absolutely FURIOUS with autodesk/fusion - Page 4
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 145
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,705
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3217
    Likes (Received)
    711

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Milland View Post
    All I can say is that his Youtube account along with his Patreons must be treating him very well, as his toys get more and more expensive.
    yeah really like $400 hair dryers and $500 + Dyson vacuum cleaners get pulled apart, like "Ohhh … So that's the cheap sh*t motor in my overly expensive vacuum cleaner... Thanks for that ! (Thumbs up, like , subscribe )" .

    __________________________________

    I think AvE did take a bit of risk / long tern view on his HAAS vertical + 5 axis trunnion.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    People's Republic
    Posts
    2,948
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    212
    Likes (Received)
    2052

    Default

    Dunno, but his finished part looked quite a bit like his crappy model, shrug


    yeah, my custom posts disappeared

    and I still cannot find my tools

    as they approach the cost of real software they will lose all uses if they continue to program like it is a college project

    That said it is still a useful piece of software, I just have no understanding how a real company can put the effort in and still look like amateurs

  3. Likes cameraman liked this post
  4. #63
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,705
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3217
    Likes (Received)
    711

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gustafson View Post
    Dunno, but his finished part looked quite a bit like his crappy model, shrug


    yeah, my custom posts disappeared

    and I still cannot find my tools

    as they approach the cost of real software they will lose all uses if they continue to program like it is a college project

    That said it is still a useful piece of software, I just have no understanding how a real company can put the effort in and still look like amateurs

    Autodesk used to be the "Enemy" like 10 to 15 years ago , but then they went through a period of buying serious 3d graphics companies especially for film and TV level 3d graphics production and compositing etc. So there was almost nobody left to be bought out lol.

    BUT at the same time these seemingly large companies and outfits still operate as a set of separate divisions and departments that are not integrated and essentially have separate product lines, code base and assets + very different operating budgets.

    That's what I normally take comfort in is that a particular smaller division of lets say SONY or APPLE or HP etc. etc. may not have such a well funded division for things that we specialize in or are hyper focused on.


    In the case of Fusion 360 there seems to be a "People power" / "Power to the users " (Tron ref) idea / blueprint. So seems through constant feedback they could make potentially better software that does indeed step on the toes of Autodesk's other offerings (from completely different entities). In other words not to have the product be over defined up front in a top-down way but allow modern (young users) to help define what tomorrow's (affordable) CAD/CAM software could be. Seems Fusion 360 division is betting on a more "Bottom up" emergent style of software development, rather than being all "Top down" design and plugging in / trying to attempt code migration from other divisions for more 'Expensive" capabilties. (That probably explains why in some instances they are keen to reach out to users, and also probably explains their need or reliance on cloud based systems; using an emergent approach will also make things appear initially more chaotic. ).


    So the "Entry level" slightly buggy $600.00 piece of software may end up being the $2K to $4K price point (more fully featured and competent / more professional friendly ) CAD/CAM software of the future.

    Right now the "Plan " (it seems) is to get folks hooked on Fusion 360 in a ubiquitous way and then make the product better and then it hits a higher price point in much greater number due to popularity. It's also possible it might become the easiest to use. I'm sure many use cases are being 'Data mined". So if Fusion 360 is in all universities, colleges, trade schools and high schools then Autodesk has a decent chance of becoming a fairly ubiquitous "Standard" for 90% of applications ten to fifteen years from now, which in of it's self will start to starve / kill off the revenue streams of higher end competing / more expensive products thereby making them even more expensive per unit to innovate (for higher end mid-market solutions.). You end up with very expensive top drawer software and then you have fusion 360 occupying the new price segment of $2k to $4K with various "Lite" versions and academic/ learning addition price breaks / FREE stuff they are already doing.


    __________________________________________________ __________________________________




    ^^^ Mainly fast forward to last 3 to 6 mins, but seems they are trying to create a different culture here with the likes of CJ Abraham (product manager ) and that "#Insta-machinist" culture , noteworthy that he's running that on a Mac.

  5. #64
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,705
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3217
    Likes (Received)
    711

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gustafson View Post
    Dunno, but his finished part looked quite a bit like his crappy model, shrug


    yeah, my custom posts disappeared

    and I still cannot find my tools

    as they approach the cost of real software they will lose all uses if they continue to program like it is a college project

    That said it is still a useful piece of software, I just have no understanding how a real company can put the effort in and still look like amateurs
    It's a good strategy* to find out what people want, beyond what they think they need.

    __________________________________________________ _________________________


    * In sports like fencing and other martial arts it's all about finding out what your opponent wants to do, so if you drift a little bit , make deliberate errors you can find out what your opponent is inclined to do or react to (even though he or she is trying as hard as they can not to give away what their 'A" game really is.) . Normally one has natural counter attacks for whatever you may have drawn your opponent in to do by "Drifting" or deliberately exposing certain target areas to draw certain types of attacks or test certain reactions so they inadvertently show their hand.

    If Autodesk is tasked to derive the BEST fit for a target user base with the goal of destroying mid-market competitors and owning 90% of the new user space and playing the long term game (with a ten to fifteen year plan), then acting like …


    Quote Originally Posted by gustafson View Post
    a real company can put the effort in and still look like amateurs

    ^^^ Would be the perfect strategy to draw out of users what they really want... [If they make everything like they have made before (other products) then they won't be able to innovate or achieve a tight fit* with their user base...]. And do this without telegraphing to Autodesk's competitors what their intentions are. I.e. Allow your competitors to falsely believe that you are not a threat, whereas in reality Autodesk and Fusion 360 has the capability to completely annihilate the mid market segment for CAD/CAM and beyond (ten years from now or less). So if Autodesk's competitors are lured into a false sense of security by seemingly "Buggy" and amateurish software (that poses little or no threat to the professional market) and choose to ignore this particular market segment (academic and startup and job shop)... This will all creep up on Autodesk's competitors imperceptibly until it's too late. They won't be able to react quickly enough other than by being forced to downgrade their top flight expensive product offerings to a fraction of their original cost. In all likelihood if past behavior is an indicator of future behavior Autodesk could decide to acquire it's failing competitors (in such a situation).


    I think some of this could be deliberate "Drifting" to draw in valuable user input, as otherwise if they if things work as they should then they get zero input from users.

    As someone that does actually develop high end 3d software and came out of a CAD department I don't see how they would be making some of the 'Mistakes" they are making otherwise... Reading and writing files / and formats that you yourself created is pretty basic stuff, and pretty basic to test before release. Most software engineers create very elaborate tests data sets to run new software versions on. It should never get to a point where this is happening at the user / client end of things, at least not to this degree.

    ____________________________

    * Personally I would not recommend "Trauma bonding" your clients as a good business model for software development.

  6. #65
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    702
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    92
    Likes (Received)
    375

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cameraman View Post
    Too much bs to include your actual post....

    Autodesk is making these fuckups on purpose? They are pretending to be fencing? What the hell are you even talking about.

    I think the fact that you're linking a video about G187 and arc filtering as being some sort of revolutionary Autodesk invention shows how much you know about this topic. Every CAM company is doing this. Guess since they aren't doing it while wearing purple glasses it makes them less cool and less innovative.

  7. #66
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,705
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3217
    Likes (Received)
    711

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by goooose View Post
    Too much bs to include your actual post....

    Autodesk is making these fuckups on purpose? They are pretending to be fencing? What the hell are you even talking about.

    I think the fact that you're linking a video about G187 and arc filtering as being some sort of revolutionary Autodesk invention shows how much you know about this topic. Every CAM company is doing this. Guess since they aren't doing it while wearing purple glasses it makes them less cool and less innovative.

    Wrong end of stick …

    I'm not linking the video to show "a video about G187 and arc filtering as being some sort of revolutionary Autodesk invention shows how much you know about this topic"



    It's the exact opposite
    . [I face palm at the geometry and lament the fact that on control polynomial and Nurbs are not more common or more portable vector descriptions are not used versus a geometric description that goes back to the 1950s (G and M codes.) . In Nurbs that would be 5 lines of code with 7 coefficients. But a lot of 'peeps" here think that Nurbs / super-nurbs like on the Okuma control is BS also ? But at the same time I don't want to diss folks that are super happy with the "Normal" way of doing things either, but admit that video is little painful to watch (without sounding like a snob.).].


    I'm not for Fusion 360 or Autodesk ,

    I don't support what they do as I believe they will ultimately kill the diversity of software offerings for CAD/CAM in the mid market sector …

    See @Goose (your fencing drew out my "Intention and feeling with this ;-) ).

    And as professional developer that actually got a PhD through a CAD laboratory and who's supervisor developed key elements of Unigraphics that was bought by McDonnell Douglas , that I am incredulous to the kinds of errors that they are making (much like what Gustafson is questioning also ? I'm scratching my head but am somewhat more cynical as to how this really goes down as these kinds of mistakes with a company like Autodesk really should not be happening especially with Fusion 360 as it's 100X less complex than a lot of the software they offer. It's a very paired down feature set.

    I think the Fusion 360 platform is entirely strategic and will be the ubiquitous standard 10 years from now for most applications.


    I saw similar tactics with how Autodesk bought up a lot of other graphics companies in the past.


    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _



    It's not they set out to be deliberately sh*t , they have a balance between how GOOD they can make something versus how many bugs creep into to user's software... That's a conscious decision on their part.

    Fusion 360 team has been tasked with building something different and they need useful user input to achieve that goal.

    Fees and license paying customers should not be used as Beta testers …

  8. Likes empwoer liked this post
  9. #67
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    California
    Posts
    259
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    308
    Likes (Received)
    110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 360427 View Post
    Fast forward to 8:00. This issue looks super fun to deal with... YouTube
    yup, had that happen to me, annoying AF

  10. #68
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Tennessee
    Posts
    443
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    138
    Likes (Received)
    115

    Default

    never used fusion cam, but I tried earlier iterations of the cad, and again about 6 months ago. Autodesk should be embarrassed by it. This is not their first cad software, and they have an army of coders, and they have had time.

  11. #69
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    702
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    92
    Likes (Received)
    375

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cameraman View Post
    It's not they set out to be deliberately sh*t , they have a balance between how GOOD they can make something versus how many bugs creep into to user's software... That's a conscious decision on their part.

    Fusion 360 team has been tasked with building something different and they need useful user input to achieve that goal.

    Fees and license paying customers should not be used as Beta testers …
    ok ok, points taken and I agree with a lot of it...

    I'm still not agreeing with intentional/semi intentional shitty product/fuckups. Autodesk could give 2 shits about CAD/CAM and it shows. They don't want 90% of that market, They wouldn't get the returns needed to keep their investors interested to achieve that share. Their play is the construction industry judging from their 2 latest big purchases. Big money to be made there, a lot more than what's being made from Fusion. Fusion is nothing but a pet project and once investors get sick of funding it.....the rates will either get jacked or the project will get killed.

  12. Likes memphisjed liked this post
  13. #70
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,705
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3217
    Likes (Received)
    711

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by goooose View Post
    ok ok, points taken and I agree with a lot of it...

    I'm still not agreeing with intentional/semi intentional shitty product/fuckups. Autodesk could give 2 shits about CAD/CAM and it shows. They don't want 90% of that market, They wouldn't get the returns needed to keep their investors interested to achieve that share. Their play is the construction industry judging from their 2 latest big purchases. Big money to be made there, a lot more than what's being made from Fusion. Fusion is nothing but a pet project and once investors get sick of funding it.....the rates will either get jacked or the project will get killed.
    I won't bore with a long list of companies and products that Autodesk has acquired these last 15 years.

    But $5 says that when they reach a critical number of users that are familiar with the Fusion 360 platform and have experience with it for let's say average of five years, the product will reach this mysterious bend or knee in the curve (upwards) where the software suddenly and mysteriously becomes much more stable, robust and has advanced features thrown in that work well. I.e. become substantially less annoying and far more reliable and start working exactly as it should or one would expect to work or better (than what anyone would ever imagine, given it's current "Manifestation' ).

    Sheer number of users will make Fusion 360 lucrative in of itself, but from a business point of view it's more about eliminating the competition.

    If your competition goes out of business then you have no competition, it becomes a quasi monopoly for an entire market segment.

    One could have said the same things about Datsun cars in the 1970s or for example having stuff made in China. + potential price dumping, in a sense Autodesk have initially been quite "Sporting" about how they have gone about things with Fusion 360 and letting the 360 team survive according to their own merits / efforts.


    I'm not vehemently against Fusion 360, pleased that a lot of "Peeps" get to drive software for their CAD/CAM efforts that they wouldn't otherwise... But I do see them potentially wiping out the middle market segment where smaller firms develop their own take on the whole CAD/CAM paradigm, some of them very successfully.


    Quote Originally Posted by goooose View Post

    the rates will either get jacked or the project will get killed
    That's really interesting ^^^ I think (ironically) if there was the possibility of investing in Fusion 360 … NOW would be the time to do that.

    Remember Fusion 360 can't be too good other wise it does step on power mill and other offerings within Autodesk's "Stable". But IF Autodesk is able to kill smaller companies that are in the middle segment in terms of (price performance) other than very specialized applications software, then they Autodesk CAN and probably WILL jack their prices up.

    Let's say AutoDesk Fusion 360 acquires 400 thousand users (Globally) and then jacks the price up from $450 / year to a $2500 initial investment + some sort of maintenance ---> That's exactly $ 1BN

    (lets say 5 years from now, and the "Product" suddenly becomes really good and everybody knows how to use it ? ). That's a major threat. It's not like HYPERMILL is going to engineer a fully featured "Entry level" product. Also probably explains why SolidWorks is trying to dabble in this area also. The Top drawer companies will carry on doing what they have been doing, but some of their market share will be damaged.

    How does that 400 thousand 'peeps" user base compare with specialized software sold for the construction of massive projects like Hospitals or other municipal structures / entities (in terms of revenue) ?
    __________________________________________________ _____________________________________________


    Every digital electronic product has an "Error" reliability/ corruption rate associated with it. For example a hard drive has various data density rates that are variable that are contingent on reliability and data integrity. For example APPLE makes their stuff extremely thin and hard drives solid state or mechanical are maxed out in terms of data density at the expense of reliability. Manufacturers of such equipment do hold out on their customers only implementing incrementally product improvements that could have been offered earlier (by years in some cases). It's no different with software development. If people's lives depended on Fusion 360 then the way they release software would be very different.


    __________________________________________________ ______________________________________________


    Like what Warren Buffet keeps going on about is that it IS about storming the castle, I don't see any indication that Autodesk has changed it's spots over the last 20 years. They are not buying the world a "Puppy" with Fusion 360 (sick or otherwise). (personally whether you may think I am smoking crack or not, but I think it's a mistake to underestimate what Autodesk will aim to accomplish with Fusion 360 long term.).

  14. Likes empwoer liked this post
  15. #71
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    7,724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    311
    Likes (Received)
    1821

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cameraman View Post
    I won't bore with a long list of companies and products that Autodesk has acquired these last 15 years.

    But $5 says that when they reach a critical number of users that are familiar with the Fusion 360 platform and have experience with it for let's say average of five years, the product will reach this mysterious bend or knee in the curve (upwards) where the software suddenly and mysteriously becomes much more stable, robust and has advanced features thrown in that work well.

    Sheer number of users will make Fusion 360 lucrative in of itself, but from a business point of view it's more about eliminating the competition.

    If your competition goes out of business then you have no competition, it becomes a quasi monopoly for an entire market segment.

    One could have said the same things about Datsun cars in the 1970s or for example having stuff made in China. + potential price dumping, in a sense Autodesk have initially been quite "Sporting" about how they have gone about things with Fusion 360 and letting the 360 team survive according to their own merits / efforts.


    I'm not vehemently against Fusion 360, pleased that a lot of "Peeps" get to drive software for their CAD/CAM efforts that they wouldn't otherwise... But I do see them potentially wiping out the middle market segment where smaller firms develop their own take on the whole CAD/CAM paradigm, some of them very successfully.




    That's really interesting ^^^ I think (ironically) if there was the possibility of investing in Fusion 360 … NOW would be the time to do that.

    Remember Fusion 360 can't be too good other wise it does step on power mill and other offerings within Autodesk's "Stable". But IF Autodesk is able to kill smaller companies that are in the middle segment in terms of (price performance) other than very specialized applications software, then they Autodesk CAN and probably WILL jack their prices up.

    Let's say AutoDesk Fusion 360 acquires 400 thousand users (Globally) and then jacks the price up from $450 / year to a $2500 initial investment + some sort of maintenance ---> That's exactly $ 1BN

    (lets say 5 years from now, and the "Product" suddenly becomes really good and everybody knows how to use it ? ). That's a major threat. It's not like HYPERMILL is going to engineer a fully featured "Entry level" product. Also probably explains why SolidWorks is trying to dabble in this area also. The Top drawer companies will carry on doing what they have been doing, but some of their market share will be damaged.

    How does that 400 thousand 'peeps" user base compare with specialized software sold for the construction of massive projects like Hospitals or other municipal structures / entities (in terms of revenue) ?
    __________________________________________________ _____________________________________________


    Every digital electronic product has an "Error" reliability/ corruption rate associated with it. For example a hard drive has various data density rates that are variable that are contingent on reliability and data integrity. For example APPLE makes their stuff extremely thin and hard drives solid state or mechanical are maxed out in terms of data density at the expense of reliability. Manufacturers of such equipment do hold out on their customers only implementing incrementally product improvements that could have been offered earlier (by years in some cases). It's no different with software development. If people's lives depended on Fusion 360 then the way they release software would be very different.


    __________________________________________________ ______________________________________________


    Like what Warren Buffet keeps going on about is that it IS about storming the castle, I don't see any indication that Autodesk has changed it's spots over the last 20 years. They are not buying the world a "Puppy" with Fusion 360 (sick or otherwise).
    Ohh, for the love of God!
    Please don't do/post anything like that... in that form.... like ... EVER AGAIN!!!!

    How difficult is it to just make a simple ( or complex ) comment and leave at that?

  16. Likes cameraman liked this post
  17. #72
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,705
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3217
    Likes (Received)
    711

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SeymourDumore View Post
    Ohh, for the love of God!
    Please don't do/post anything like that... in that form.... like ... EVER AGAIN!!!!

    How difficult is it to just make a simple ( or complex ) comment and leave at that?
    feel free to edit, knock yourself out :-)

    It is a complex discussion about Autodesk's history and what their strategy is with Fusion 360.

    If you can summarize that in 3 sentences then you are a better man than I .

    Go for it !

    Also doing due diligence to the points Goooose raised, he raised some interesting and valid points.

  18. Likes empwoer liked this post
  19. #73
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Tennessee
    Posts
    443
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    138
    Likes (Received)
    115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by goooose View Post
    ok ok, points taken and I agree with a lot of it...

    I'm still not agreeing with intentional/semi intentional shitty product/fuckups. Autodesk could give 2 shits about CAD/CAM and it shows. They don't want 90% of that market, They wouldn't get the returns needed to keep their investors interested to achieve that share. Their play is the construction industry judging from their 2 latest big purchases. Big money to be made there, a lot more than what's being made from Fusion.
    acad is cad in construction industry, As Autodesk moves it more to fusion suite they still have cad customers. Revit is their future anchor in construction (they own BIM in reality), which still needs pretty pictures from advanced steel or another Autodesk product (fusion). Cam, they might not care about. autocad and some solidworks is most of what I see. 1 customer uses catia. What were the last purchases of Autodesk? I don't keep up with them, and use sketchbook and 123d the most from them.

  20. #74
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Michigan
    Posts
    118
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    13
    Likes (Received)
    41

    Default

    A lot of the argument here is people thinking Fusion 360 is a CAM product, and that's kind of the problem. It's not a CAM product, it's a mechanical design product that happens to do CAM.

    If you look at mechanical design software like Catia, NX, Creo, etc the ratio of CAM seats to CAD is pretty low. Which explains the business decision for products like SolidWorks, Inventor, OnShape, etc to not have had CAM in it from the start. There is that perceived image the CAM integrated into the major design products is difficult to use, and does not get the development attention all the other features do that allows CAM only systems to survive in the marketplace. Products like SolidWorks and Inventor figured it was better to work with CAM partners that were experts, instead of trying to do it themselves.

    When Autodesk made Fusion, I'm sure no marketing person said their primary customer would or should be a job shop. Fusion's CAM is pretty good, especially at the price, especially for job shops, and the percentage of Fusion users that use the CAM functions is much higher than the number of Catia/NX/Creo seats that use CAM. This could be good or bad:

    Good, if the rest of Fusion is improved such that the non-CAM users increases/buys enough new seats over the CAM users to meet industry norms.
    Bad, they realize their non-CAM base won't grow enough. I don't think Autodesk really wants to carry a small profit product, for a small segment of mechanical design, so you can guess what'll happen.

    I could see some employees / former employees trying to make a separate go of Fusion in the future if it's put in the graveyard. Similar to where ArtCAM is now, but that's a tough market, and they would not be able to do it at existing prices.

    Lastly: Fusion 360 was one of Carl Bass' babies. He's on the board at Zoox now (autonomous car design) and if you look at their job openings, it seems they are a Catia house.

  21. Likes cameraman liked this post
  22. #75
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,705
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3217
    Likes (Received)
    711

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SeymourDumore View Post
    Ohh, for the love of God!
    Please don't do/post anything like that... in that form.... like ... EVER AGAIN!!!!

    How difficult is it to just make a simple ( or complex ) comment and leave at that?
    Always willing to accept a challenge :-) Ok three lines...

    My conjecture is … (rightly or wrongly)…


    1. Autodesk cannot be seen to be engaging in price dumping* (with Fusion 360), but must project the image of the “Start-up” that’s trying to help the ‘Little guy”.

    2. However, to justify the low cost of the software almost by necessity the software has to have a few bugs / quirks otherwise the price versus capability of the software becomes conspicuous. In respect of 1. (see above.).

    3. If the software has a negligible level of persistent bugs / errors and had more advanced features (as demanded by it’s users) then the price would have to be jacked up hence negating their need and objective for (1) .


    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _______________

    Notes/ references (not mandatory reading … look away if you feel disinclined to go any further .).

    * The objective (of price dumping) is to increase market share in a target market by driving out competition and thereby create a monopoly situation where the strategic "Dumper" will be able to unilaterally dictate price and quality of the product.


    ---> Autodesk - Wikipedia

    Autodesk^^^ has a phenomenal history but in respect of the software industry it is definitely a conglomerate... Most of the graphics and 3d softwares I have used between 1995 to 2010 (at least) have been acquired by Autodesk it's a very long list of company acquisitions.

    In terms of business they are extremely 'Canny" IMO.


    Solved: History of fusion 360 - Autodesk Community
    ^^^ This is illuminating from 2016.

    "The fact that we have added in the past year simulation, CAM and drawings supports that Autodesk is committed to Fusion 360 as the future of making things".

    Since 2016 Autodesk's share price has almost tripled from then to now. https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/adsk/interactive-chart

    ^^^ click on 5 year chart you get the longer picture including their substantial rise.

  23. #76
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    702
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    92
    Likes (Received)
    375

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cameraman View Post

    Let's say AutoDesk Fusion 360 acquires 400 thousand users (Globally) and then jacks the price up from $450 / year to a $2500 initial investment + some sort of maintenance ---> That's exactly $ 1BN

    Cherry picked this one, it'll never happen and Autodesk is pulling the wool over it's investors eyes with this. Maybe that's the play with Fusion, pumping the stock price by showing big sub gains.

    Lets play out your above scenario and see what really happens. Of this fictional 400k users, how many are teachers, students, hobby 3D printers, makers, random people who downloaded because it was free? I would put that number at about 80-90%. So that only leaves you with 40k customers who might be wiling to pay $2500...but many of them would already be grandfathered in and only be required to pay the maintenance. This 1bn is now 500k. Autodesk investors won't pick up the phone for a conference call about that kind of money, I'm sure they'd rather be on time for their tee off.

    Fusion taking over in general won't happen as long as it is cloud based and subscription based. Large companies either don't want there files stored on someone else's servers or simply are not allowed to (ITAR for example). Any company with some business sense can see the risk of being locked into a CAD/CAM sub, all your work is gone as soon as the sub expires and thus, so is your business. Very dangerous.

    Simply, the Adobe model does not work. There are millions of photographers and wanna be youtubers to support the Adobe suite, there is not that many users in the CAD/CAM space and if you scrape deep enough to find that many, they sure as shit won't pay.

  24. Likes cameraman, wheelieking71 liked this post
  25. #77
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Minnesota
    Posts
    233
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    73
    Likes (Received)
    104

    Default

    I would gladly pay $2500 if it wasn't cloud based and they stopped doing updates weekly. At least let me go 6mo, and when the update happens, it doesn't screw up past work. Make this the actually "professional" version, offer free post processors, and a yearly fee that is reasonable for support.

    I like the layouts, I love how easy I can draw and how fast I can make something. Just stop trying to force us to put our stuff in the cloud.

  26. Likes cameraman, wheelieking71, empwoer liked this post
  27. #78
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,705
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3217
    Likes (Received)
    711

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by goooose View Post
    Cherry picked this one, it'll never happen and Autodesk is pulling the wool over it's investors eyes with this. Maybe that's the play with Fusion, pumping the stock price by showing big sub gains.

    Lets play out your above scenario and see what really happens. Of this fictional 400k users, how many are teachers, students, hobby 3D printers, makers, random people who downloaded because it was free? I would put that number at about 80-90%. So that only leaves you with 40k customers who might be wiling to pay $2500...but many of them would already be grandfathered in and only be required to pay the maintenance. This 1bn is now 500k. Autodesk investors won't pick up the phone for a conference call about that kind of money, I'm sure they'd rather be on time for their tee off.

    Fusion taking over in general won't happen as long as it is cloud based and subscription based. Large companies either don't want there files stored on someone else's servers or simply are not allowed to (ITAR for example). Any company with some business sense can see the risk of being locked into a CAD/CAM sub, all your work is gone as soon as the sub expires and thus, so is your business. Very dangerous.

    Simply, the Adobe model does not work. There are millions of photographers and wanna be youtubers to support the Adobe suite, there is not that many users in the CAD/CAM space and if you scrape deep enough to find that many, they sure as shit won't pay.
    I have to admit I agree with a lot of what you have set out there,

    IME Autodesk usually gets what it wants...

    My arithmetic is not brilliant but 40 thousand users * $2500.00 / unit cost = $100M

    Having 1/2 of my "being" in the software development and business folks usually vastly underestimate how expensive real (industrial strength/ stable ) software is to develop. Fusion 360 has an advantage as it's fairly fresh and doesn't suffer from massive 'Code" bloat , so I would imagine right now it's a pretty clean implementation under the hood.


    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________

    I totally agree about ITAR , the security methods we use are in line with what Sandia National laboratories enforces, does make things seem like Battle Star Galactica (re-boot) in terms of how isolated and primitive some critical systems need to be... (for sure). [Drop Box was totally hacked, I use that as my "Reason" for archaic security measures. ].

  28. #79
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,705
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3217
    Likes (Received)
    711

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EndlessWaltz View Post
    I would gladly pay $2500 if it wasn't cloud based and they stopped doing updates weekly. At least let me go 6mo, and when the update happens, it doesn't screw up past work. Make this the actually "professional" version, offer free post processors, and a yearly fee that is reasonable for support.

    I like the layouts, I love how easy I can draw and how fast I can make something. Just stop trying to force us to put our stuff in the cloud.
    I totally agree, people really undervalue the essence of good design through simplicity.

    Non -designers tend to take it for granted as they don't see or experience the chunkiness of what could have been through code bloat and legacy software, code migration and waaaay too many features.

    Really clean software is undervalued IMO, and GLAD to see folks gaining an appreciation of that. [Not like Microsoft in the old days just trying to cram in as many bells and whistles as they can just for the sake of it (for a new roll out they can charge upgrades for.].

    __________________________________________________ ______________


    I'm not really clear as to why the "Cloud model" exists in the first place for Fusion-360 ? (I know it has a history for being that way but wondered if that reason has now 'Expired" ?).

    There appears to be some confusion or disagreement as to what has to bein the cloud versus what can be made / stored locally ?

  29. Likes empwoer liked this post
  30. #80
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Illinois
    Posts
    316
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    72
    Likes (Received)
    184

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 360427 View Post
    Fast forward to 8:00. This issue looks super fun to deal with... YouTube
    I liked the danger sign on his machine. lol


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •