I think all this speculation about whether Autodesk is going to continue
marketting and developing a product is really silly. They will continue to
do so to leverage as many users as possible. I once did a project for an egg
roll manufacturer who was bought out by Tony's Pizza. I learned an
interesting anecdote from their project manager. This particular egg roll
manufacturer was bought out by Ming Egg Rolls, which is actually owned by
Tony's Pizza, which is actually owned by Schwan Foods...along with a LOT of
other pizza/eggroll/frozen food product lines. He told me that when you buy
about 80% of any frozen pizza from your local Safeway store you're actually
buying from (eventually) the same parent company. By offering a large
variety of names and identities they actually garner a much larger market
share. Why wouldn't Autodesk, or any other company, do the very same thing?
Frozen pizza, software- it's all the same thing.
I grow weary of all the "Chicken Little" fears for the demise of what is a
great product when there's no real evidence such a demise will likely
happen. I can't count the number of times I've heard "I've been told by
reliable sources that ______ is definitely the last release!". This was said
about items such as LISP and even AutoCAD when they came out with the
vertical line of products- yet plain old AutoCAD is probably still
Autodesk's largest revenue generator still and is probably still being
developed and planned for MANY MANY years ahead. Why would they shoot
themselves in the foot and cut off any revenue when they can, by diversity,
generate more?
Robert Grandmaison
"Brian Harder" wrote in message
news:540448CC423E901929B7E27A1C3541CD@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Why is the same not said for Revit? If the market doesn't warrent the
> further development of Revit, it'll be dropped. But no, it appears that
> Revit is a foregone conclusion and ADT is not. ADT must continue to prove
> itself, but Revit need not. The cynical side of me says Autodesk is not
> interested in serving the market; rather dictating the market; if not by
> compulsion, by attrition.
>
> --
> Brian K. Harder
> CAD Manager - RNL Design
> http://www.rnldesign.com
> -----------------------------------------
> Remove .ns to email
>
>
> "Matt Stachoni" wrote in message
> news:dlip0v4e86pd85v6gotftih9v6jhscrr2e@4ax.com...
> > On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 11:43:49 -0800, "David Hogan"
> > wrote:
> >
> > >I didn't mention vaporware,
> >
> > I know, my reply was for Peter, who did.
> >
> > >but I did hear conflicting statements when Adesk
> > >was touring hyping Revit from the top presenter (not Lynn Allen), and
> from
> > >others there and in the weeks following about upgrade pricing and what
> > >packages were being upgraded; how and when. Your statement is in
conflict
> > >with what I heard there, that ADT will not continue development beyond
4
> or
> > >5, forget which.
> >
> > Phil Bernstein from Autodesk's BID (Bldg Industry Division) said that
> > without a doubt there will be an ADT 4 and 5, and that the market will
> > decide if 6+ will happen. But that Revit development is continuing in
> > a very strong way and that Autodesk is putting a lot of resources
> > behind it, because it believes the Revit platform is the way to go
> > (eventually)
> >
> > Which is just common sense. But Peter's post was just a bunch of
> > emotional ranting without any hard facts.
> >
> > Matt
> > mstachoni@comcast.net
> > mstachoni@bhhtait.com
>
>