Update | Autodesk Civil Infrastructure Product Roadmap

[lim.wendy]

We've completely revamped the Autodesk Civil Infrastructure product roadmap! The new public roadmap provides a view into what's under consideration for future versions of Civil 3D, InfraWorks, and ReCap. More importantly, it enables our customers to provide feedback and rate the value of each item.

Refer to the article to learn more.

@TimYarris 🙂

[neilyj666]

@lim.wendy some interesting ideas but I'd also like to see the ability to apply existing profile settings to a new one i.e. the surfaces and bands. It is very tedious to have to go through the same steps for each profile I need and cross sections aren't always appropriate and they have their own issues too.

[TimYarris]

Good suggestion, @neilyj666. Is this one on the Civil 3D Ideas forum? We've been combing that to see how those align with other customer research we've been doing. 

Related to that idea, with Civil 3D 2022.1 Update (out today), you'll see the ability to reuse corridor and region parameters.

[neilyj666]

@TimYarris It is now...:)

[Joe-Bouza]

The road map doesn’t like my iPhone 😫

[ChrisRS]

I don't like your iPhone either. I don't like iAnything 😉

[ChrisRS]

@lim.wendy, I like the new roadmap. It is much more detailed than previous versions and encourages some user feedback.

My quibble is that it is "buried." You do have a post in the Pinned Section. I visit the forums pretty much daily, but I pretty much ignore the pinned section. It is pretty static. (On my phone it takes about 20 seconds to populate the pinned area with the current posts coming up about 40 seconds later.)

You might want to consider rewording it to something like "CAST YOUR VOTES IN THE Autodesk Civil Infrastructure Product Roadmap!" and occasionally bumping it to the top. 

I suspect that the community/forum webpage design decision making is in the hands of others, but I suggest that links for the roadmap and Community Voices blog be added. I understand that there is a desire/need to keep things simple.

@TimYarris, I like the roadmap much better than previous version. I like that The Items originating from Ideas are identified and linked back to for additional input. (It is concrete evidence that the Ideas are at least being looked at. Tim, your recent participation in reacting to Ideas is truly appreciated.)   

With regard to the non-Ideas based roadmap cards, many of them would be very difficult for me to understand if I did not already know details from also following "futures."

For Ideas based cards you refer back to the Ideas post(s): "Vote or give us your feedback on the associated Civil 3D Idea:"

It would be great if there was a similar feedback mechanism for non-Ideas based cards. A simple solution could be new Ideas posts from a pseudo user such as "AD Roadmap." Obviously the Ideas would contain a link to the Roadmap site/card.

As a general Roadmap observation, I am not always able to tell which product a card refers to.
e.g. under Roads and Highways, does "Dynamic Road Signs and Markings" apply to Civil 3D or Infraworks? It Civil 3D, I will vote for it. If Infraworks, I will not. (Perhaps I misunderstand the current goals, but I see little value in programming effort that enhances 30% concept design (IWX) with no corresponding 40% to 100% design capability (C3D) in mind. If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there.) 

I do want to reiterate that I like the Roadmap and the apparent Autodesk openness to user involvement it demonstrates. 
    

[pobrienFNE96]

I really appreciate the roadmap. Thank you.

Unfortunately, it gives more insight into how developers/managers pick solutions for problems with little interest while there are items on the Ideas forum with thousands of votes that have been ignored ... for years. Please address the items that have been thorns in our sides (read: expensive time-sucks) for our entire careers before adding new features that add small value for only a few folks.

[neilyj666]

@pobrienFNE96 Totally agree - I suspect they address the "quick wins" first, anything that requires more effort (unless it is BIM360/Cloud based) is quietly forgotten about or you have to rely on third party developers or program it yourself.

[TimYarris]

Hi everyone,

Thanks for the feedback on the public roadmap. We’re really happy people see value in the newer format and want to continue to be engaged with the product team.

@ChrisRS  – I appreciate it can be tough to remember to check back on the public roadmap because it’s not always at the top of everyone’s mind. To help this, we’re planning to have more regularly scheduled updates to let customers know when significant changes have been made. We’ll post blog articles (similar to this one) and promote it via social media and this forum. I like the idea of enabling some way to enable feedback via the Ideas forum; I’ll give some thought to how to best make that happen.

Please note the public roadmap is not the full view of what we have under development. There are ideas that aren’t on the public roadmap but will be resolved strategically as we work on related areas of the product. 

With the Ideas forum, the public roadmap, and other avenues, we’re doing our best to incorporate customer feedback, balance it with our strategic goals, and communicate our plans back to our customers. We won’t always make everyone happy but we appreciate that our customers are willing to continue to work with us and let us know what’s most valuable to them.

[SoaresASBCAD]

yes, always improvement 

[RobertRiley]

Is this still board active/there/viewable? I get a "Board not found" message.

[ChrisRS]

I get a "Board not found" message as well.

It may be temporary.

There was an Infrastructure AMA within the last couple of months, and reference was made to an upcoming new system. It sounded like the roadmap, and use of the term Roadmap would continue.

A change may have occurred without advance notice in this forum. Stranger things have happened.

@lim.wendy, any insight? 

[lim.wendy]

I apologize for any inconvenience caused. The link has been updated. Kindly refer to the article for further details.

[ChrisRS]

Thanks, @lim.wendy.

That works.

It looks like revamp included resetting the vote count to 0.

If you voted in the previous roadmap iteration, you should go back and vote again.

[neilyj666]

Call me cynical but Mark Twain said "...if voting made a difference, they wouldn't let us do it".

There have been loads of great suggestions to improve the product usability in the real world but the focus recently has been on cloud stuff which are of use to the multi thousand seat consultancies using Autodesk products but no use to me.

 

[pobrienFNE96]

To be honest, they're not all that great for those of us who need them, and jumping on board with them has cost countless hours of rework and confusion.

[ChrisRS]

Don't Shoot!

I am just the messenger, Neil.

Somewhat uncharacteristically, I will attempt to be a voice of reason.

• The "Roadmap" has been made available as a user feedback mechanism.
  I agree that availability and user feedback do not assure substantial review and action by Autodesk.
   It's a crap shoot. It is our choice to play the game or not.
• It appears to be important to someone at Autodesk.
  I assume it is important to the C3D team, even if they had to be told it is.
• Our participation may or may not bear fruit.
  A choice not to participate will not.
• The direction and decisions regarding C3D are set by higher-ups.
  I am convinced that the C3d team wants to do a good job for us.

I agree with you in preferring a more down-to-earth focus.

My reasonableness has worn thin:

The "Roadmap" breakdown (approximate):

• In process: 1 of 26 is Idea based.
• Up Next: 9 of 82 are Idea based.
• Later: 4 of 44 are Idea based.

[neilyj666]

@ChrisRS no worries - just some Friday afternoon cynicism; it's been a long week...😉

[mick_hail]

Thank you for attaching the right link!