AutoCAD Civil 3D Wishes (Read Only)
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Does anyone actually like yearly releases?

30 REPLIES 30
Reply
Message 1 of 31
Sinc
1405 Views, 30 Replies

Does anyone actually like yearly releases?

I'm seriious.  These yearly releases do nothing but cause me never-ending grief.

 

If there's anyone out there who REALLY LIKES these yearly release, then please respond, and give an exact reason as to why you think they work.  Also, let us know EXACTLY how large your deployments are, and whether or not you do any customizatiions (such as custom Toolbox Reports, custom Subassemblies, etc.)

 

I, for one, am going insane over these yearly releases that are only minor improvements, yet simultaneously break tons of things, and create a huge IT headacke with little gain for our productive teams..

Sinc
30 REPLIES 30
Message 2 of 31
michael.robertson
in reply to: Sinc

The value of the yearly releases probably depends on the discipline you are using it for. For transportation work they are needed to fix the shortcomings of the product where we can actually use it for major road work.

 

For other disciplines, the changes coming out may not be applicable.

Mike Robertson
FL. Dept. of Transportation
CADD Applications Developer
Message 3 of 31
mathewkol
in reply to: Sinc

I like the yearly upgrades, well I did when I was in production. I have a moderate amount of customization. It was never a problem to do the change over: no IT headache, definitely not "huge". The customization went smoothly. Yes, there are always a few surprizes along the way with regard to features but we always worked through them without too much hassle.

I just like to work with the new features.

Keep 'em coming.
Matt Kolberg
SolidCAD Professional Services
http://www.solidcad.ca /
Message 4 of 31
Sinc
in reply to: mathewkol


@mathewkol wrote:
I like the yearly upgrades, well I did when I was in production. I have a moderate amount of customization. It was never a problem to do the change over: no IT headache, definitely not "huge". The customization went smoothly. Yes, there are always a few surprizes along the way with regard to features but we always worked through them without too much hassle.

I just like to work with the new features.

Keep 'em coming.

Interesting.

 

I work with C3D as a C3D tech.  I also work as a C3D plug-in provider.

 

I see many headaches every release as a C3D plug-in provider.  I see much more as IT manager for a Land Surveying company that uses C3D.  Almiost *ALL* of that headache is a result of the yearly incompatible releases.

 

And since I've recently been informed that as a C3D Subscription customer, I'm *REQUIRED* to be on the latest release (and only the latest release) as of 90 days after its release, I've seriously begun to question the ability for Edward-James Surveying to continue to use Civil 3D.

 

I would *really* like to hear comments from other *real* users of C3D, as opposed to Autodesk-related personnel.  I don't know how long it's been since you (Matt) switched to Autodesk, but I'm still in "the real world".  And I am SO FRUSTRATED.

 

One of my major clients is still on Land Desktop 2008.  I *HAVE* to work with that client.  And the trials and tribulations I face, triying to work with another Autodesk client, are beyond absurd.

Sinc
Message 5 of 31
Sinc
in reply to: michael.robertson


@michael.robertson wrote:

The value of the yearly releases probably depends on the discipline you are using it for. For transportation work they are needed to fix the shortcomings of the product where we can actually use it for major road work.

 

For other disciplines, the changes coming out may not be applicable.


Ugh..  You'll learn.  I've been using C3D since the 2006 release.  You FDOT guys are in for a nasty surprise.

 

I wish it weren't so, and there's no real good reason for it to be so, but you've done enough customization that I bet, over time, you'll have to deal with enough different people on enough different versions of C3D that you'll learn...  This is an "I warned you so" post that I think you may disregard now, but you'll probably be saying the same thing as me before long (unless Autodesk changes their annual incompatible release cycle...)

 

Too bad if it's too late, and you have to learn "the hard way".  I know Seth was trying to get me in on your planning commissions, but it never panned out....  But we always learn best through experience, especially when it bites us.

Sinc
Message 6 of 31
michael.robertson
in reply to: Sinc

While C3D is gaining functionallity that we need we really don't have a choice but to upgrade with each release (once all the functionallity is there we may do like we do with Microstation and go every other release, we are usually 1 version behind what is the latest release in MicroStation).

 

Like with MicroStation, we will certify which versions of Civil3D we support (we usaully support older version of our software on the certified release it targeted as far as problems but don't modify old software once we move to a newer release).

 

As we've worked through our pilot projects we are in the process of stripping some of the customization back out and it has been a real learning experience compared to the supporting MicroStation (it's easy to tell which software was originally client/server and which was PC based)

 

 

 

 

Mike Robertson
FL. Dept. of Transportation
CADD Applications Developer
Message 7 of 31
el_nath
in reply to: Sinc

I'm in the real world, and I use Civil 3D about 60% of the time at my desk everyday.  I'm a Civil Engineer (P.E.) and I can't wait for the latest release.  There is always new functionality that I'm looking forward to using.  I can see how as a technician, the continual upgrades releases seem minor, but for a design engineer, they are huge.  Take the latest version of the superelevation view as an example.  For a technician who will never use it, the addition of the superelevation view appears minor and just another headache, but for my design work it is like a dream come true.  I can say the same for catchment areas, intersection objects, etc... all of which makes my design work easier.  A technician will never need to generate a flow path for a catchment area, however, having spent hours clicking water drop paths in C3D 2009 (and using parcel objects to define catchment areas!), having the flow path as an automated defined part of the catchment area in C3D 2012 is golden.

Nathan Selles-Alvarez, P.E.
Senior Civil Engineer
Message 8 of 31
jmatthei
in reply to: Sinc

I would like the yearly releases if I felt C3D was rapidly pushing forward into new territory, but as you mentioned the last few releases have had rather trivial improvements, as far as our office is concerned.

 

Back in 2007, I expected that by now we'd be seeing true pavement solids representation (not just hatches at sections in corridors), pressure pipe support, landscape item support, and various revit-like sectioning and labeling abilities.  If C3D were adding pieces of this every year I would be enthusiastically in favor of upgrading each year.

 

Given that the program is stalling though, I agree that the yearly upgrades aren't as valuable.  However we don't customize much , so the 2012 upgrade didn't really hurt most peoples' productivity much.  Our IT group auto-installed the upgrade overnight, and the next day we just plowed ahead in 2012.

 

It may all be a moot point for us since C3D is stalling, and the architects and structural engineers at our firm are now trying to get the company to abandon C3D entirely and do our site work in Revit + some site functionality addons.  (Guess who will probably have to run the pilot project on that to see how well that works.)  Actually, since Revit appears to be less buggy, that may be a good thing...

 

--Jeremy

 

Message 9 of 31
tcorey
in reply to: jmatthei

Hey Jeremy,

 

Regarding the true pavement solids, check out the Corridor Solids for AutoCAD Civil 3d on Autodesk labs. Does that answer your need?

 

Regarding the product stalling, I disagree. In 2010 they made Quick Properties work with Civil 3D objects (a huge time saver for me.) For 2011 they added 64-bit support, a massive undertaking and a big advantage to users. For 2012 they increased speed in file loading and ribbon switching, and helped performance with large surfaces by introducing Level of Detail display. I consider all of these to be valuable upgrades.

 

Oh, and Storm and Sanitary Analysis was added.

 

Is there more to do? Absolutely. Keep posting, especially in the Civil 3D wishes group...

 

Best regards,

 

Tim



Tim Corey
MicroCAD Training and Consulting, Inc.
Redding, CA
Autodesk Gold Reseller

New knowledge is the most valuable commodity on earth. -- Kurt Vonnegut
Message 10 of 31
mathewkol
in reply to: Sinc

Indeed Tim. Civil 3D has hardly stalled in its development. No, it's not like the early years anymore; how could it be? You can't have earth shattering features every year anymore now that we have a mature product.
Matt Kolberg
SolidCAD Professional Services
http://www.solidcad.ca /
Message 11 of 31
jmatthei
in reply to: mathewkol

Matt - do you really believe this product is mature?  From an Operating System analogy I'd say:  Land Desktop was DOS, the initial C3D releases were Windows 1.0, and by now we're at Windows 2.0.  In my mind there's a lot of functionality left to be added before we even hit the basic usability of Windows 3.1:  Pressure pipe, true solids, and landscape and irrigation 3D modeling.  Even then the program will need lots of work to make it less clunky and more user-friendly to reach the equivalent of Windows 95.  Revit seems to be at the level of a Windows XP.  I think we've got a long way to go before Civil 3D even approaches maturity.

 

Do you work with architects and building engineers on Revit?  I'm part of a comprehensive A/E company and do a great deal of work with them, and the capabilities they have with Revit are about a decade ahead of what we can do with Civil 3D.  They have true material layers and solids with every material.  They don't need to mess around with frequencies and corridors, but can cut sections at any angle anywhere, and get every material.  They get automated quantities, automated tables, and even automated keynote leaders for everything, which link to spreadsheets and spec documents.  They can do 3D views of anything anywhere, and can easily export their models to 2D CAD that the clients can open.  They can do pipe fittings, laterals, bends, wyes and everything else that we need to Frankenstein together on C3D.  Plus they all share a single BIM model that everyone can access, except for us in the site world.

 

I'm constantly getting asked by the architects and building engineers to give them Revit models of the site, or at least export "IFC" files of the pavement, earthwork, piping, landscape, and site fixtures in 3D solids.  I can't.  I need to export everything to 2D linework, and have them do the same back to me.  Even for surfaces:  I need to make 0.1' contours, explode those, and give them to the architect to build a Revit surface.  The information transfer workflow is absurd.  Civil 3D is great for road profiles and sections, and great for sewer layout, but beyond that it pales.  The effort needed to amend corridors to install even curb drops at driveways is far too much.

 

Now the MEP engineers are even saying:  "Why don't you just use Revit MEP for your sites?  It can produce any drawings you can, and then you get a BIM model."  The structural engineers are saying "We've got this SiteWorks addon to Revit - why don't you use that to get your pavement and earthwork?  Then we can share the Revit model."  The architects are saying "Why don't you use Revit to get us the trees, landscaping and fixtures?  Then we can do our renderings easier."

 

I'm running out of reasons to say no.  True, Revit can't do road corridors with vertical curves, but that could be exported with TINs out of a few shared C3D licenses, much like how we use AutoTurn for truck turns.  Civil3D has a long way to go to be true BIM, but I'm starting to believe it'll be supplanted before it gets the chance, if it comes from the other direction as Revit expands to sites.  Obviously we'd need to see if everything works as well as our building A/Es say it will, but I'm starting to think a pilot project is inevitable.  If we could add the best of C3D to the best of Revit, we'd have an excellent solution for our needs.

 

I appreciate your defense of Autodesk, and I appreciate what Autodesk has done so far, but I feel we could get so much more, and I'd like to challenge them to provide it.  If they don't, somebody else eventually will, and when a true, functional "Revit Civil" does come out, we'll switch to it, regardless of who writes the code.

 

--Jeremy

Message 12 of 31
mathewkol
in reply to: Sinc

Yes, it is a mature product. Fact is, I can get projects done faster than Land Desktop and with fewer errors. If yoi have a different pespective then that's. fine.

Obviously Civil 3D can use new features; every software can That doesn't mean that what someone hope to see will get there in the next release. I could care less about Revit interiperability. So there are two sides to the coin and Autodesk has to balance the needs of everyone.

I'm not defending Autodesk; why would I do that? I'm not a share holder. I just call it as I see it.
Matt Kolberg
SolidCAD Professional Services
http://www.solidcad.ca /
Message 13 of 31
O.Maille
in reply to: jmatthei

Yearly releases are a bit of a joke both within and outside Autodesk. I fee they are to blame for a lot of rushed coding and lack of long term planning; Structures not appearing in prospector and/or crashing & yet to integrate any design (aside from roads) into product eg. S&S . C3D is not BIM as the model is not informative at all really. Revit Civil get a +1 from me anyway.

 

With regard to the maturity of the product it is not; it's a mish-mash of Map,autocad,Landdesktop,intelisolve and all the other compeditors they buy out. That is not to say it can be used productively and help speed up design. I think the frustration with the yearly release is warrented the last few have added a bit more stability and made it fancier looking but most of the design improvement have been minimal. The main issue on maturity is the lack of multi-threading and utilisation of hardware of the last 5years this may be why they want us to use additional programs for analysis.

 

 

 

 

Message 14 of 31
AllenJessup
in reply to: Sinc

Not so fond of yearly released. We only share 6 licenses between 4 full time and 6 very part time users who don't use the Civil functions. Creating a deployment isn't too bad but I never seem to have the time. The customization is light and is only there to aid in the workflow. I happen to like Tool Palettes, so I make ones that contain commands for grading, for Surface manipulation and tools for display and layers. But the users don't have to use them. They're only there to help those that find that an easier way to work.

 

Let's remember why Autodesk introduced yearly releases. People who were paying Subscription (or maybe it was VIP) cost at the time were starting to ask "Why am I paying money every year if I'm only going to see new software every 2 or three years?". So since Autodesk wants everyone on Subscription and contributing to they're profit every year. They started yearly releases.

 

I don't think there needs to be a release every year. Fixes can be handled with Updates and new features can be released through Subscription Advantage Packs. But Subscription Customers have to agree that this will be worth the yearly fee. That's not going to go down!

 

I also think that Autodesk spends too much time in new interfaces. There seem to be new ones every couple of years. Remember the Dashboard?  The Ribbon angers me. Not because it's there but because Autodesk is making new commands available ONLY through the Ribbon. You can figure out the command line equivalent and use that in customization.

 

We're still using 2011 because I haven't gotten 2012 deployed yet. Seeing some of the problems with it I'm in no hurry.

 

So. No. I'm not a fan of yearly releases.

 

Allen



Allen Jessup
Engineering Specialist / CAD Manager

Message 15 of 31
Sinc
in reply to: AllenJessup


@AllenJessup wrote:

Let's remember why Autodesk introduced yearly releases. People who were paying Subscription (or maybe it was VIP) cost at the time were starting to ask "Why am I paying money every year if I'm only going to see new software every 2 or three years?". So since Autodesk wants everyone on Subscription and contributing to they're profit every year. They started yearly releases.


 I actually view that as the heart of the non-argument.  It is what I consider a gross mischaracterization of the entire software development process, foisted upon the gullible by the Marketing department.

 

One of the things I think the Sincpac-C3D illustrates so well is that you can add incredible functionality to C3D without pushing out a whole new release, which requires new Profiles, new Deployments, (for many companies) an IT person to handle the upgrade, broken Custom Reports, broken Custom Subassemblies, and all the TONS of other problems involved in moving up to a new release.

 

Not to mention, if we only had a major new release every other-year, that would immediately cut the "C3D Incompatibility Problem" in more than half, since more and more people would actually be on the same release.

 

I see nothing good coming of these annual incompatible releases, and I see tons of problems created for those of us "in the trenches", who are actually trying to USE this software to be profitable.  I also see it as a drawback to Autodesk, who must come up with releases in 14 different languages with every release cycle, do QA testing on all those releases, and provide support for all those releases.  The amount of time wasted by Autodesk on this must be astounding.

 

The ONLY reason I see for these incompatible yearly releases is a misguided forcing of the issue by Autodesk's Marketing and Sales, who are probably falling into the general trap of trying to maximize this-year's profits, even if it means making poor long-term decisions.

Sinc
Message 16 of 31
Sinc
in reply to: mathewkol


@mathewkol wrote:
Yes, it is a mature product. Fact is, I can get projects done faster than Land Desktop and with fewer errors. If yoi have a different pespective then that's. fine.


What does "mature product" really mean?

 

I agree with your assessment vis-a-vis LDD.  I don't put much stock in "shoot-outs" and that sort of thing.  Instead, I look at the long-term staffing requirements we've need at Edward-James Surveying.

 

We use to use a heavily-customized Land Desktop setup.  We also utilized most of Land Desktop's functionality...  We had several new employees comment that they thought they knew how to use LDD until they started working for us, and then discovered they had been using maybe 15% of its capabilities.  And through all that, we needed 1 office tech for each field crew.

 

Fast-forward to now...  I'm no longer working full-time as a C3D tech (the Sincpac-C3D is keeping me busy the rest of the time), but I still work about three days a week as a C3D Survey Tech.  As such, I completely support two field crews, and also handle overflow from our other office.  So if I were to project that out to full-time employment as a C3D tech, I would be able to completely support 5 field crews.  And in the years since we started using C3D, we've improved the equipment of the field crews, so they're working even faster.  Yet I can now support 5x the number of field crews by myself, using Civil 3D vs. Land Desktop.  And at the same time, we're doing better work, with a higher degree of quality control.

 

At the same time, I waste an incredible amount of my time trying to track down YET ANOTHER bug in C3D, or YET ANOTHER problem...  And if I should give C3D input it doesn't like, it often crashes, rather than give me a useful error message.  The UI also has tons of issues...  It gets really frustrating to use.  By contrast, EVERY other program I use works well.  That includes things like Office, and UltraEdit, Camtasia, and (especially) Sonar...  They all work well, rarely (if ever) crash, have no UI artifacts, have no "bug hunts" that can go on for days....  Only C3D makes me go through all that.

 

So what does "mature product" really mean?

Sinc
Message 17 of 31
AllenJessup
in reply to: Sinc


 

Sinc wrote:

 

One of the things I think the Sincpac-C3D illustrates so well is that you can add incredible functionality to C3D without pushing out a whole new release, which requires new Profiles, new Deployments, (for many companies) an IT person to handle the upgrade, broken Custom Reports, broken Custom Subassemblies, and all the TONS of other problems involved in moving up to a new release.


Well. Yes! I thought I'd made it clear that I thought that Autodesk could handle it with incrementally without pushing a new version every year. I'd be perfectly happy with a 3 year cycle with patches and updates in between.

 

Allen



Allen Jessup
Engineering Specialist / CAD Manager

Message 18 of 31
Cadguru42
in reply to: Sinc

I do not like it. The main reason I do not like the yearly release cycle is the quality of the software.  The developers probably only get about 3 or 4 months to work on the Civil 3D portion because they have to wait on the core Autocad developers on top of the Map developers.  It leads to sloppy programing and loads of bugs, as well as core issues like the UI not being very good design.  Not that the developers are sloppy, it's the time constraint that management is putting on them to release a new version every year.  

 

I liked the old 18 month development cycle. That gave them enough time to work out kinks and features and get something out that wasn't full of bugs.  Even a two year cycle would be fine.  I know it was because of the VIP program (now subscription) that caused it, but that's marketing and money talking instead of the software.  From what I remember reading in the past, most companies even on subscription don't upgrade until at least a service pack has been released and sometimes just skip every other version. This means they're always behind anyway.  Besides, the subscription cost is basically 10% of the software, so even if a company paid yearly and got a new version every other year they're still saving money from waiting every five years to buy new licenses. 

 

I'd like to see a good program released every 18 to 24 months with some service packs in between that fix things and add features like the Terrain Modeler or Corridor Solids.  Make it where only the subscription people get the labs projects to help wet their appetite.  

C3D 2022-2024
Windows 10 Pro
32GB RAM
Message 19 of 31
mfernandes
in reply to: Cadguru42

Sinc’s earlier post 01-19-2012 01:07 AM “frustrating” sums it up well.

When in the industry, the larger companies that I worked at, although on subscription choose to not implement every release. I believe this is a common occurrence and for good reason.

Could the motivation of yearly realise be a result to justify the value of subscriptions, driven by the marketing group.

In my humble opinion, I think that Autodesk is further ahead fixing gaps in the product rather than adding bells and whistles.

Don’t get me wrong, not all added tools are trivial, example, pressure pipes, long time coming, also  C3D is a great product and you will be hard pressed to find a package that can compete. I just feel that a little more effort should be placed on fixing or filling small gaps in the products as it relates to production workflow rather that added new tool just for the sake of adding new tools for the next release.

But if Autodesk fixed the gaps what would sinc do. He would have to go back to real work and not have all that fun developing all those apps ....lol...I mean well.

Just one man’s humble opinion

Message 20 of 31
O.Maille
in reply to: mfernandes

Let us accept that we're not going to change Autodesks mind with regard to the yearly release so if anyone from autodesk is reading can we at least get a deployment tool of some kind.

I've only a laptop and office PC to use with infrastructure and building design suites and it takes probably a day to uninstall all the programs, features, plugins etc. etc.

 

Surely even a per suite tool is possible to help install during upgrading?

 

Ideally a tool that will pull updates, extensions (similar to the install tool) and manage the new apps etc. should be possible? The same tool could be used to download your yearly release and help automate the update proceedure.

 

Image a world where you could just leave you pc on overnight (uninstalling and installing) and wake up to your new products

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums  

Autodesk Design & Make Report