This is a special invitation for experienced AutoCAD users looking to shape the future of AutoCAD.
Test drive what the AutoCAD team is working on for the future and help guide our product decisions. We are developing exciting new features and services, and are looking for motivated users to collaborate with us.
To sign up please fill out this quick survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/ImpactAutoCAD1
Sr. Product Manager - AutoCAD
1 Market Street, San Francisco 94105
Answered the survey online just now.
Just curious. Do you get a lot of survey responses to these kinds of online questionairres?
I'd be much happier if you just get a newly released product working like it should. Maybe instead of pushing new exciting features you can fix what's wrong? Please, take your time. I'll wait.
I would like Autodesk to focus on putting out a product that works instead of spitting out features that don't work. I refuse to be Autodesk's guinea pig and debug their product for them. I won't install the latest version on mine or my users computers until at least after the first service pack is out. I have better things to do than fix your product which my company paid for.
Would you buy a car that crashed all the time? In the automotive world your first release each year would be considered a lemon and you could return it for a new one that didn't have problems.
I've used AutoCAD since Rel. 9 and this annual release cycle has made your product sloppier than it's ever been but it's a cash cow for you so why should you care.
Release one version of AutoCAD where there's as few problems as you can possibly make it, ie. DEBUG your product. The customer shouldn't have to DEBUG YOUR PRODUCT particularly when we pay for it and have work to do.
Thanks Mark, I appreciate that! I'm sick of Autodesk putting out a faulty product. More people need to complain. We are not THEIR guinea pigs.
Just so ya know, I am a guy.
In a product this complex, many problems simply cannot be found by traditional testing. They only show up when users actually *use* the program. And I'm not referring to BETA testing either, since those with enough free time to properly BETA test rarely use it under more than "This looks cool, lets try this out..." conditions, further complicated by the fact BETA releases explicitly cannot be used in production work and frequently cannot be installed side-by-side with other releases.
On top of all that, it is impossible to fully develop new features under the yearly release cycle. They have to be "walked in" over the course of several years in several stages. Full-blown, well articulated, and completely bug-free programming would require several years and by the time it's been released into the wild they will be obsolete or the work processes it assumed would render it difficult to use. Trying to hit that kind of moving target results in a lot of wasted work cycles, continuously reworking things to meet changed expectations. Very frustrating and budget unfriendly.
Its easy to call things half-baked when you only look at one release instead of several years down the road. In some respects its actually better to get the basics worked out at the front instead of waiting years for something which nobody wants to use anymore.
There is no reason for software this complicated to be upgraded on a yearly basis when some problems continue to fester from one release to another. Every two years would work much better.
Log into access your profile, ask and answer questions, share ideas and more. Haven't signed up yet? Register