Before SharkCad pro 14 I only missed one product upgrade, the notorious version 11 having used the software since Concepts Unlimited was in prerelease with a discount For Electric Image users.
I haven't enjoyed a stable income for about 12 years but did not skip 11 because it was too expensive, I skipped it because it was a dreadful release with the removal of significant features (SubD2Nurbs) and ridden with bugs.

So the rant is because I cannot move my SharkCad license to a replacement PC, PunchCad are almost unique in requiring an active maintenance for this and this is a betrayal of the promise made When Tim asked users to return their ConceptsUnlimited 2 dongles in favour of node locked licensing. Autodessys reset my activation within hours of my email this black Friday, they don't insist on active maintenance or that I upgrade to v10 for such a trivial task.

So I am a bit annoyed with PunchCad, mostly because they seem to harbour a resentment toward customers that no longer upgrade every release, without addressing the reason users may skip a version or two.
If PunchCad delivered a more polished product the number of users that skip versions would drop dramatically - just saying.

v14 never did get its finished Luxcore renderer, just a partially complete feature that could manage a few very poor-quality demos but unusable for commercial work. It is slow, unstable and cannot even properly facilitate editing materials. So please understand user caution before committing to any new version upgrades.

I think it is clear that resentment toward existing customers because they do not upgrade or renew maintenance regularly is a poor business strategy. Taking a bit more time to finesse each release and not removing core features might be a good starting point.

I really love this software but having just invested the cost of upgrading to v16 in a new Rhino 3D license and having a hard time moving on. Rhino 3D does not have the SharkCad minimalist UI aesthetic with hundreds of tools needlessly duplicated but its customer care is on another level entirely.
Sometimes you have to kiss the ugly frog (I mean Rhinoceros).

V12 licensed just fine with Aeropack and PowerPack Pro. This is arguably a better release than 14 save for a couple of features for aligning parts.

Edited by user Tuesday, December 30, 2025 6:08:33 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

>> removal of significant features (SubD2Nurbs) a

I loved the SubD2Nurbs interface. I personally paid for that license independent of company. I spent a lot of time working on that integration. But we unfortunately lost the license because the parent company (Navarre) filed bankruptcy independent of Encore/Punch and SubD2Nurbs refused to transfer the license to the new entity. ugh.

Tim

Edited by user Monday, January 5, 2026 5:47:47 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

I still have a couple of working installations of FX V10 PPP and I also love it, with the variety of retopo available now for imported .stls and other tri-dominant files, especially from 3D scanners now, so thanks for getting it to us in the first case, Tim. I don't enjoy Fusion360's T-Spline implementation of mesh2NURBS, and T-Spline patents have expired, if there's any food for thought there.
NPower do their own thing with a subD modeller and Mesh2NURBS (mesh2CAD, in their spin) in Cyborg3D, but having your implementation means I don't have to suck up the price they currently pitch it at! They do their own shrink wrap retopo, but retopology has come a long way with Blender, Rhino, even IMSI's DesignCAD 3D Max being a lot more controllable than when V9 and V10 PPP needed it. Instant Meshes, and a related descendant in an interesting modeller called Dust3D went some way, but at the time I couldn't justify 3DCoat, which you sampled and liked. SubD2NURBS is pretty automatic, but needing a quad-dominated mesh makes fiddling with foundling .stls and output from many 3D scanners, especially consumer-level, obligatory.