 

 

Regardless, the market will have the final word, and I honestly don't see how this move is anything but a prelude to HD going the way of the shag rug. A lot of software is viable for SaaS, even if we deplore SaaS in principle. Home Designer is not one of those programs. 

[mthd97]

If a DIYer has funds set aside for a renovation project, CA inc want them to factor a software cost into that project. For a one off project the timed subscription cost might be justifiable for many ? Time will tell. 
 

For those who want their software to keep working indefinitely, then other options and time investment might be more appropriate. So why spend time learning how to use something that might only ever be used once ? We all like our buildings to last for a long time so why not our software ?

[TheMadCadder]

Time marches on and we either adapt or go extinct...

 

I'm one who (now) uses HD professionally, on an almost daily basis in my work. However, I am one guy working at home...and I have AutoCAD as well. I work remotely, entirely online and I never meet clients. The latter was not always this way.

 

I rarely use 3d modeling for preliminary designs & quoting, preferring to create quotable 2d floor plans in AutoCAD rather than model an entire house simply to quote a job. In general, AutoCAD...at least my 2d AutoCAD platform...will always be faster than my 3d modeling platform. (Full CA may likely be different, but basic HD 3d modeling is not where it's at for me as far as construction docs are concerned)

 

From a construction documents standpoint I only use 3d modeling software to generate the four 2d elevation views I need for the rest of my AutoCAD-created permit plans. What value do I assign to this, which I can readily accomplish in AutoCAD, albeit considerably slower? (I am not alone in operating this way...supplementing CA with ACAD)

 

Where 3d modeling excels and truly delivers in a solo operation such as mine is the unparalleled ability to convey design aspects remotely. What value do I assign to this?

 

I'm not so old I no longer remember all those sit-downs with clients, before the age of 3d modeling when 2d was all there was. My drafting buddy and I use to dream about being able to design in what would some day become 3d modeling and literally 'walk through' our designs with clients remotely. It is truly impressive how far the tech has come in this industry.

 

In the grand scheme of things $500/yr is a nominal fee for what I get in return. It is unfortunate that CA sees this and wants to capitalize on it but I get it...it's just business. No doubt the DIY'ers and the post-2d'ers will not see it this way. I will eventually migrate into full CA some day, finally leaving AutoCAD behind because I realize that a $3000/yr fee to do what I do really amounts to less than half of one job I do each year. It comes down to that age old question, "Is the juice worth the squeeze?"

 

If that is the price of adaptation in this environment I'll pay it...and unfortunately CA knows it. The alternative is extinction.

 

[mthd97]

8 hours ago, TheMadCadder said:

Time marches on and we either adapt or go extinct...

 

I'm one who (now) uses HD professionally, on an almost daily basis in my work. However, I am one guy working at home...and I have AutoCAD as well. I work remotely, entirely online and I never meet clients. The latter was not always this way.

 

I rarely use 3d modeling for preliminary designs & quoting, preferring to create quotable 2d floor plans in AutoCAD rather than model an entire house simply to quote a job. In general, AutoCAD...at least my 2d AutoCAD platform...will always be faster than my 3d modeling platform. (Full CA may likely be different, but basic HD 3d modeling is not where it's at for me as far as construction docs are concerned)

 

From a construction documents standpoint I only use 3d modeling software to generate the four 2d elevation views I need for the rest of my AutoCAD-created permit plans. What value do I assign to this, which I can readily accomplish in AutoCAD, albeit considerably slower? (I am not alone in operating this way...supplementing CA with ACAD)

 

Where 3d modeling excels and truly delivers in a solo operation such as mine is the unparalleled ability to convey design aspects remotely. What value do I assign to this?

 

I'm not so old I no longer remember all those sit-downs with clients, before the age of 3d modeling when 2d was all there was. My drafting buddy and I use to dream about being able to design in what would some day become 3d modeling and literally 'walk through' our designs with clients remotely. It is truly impressive how far the tech has come in this industry.

 

In the grand scheme of things $500/yr is a nominal fee for what I get in return. It is unfortunate that CA sees this and wants to capitalize on it but I get it...it's just business. No doubt the DIY'ers and the post-2d'ers will not see it this way. I will eventually migrate into full CA some day, finally leaving AutoCAD behind because I realize that a $3000/yr fee to do what I do really amounts to less than half of one job I do each year. It comes down to that age old question, "Is the juice worth the squeeze?"

 

If that is the price of adaptation in this environment I'll pay it...and unfortunately CA knows it. The alternative is extinction.

 

@TheMadCadder, In then end we will all use what we need and what we know to get all of our drafting work done.

 

And yes those Autodesk fees are very high. 

 

Personally I am much faster without AutoCAD becuase I wasn’t patient enough to learn it. However with AutoCAD Architecture that makes it 3D, I would have taken the time to learn it. I think Autodesk had a product called Architectural Desktop a couple of decades ago that made  AutoCAD 3D as well. 
 

I chose Chief Architect V6 because it did what I wanted at the time including 2D work. I couldn’t afford AutoCAD 2D and all the add ons that were needed to make it 3D and to render with it.

 

When we have work to do and we need to get it done efficiently and accurately we will use what works for us. I used drawing boards and drafting machines before CA and that is what got the work done for me then. I still have those older tools available just in case I need them again. 

[mconstruction7]

The upgrade cost for my old Home Designer is ~$200.  Given I expect it will save me with the design and 3D, seems reasonable to me.

[jwbassgarl]

9 hours ago, mconstruction7 said:

The upgrade cost for my old Home Designer is ~$200.  Given I expect it will save me with the design and 3D, seems reasonable to me.

You will loose access to all of your designs should you decide you no longer want CA. That was the deal breaker for me.

[BalutFX]

15 hours ago, mconstruction7 said:

The upgrade cost for my old Home Designer is ~$200.  Given I expect it will save me with the design and 3D, seems reasonable to me.

 

Yes, as mentioned above, unless you continue to pay the rental fee for the software, you will no longer be able to access any of the plans that you create in HD 2026 once the rental period ends.  The currently quoted 1 year rental cost is $495, with no guarantees that Chief Architect won't raise it by the time you have to make that decision. And if you design and save anything in HD 2026, you will no longer be able to open it in an older version, since they do not allow backward compatibility. But if it works out better for you, then great. Also, your signature says you have HD Pro 2025, so make sure you take advantage of their current rental upgrade cost through Jan 5th.