Well yeah, but Solidworks costs anywhere from $5000 to $10,000 per user per year... not really comparable ;-)
Updates come with annual maintenance, roughly 20 percent of license.
People can and do get a license and just run it for a long time.
This is unlike, say, Excel 2007, which can export .xls files that Excel 2000 can read.
The other thing people should realize is all the CAD tool vendors are generally funding complex PLM / PDM system development necessary for larger scale users to operate on large products and across many teams. This is a significant portion of annual license fees.
As a small team or individual, one can use STEP. Now, admittedly the ability of Solidworks to work with STEP files is limited. (I would not want that job)
Personally, if I were going to get a license and just run it, I would get a system much more capable in that area. NX, as an example, is excellent, and I know many who have older licenses who do a lot of work just fine that way. Most everything can be done, and the skillset is not unlike what we use in some of the open CAD systems.
A native file is not always required when the modeler offers direct modeling as well as parametric. Just FYI.
Finally, anyone needing to interact with CAD needs to build license costs into their rates. It's too expensive to do otherwise.
Let the work pay for the tool.
If you are the source of designs, use whatever you want to use. Downstream users will either need STEP / DXF / PDF / STL, or they will have your version or newer, or their system can import, or use a Parasolid, ACIS, whatever type of file.
If you are a downstream user then you need to know where your work is coming from and whether you can price software in. On this note, buying into an annual license of Fusion or OnShape is a great translation service as both of those will write out respectable STEP and Parasolid files. Translation licenses are super expensive.
Or, you need to invest your skills into systems that are adept at non-native data. These skills are extremely high value BTW. Getting them is great for a resume.
Then price and purchase accordingly.
For learning / personal use, get the academic licenses.
In that case, there really is only a couple paths: (and flat out, Solidworks isn't the best for this kind of thing)
If the volume of work is serious, invest in systems. This is rare, but sometimes necessary.
In many cases, invest in one that is very adept at non-native data. There are a couple pretty good ones out there. KeyCreator is actually quite good for manufacturing related tasks. For more involved tasks, NX is great on the higher end, but not cheap. That one offers all possible model paradigms too.
Parametric, history based.
Parametric, non history based (synchronous)
Direct Modeling, with history
Direct modeling, no history.
It can do the job period. But, isn't cheap.
Collaborations often default to who has the most restrictive environment, or priority in requirements and the other members deal, or there is some time spent integrating design work across systems.
Intent is difficult to preserve in this scenario. Often, there will end up being an owner of that.
BTW: Subscription licenses can get someone through a collaboration at a very significantly reduced cost.
That's the option I would use myself, given I didn't have access to a sufficiently capable system. Do it, export non native, drawings, reference geometry, etc... Express detail intent in Excel + 2D drawings. Basically make a reconstruction kit for the future and call it good.
Also export native files on the off chance a resubscription makes sense. It can, depending.
Over the years, I've accumulated a lot of understanding of basic geometry and means and ways to work on STEP, Parasolid, Surfaces, Solids, drawings, etc... Paid off many times.
Edit: The other skill to seek is being able to use basic tools where needed. Advanced modelers have a good and bad aspect to them. Every time someone clicks one of the advanced function buttons, a lot of money will eventually be spent. So don't click those buttons! The resulting designs are likely cheaper and manufacturable in more ways, all of which is an advantage.
I can tell you some names you would recognize did great product design on basic licenses. Doing this in very robust software is different than doing it in something lower tier. People have a lot of options when the basic capability is robust, offering all the modeling paradigms. People may want it and have reasons, but do they really need it? No is the right answer more than we may realize.
In short, role flexibility is expensive, or requires having made an investment in a highly technical, niche skill set.
Limiting that can actually save money, depending on what software is in play.
There won't be great answers very soon either. There are some efforts in progress right now. Half a decade to a decade from now, this chat may be different!