With all due respect but I must disagree.
Price tag does not have to be an indicator of how sophisticated the software is. Especially that most CADs are way overpriced, not worth the money companies charge for them.
In this respect Fusion 360 was a fresh and welcome change.
Fusion 360 runs on dozens of years of experience of Autodesk so there is no reason it should be viewed as a **** of CAD. The Autodesk heritage is what makes people trust it and be willing to give this software a try. Frankly - this is what I and many others though of Fusion 360. Finally a sensibly priced decent CAD package that we can adopt for our future use. A CAD that one day may even become a standard.
It's not up to me or anyone else to try to understand what the business model of Autodesk is in respect pricing of Fusion 360. If advertised as CAD that can do what all other CADs do plus MORE, why should we be accepting its shortcomings? It would be a very different story if Fusion stated clearly: NOT suitable for professional use. But no, they promote it as being in the same league with other, more expensive CAD packages. CAD, CAM, Simulations... you name it. My time, the time I must spend to learn the software is of value. If this CAD is only "half CAD" I need to know it before I consider investing my time into it.
Finally - the features we are discussing are not sophisticated functionalities. We are talking about basics. The ability to customize the default color of dimensions! One would expect that Autodesk is experienced enough to understand the importance of it. I'm not buying the argument that this is needed for designing space rockets only so we should go easy on Fusion. Why easy?
I've designed an entire Wankel engine, and I built one as a hobby. At this moment I don't see how I would be able to do it with Fusion. And we are talking... a hobby project.
I just hope that I don't have enough experience with the software. I really hope so because there are certain features of it that I like.