« Autodesk Design Review 2008: Navigation Palette Enhancement Overview | Main | Make Sure Digital Files are Complete Before Sending for Printing »

February 22, 2007

Comments

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

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed

  •  Subscribe