Autodesk CIP: We are not evil

We are not evil. There are bloggers who like to make names for themselves by depicting us as evil, but we are just regular people who come to work every day just like you. So when one of our products, like Autodesk Design Review 2008, asks you to participate in our Customer Improvement Program (CIP), we're not trying to collect data from you to learn what competitive products you have. We don't care what porn sites you've visited. :-) We're not trying to steal your credit card information. All we want to do is gather data on how you use our products, so that we can make them better.

When you invoke Autodesk Design Review without a DWF file, it looks like:

OK, the Autodesk logo is in black. Yes this conjures images of Darth Vader. That's just our new look. The Autodesk web site will soon get a makeover and reflect this imagery. I guess black is the new black. But I digress...

From the Autodesk Design Review start page, you can invoke the CIP feature.

Once invoked, you will see a dialog that looks like:

If you elect to participate, Autodesk Design Review will "phone home" with information about your usage of Autodesk Design Review. When Autodesk Design Review sends data back to Autodesk, it includes items like: General Operating system, graphics hardware, I/O devices Startup, Exit, and crash counts Autodesk Design Review specific Commands executed while using Autodesk Design Review Applications that have hosted DWF files, e.g. Microsoft Word Time to load DWF documents Number (how many?) and types of sections (2D?, 3D?) in DWF files Applications to create your DWF files Paper sizes that appear in DWF files Indicator if DWF files have measurement, printing, or markup disabled

A random 100k sample of the collected data is sent once every 24 hours. As of now, there is no way for users lookup the data before it is being sent. The data is encoded as it is emitted. This is done simply to reduce size for transmission. Individually the information is of little value; however, when combined with data from like-minded users who want to help us improve our products, it provides usage patterns that tell us things like what commands are the most popular.

DWF is designed to go beyond the paper. With your assistance, we can hone in on ways to go even further. So please consider participating. Fear not. We are not evil.

Comments

[Ray Mendoza]

Thanks for clearing that up...It is always nice to know what is in the data that is sent back...

Granted your use of the word "like" when describing what is sent is a little unassuring...Maybe if Autodesk decided to have a page that tells users what is exactly shown in the reports it would be easier to swallow, but the word "like" states that "this is only part of it, and this is the only part that you need to know."

I have no problem submitting what I do with AutoCAD or any other program that I use...But there are those out there that see this an an invasion of privacy (look at what happened to Microsoft and Office a while back)...It just makes people a little uneasy...

However, I want to congratulate Autodesk in making it optional and not mandatory...It makes me happy as a user to know...

[Michael Evans]

You haven't got a clue, have you? Why do you suppose customers react with so much suspicion to such a frankly benign request for information? Because it's Autodesk who's asking, that's why. Autodesk, who regularly "retires" products and introduces file format incompatibilities to coerce customers to upgrade, because they know their tailfin upgrades otherwise offer little inherent value for the price. Autodesk, accused with no little justification by its competitors of pursuing a strategy of monopoly instead of competing on quality alone. I've got news for you: outside your protected, fairy-tale Shangri-La up there in San Rafael, a lot of people think it's Autodesk's fondest wish to impose, enforce, and collect a giant CAD tax on anyone who even thinks of using CAD on a PC, without ever having to develop another line of code, ever. IMHO your company has a huge public relations problem of which it is blissfully unaware - or, more likely, arrogantly dismissive. You yourself, personally, likely are not evil, but to claim that the company for which you work is not evil is, I think, grossly at odds with public perception.

Does that clear it up for you?

PS - I see these comments are subject to "approval." I bet you'll delete this one, but I dare you not to just to prove me wrong. If you allow it to be posted, congratulations in advance.

[Scott Sheppard]

Dear Michael:

1. I have got a clue. That's exactly why I entitled the article as I did. Otherwise it could have been entitled: Autodesk Design Review 2008 Customer Improvement Program Overview to be consistent with the other Autodesk Design Review articles I have posted. I recognize the problem. I am trying to show that it is unfounded.

2. We retire products to keep our support costs down. Imagine what the cost of our products would be if we still were issuing patches for AutoCAD R12. We offer our products on subscription to make annual costs predictable.

3. We introduce file format changes based on functionality. Believe me, ask anyone in QA if they like file format changes. It doubles their work. They get to test the new format and the old "Save As" format as well. No one likes file format changes.

4. Thank you for recognizing that I personally am not evil, but the company is a collection of people just like me.

5. I have the "approval" process on this blog to prevent spam. I get comments where people try to sell Viagra. I post all non-spam comments unedited.

Thank you for your comments. This is a blog after all. That's why comments are enabled. The point of my post is that we're not collecting any data that I would be embarrassed for someone to find out that we were collecting. So users can participate in our CIP process if they would like to obtain better software from us.

[Michael Evans]

Scott,

Thanks for the reply - just for the record, let me clarify. By "retire," I was referring more to revocation of the purchaser's ability to obtain upgrades at upgrade pricing, instead of having to buy an entirely new license. (The only Autodesk support resource I really ever use is the Knowledge Base, which still has articles pertaining to R12.) Of course, it's understood that the upgrade pricing is scaled to the number of releases being skipped, so that at some point it should reach the cost of a new license, but abruptly cutting users off after 4 or 5 releases seems draconian - compare this with Bentley's policy. I can tell you that when I informed my boss a few years ago that we would need to upgrade our R14 licenses to R2002 or else the ability to upgrade would be revoked, he was appalled - his response was "But this is America!" - his comment, not mine.

Nevertheless, I infer from your reply that you are more involved in product development than in marketing or customer relations, so my comments probably aren't too effective.

Thanks again,

Michael Evans

[Denny Fisher]

Just downloaded dwf, I can't open a file, what am I doing wrong?

[Volker Joseph]

Please email me with the details of the problem. I would need the file and information as to what DWF program you use.
Thank you.

[Juan Gutierrez]

Downloaded the free Design Review 2008 and runs slow on two of our PC's. Other run just fine. any suggestions? or solutions?

[Volker Joseph]

Thank you for the feedback.

Have you tried disabling the auto update functionality? Send me an email if you require additional information.

[Ralph]

I down loaded you design review to open .DGN files and it keeps having trouble opening file of .DGN type. I ther some other way of opening .DGN file?
Thanks

[Chat]

theme site lince looks nice

[Volker Joseph]

Thank you for the feedback.

What type of DGN are you attempting to open? Would you be able to send me the file for further analysis?

[susan]

My company recieved a dwf file and it won't open. I get a comment "there was a problem displaying the file".

The company generating it is using AutoCAD 2004 so I am assuming it is a 2004 version of the review software. My company is using Civil 3d 2008. I have removed the 2008 viewer, reinstalled it and installed the service pak and batch patch. Any suggestions????

[Volker Joseph]

Please send me the file for further investigation. Thank you.

[susan]

What is your email address

[Martin Field]

Our architects are using Microstation and creating a DWF file for us - I think using a dwfwriter plug-in within Microstation (they said to import DGN into Design Review took too long), but all the text displays and prints with the enclosed parts blacked-in, eg we get a solid "o".

Any solutions please?

[Volker Joseph]

Thank you for the feedback.

I would need more information to process this succesfully. Please send me the version of DWF Writer used as well as the DGN file and the resultant DWF file.

Once received, I may be able to provide a better analysis.

Thank you.

[chat]

very nice

[netlog]

very nice

[Jim Allen]

Actually I do think Autodesk are 'evil'. Your company has grown into a huge corporate monster for whom revenue seems to be the biggest driver, not customer satisfaction. I am the CAD manager for a technical division in local government in the UK. I used AutoCAD for about 15 years, and learned the joys of AutoLisp because some basic functions were missing at that time.

There are 2 issues for me, the application and the company's business practices. With regard to the former, your application is overly complex and waaay too expensive for its capabilities. I use Vectorworks now, like some sections in our division and I guess we have roughly a 50/50 Vectorworks to Autocad balance.

Take a simple example - printing. There are few simpler things that a user can do, unless you use Autocad. When I first saw Vectorworks' print dialog, it was so simple I thought it was a joke. After having used it for the last 8 years, I think Autocad's is a joke. Vectorworks is comparable in terms of features (its 3d modelling and DTP capabilities are superior), yet costs less than half and offers network licensing, something Autodesk has only just got around to implementing - apparently. Actually Vectorworks costs the same as LT, more or less. This isn't a comprehensive analysis of why AutoCAD isn't good enough, but it is a good 'jumping off' point.

Now we can turn to the company itself. Who in their right mind charges many thousands for a product and won't let you use it for 3 days because of licensing? In one case we had to wait for 2 weeks. This is particularly absurd, because I could have downloaded a cracked pirated version in the intervening period. I didn't, but I wish I had.

Then we have the annual updates and licensing. First up the change of file format each time. Why? This is obviously a cynical way of increasing revenue. It does nothing for the consumer and drives the whole industry to do the same to keep pace with the latest dwg format. As far as the consumer is concerned, you have to specify which version of Autocad we want our files in. Okay, no problem, until someone forgets, then more e-mails, CDs, file transfers. And what real benefit has each file format introduced?
You have mentioned this above, but I can't see any difference. And every release? Come on, you can't seriously expect us to believe this. Has anyone sat down and weighed up the benefits versus the drawbacks? I suspect that you are so used to this that you have decided that people are going to accept the situation each year. It's clearly wrong.

Why isn't there an option to use a specific autocad file format (say 2000) as the default? Revenue probably.
Then there are the numerous customer satisfaction calls, surveys etc. None of these seem to be carried out by AutoDesk, or by anyone who is able to feed back comments to the people who make the decisions. Certainly no-one who either cares or can do anything about the situation. Has anyone tried complaining by the way? It doesn't make any difference at all.

I suspect it's a case of, "Hell, we are making money, how can we stay number one and make some more?" rather than, "How can we best deliver what users want and need?"

Any company which values profit over fitness for purpose is arguably, in corporate terms, "evil".

Users are getting really fed up with this kind of contemptuous treatment, and I am reducing my Autocad expenditure, and attempting to move everyone over to Vectorworks. It's not going to happen yet, but I suspect more people are taking the same view. Like IBM, and to a certain extent, Microsoft, Autodesk will suffer eventually. The worst thing, is that Autocad costs twice as much as some of the opposition, involves twice as much aggravation and you don't get anywhere near twice the functionality. As a market leader it is abusing its position.

[sohbet odaları]

Beautiful article! It’s just what i needed to understand. Happy Day’s

[sudeposu]

Beautiful article! It’s just what i needed to understand...

[konteyner]

ertainly no-one who either cares or can do anything about the situation. Has anyone tried complaining by the way? It doesn't make any difference at all.

[kabin]

he worst thing, is that Autocad costs twice as much as some of the opposition, involves twice as much aggravation and you don't get anywhere near twice the functionality. As a market leader it is abusing its positi...

[cinsellik]

I am grateful to you for this great content.

[chat]

thenk you dwf.blog