Autodesk's world domination

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by David Rutten on April 28, 2010 at 1:44pm

I don't know what's going on inside AutoDesk. But our relationship with them has typically been cool but amiable. Sometimes they are in a cooperative mood, sometimes they are introvert. It seems to have a lot to do with who's in charge and how the stock is doing.

See this article for some further 'news': http://www.deskeng.com/virtual_desktop/?tag=autodesk-alias

Either way, it doesn't really affect us. I mean, it affects us, but not in a way we can do anything about. We simply have to keep doing what we've been doing.

--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia

Permalink Reply by Astro/Naught on April 28, 2010 at 2:48pm

Hi David,

Autodesk is just relentless at taking over all these smaller companies that develop some really smart software and making it their own and monopolizing the market and the industry. Yes they have Maya and 3DS as well as others but that's not quenching their thirst. I personally use Revit at work and we are using 2010 and going onto 2011, and yes it is has some really good features. However, it has nothing over Rhino, and I use rhino for personal project and that alone. I understand as an industry standard Revit hits the mark for BIM, but it is worrying to hear that Autodesk is just not interested in being in a market with other products to make it more competitive. All it wants to do is take over. I am not sure what you guys would gain by having a relationship with Autodesk? I guess it's the old saying 'keep your friends close but your enemies closer'

Permalink Reply by David Rutten on April 28, 2010 at 3:05pm

Being friendly with AutoDesk is simply beneficial to us. We gain nothing by attacking them. McNeel & Associates was the largest AutoCAD reseller in the US for a long time (since before we started developing software), and we have given hundreds of AutoCAD courses in our office. We also offer AutoCAD support to our customers.

Furthermore, it is in our interest to have a decent DXF and DWG import/export feature in Rhino which requires the cooperation of AD as DWG is not as open as 3dm.

We don't mind AD buying up firms all over the place, as long as they don't play dirty. Or at least more dirty than would be considered normal for a large corporation.

We're not really enemies with AD in terms of revenue. We are very small fish and eradicating us would barely increase their income. We are however getting some hype and press, which is bad for the stock value. Investors would pay more for stock if they felt that AD was ultimate market leader.

SketchUp is now Google, and I pity the fools who think they can muscle Google out of any market.

--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia

Permalink Reply by Charles C Vincent on April 28, 2010 at 3:32pm

Er.. Well I got a smile, for everyone I meet
As long as you don't try dragging my bay
or dropping the bomb on my street ;-)
(The Pretenders)

Permalink Reply by Vicente Soler on April 28, 2010 at 3:57pm

A few months ago i was using several different software: Ecotect, Algor and Robot Millenium, all from completely different software developers. Now they are all part of Autodesk. It reminds me of that Simpsons episode were Bart goes into a mall and in the time he goes in and out of a shop all others have been turned into Starbucks.

I personally don't like it but you can't say they are crushing all competitors because, as far as i know, all owners of those software packages voluntarily sold their property for a good price. I would actually be more worried that an antitrust lawsuit was filed against Autodesk.

For example, this is what happened with Rockefeller's Standard Oil:

The antitrust case against Standard Oil also seems absurd because its share of the petroleum products market had actually dropped significantly over the years. From a high of 88 percent in 1890, Standard Oil's market share had fallen to 64 percent by 1911, the year in which the US Supreme Court reaffirmed the lower court finding that Standard Oil was guilty of monopolizing the petroleum products industry.[32]

The court argued, in essence, that Standard Oil was a "large" company with many divisions, and if those divisions were in reality separate companies, there would be more competition. The court made no mention at all of the industry's economic performance; of supposed predatory pricing; of whether industry output had been restrained, as monopoly theory holds; or of any other economic factors relevant to determining harm to consumers. The mere fact that Standard Oil had organized some thirty separate divisions under one consolidated management structure (a trust) was sufficient reason to label it a monopoly and force the company to break up into a number of smaller units.
To economists, "predatory pricing" is theoretical nonsense and has no empirical validity, either.

In other words, the organizational structure that was responsible for the company's great efficiencies and decades-long price cutting and product improving was seriously damaged. Standard Oil became much less efficient as a result, to the benefit of its less efficient rivals and to the detriment of consumers.

From: http://mises.org/daily/2317
(Beware, that site is very ideologically charged)

Permalink Reply by Vicente Soler on April 28, 2010 at 4:30pm

btw, Algor used to allow import of .3dm files directly and had a plugin for rhino. Now both features are missing but plugins for the other programs it supported are still there. Maybe this is part of "phase one" [insert evil laugh here].

Permalink Reply by Astro/Naught on April 28, 2010 at 6:06pm

I guess it's one thing that Rhino has to play nice to make sure DWG/DXF is catered for but it's another thing that that .3dm is taken out of the picture the instant Autodesk gets a hold of yet another software. Personally I have totally moved away from all Autodesk software - for personal work that is - and work predominantly in Rhino. When it comes to work work then that's another matter. I never liked Autocad and to be honest I am just tolerating Revit for the sake of it. It is clumsy, and to be superficial, not that exciting. Once again the chap who I was overhearing admitted that the smaller, cutting edge 'boutique' firms are not that interested in adopting Revit and they work predominantly with Rhino to do their thing. Also they have the necessary skill to be self sufficient without the need for a reliance on Autodesk rep coming in to show them the rope. The reality is that they may not be Rhinophilic and don't/won't touch other software as part of their work flow - this is simply not the case, at least in my opinion. The reality is that Rhino offers 'flexibility' and means of producing and achieving some really interesting and exciting work that in is seen as 'out there' or 'cutting edge' by those that don't do that kind of work or are not in touch with that community. I guess for Rhino users there is something rather personal and intimate about the software and the way the community mentality is very tight knit but very flexible to new people coming in with their contribution. There is something still pure there that has not been touched by the ever expanding cloud that is Autodesk. I am not looking forward to that day.

Permalink Reply by Greg S on April 29, 2010 at 6:24am

I have a unique perspective in that I manage software for a firm of 2000 people and we use everything from Sketchup, Rhino, MAX, Maya, Civil 3d, Revit, DP, Inventor to Algor.
That most likely wouldn't be on the same project, but you get the idea. I see the real difference from a firm like mine and a small boutique is that most projects from those cutting edge firms are truly focused on "Form" with a big "F" so to mean more than what it looks like, but form that might be influenced by any number of attributes (We Work4Her is one of my favorite examples of that sort of rigor). While we pride ourselves on our design skill, our Knowledge is what we trade on. That means breadth of knowledge and the depth that we can bring to projects. I don't think either is the "correct" way, but they do bring a different set of requirements to the fold. The attraction of something that’s harder to design in like Revit is that it provides us opportunities, not solutions, which could ultimately take the form of a "BLM" sort of Building Lifecycle Management System, a kin to a PLM that you see in manufacturing.
It’s really the intelligence that you can get from Revit that we are after and the efficiency at which it can be gained. It certainly not the design tool for everyone, but we are trying to get teams to work in a more knowledgeable way earlier and earlier in a design process with whatever tool they choose.
This is why I push teams to use tools like grasshopper instead of just rhino as the definitions themselves can be instructive, beyond just seeing the end result and you can do some “Automatic” reporting from Grasshopper like FAR and Floor area and so on.
I think the challenge is that firms like mine don’t want files, we want systems, we don’t want to know about one project, and we want to know about all our projects. Last year that was 1.5 projects for every person in the firm. This need leads to a natural tendency for us and to vendors to collect solutions.
I have been waiting for a real Rhino BIM (VisualARQ is good for a big house in my mind) product for years, but I think don’t that’s McNeal’s focus so it leaves it up to those that are. I don’t think that’s an issue, I just think it would be better if more products where competing in the same space, Autodesk in McNeal’s and McNeal is Autodesk’s and so on.
Not a ton of insight here, just more of a perspective.
Greg

Permalink Reply by robert cervellione on April 29, 2010 at 6:42am

i think parametrics is something AD is missing. there is grasshopper and GC both are getting a lot of attention. normally autodesk would just buy one of them but in this case it would not be possible because i do not think either would EVER sell to AD. I teach a class in Revit and thought that there was some need for some parametrics in it and i have been developing some plugins and autodesk has been VERY supportive of this. i do believe that revit is where they are targeting there move into parametrics. look at the latest release of revit 2011 it has a version of catias power copy with a feature called "adaptive components". they have also really opened up the API to allow people to leverage a lot of the software. also they did manage to woo away the head developer/creator of GC a few years ago so that should also help them to fill there parametric hole.

Permalink Reply by Jon Mirtschin on April 29, 2010 at 7:12am

Is one software (or family of software from one company) ever going to be the best and most apt for all possible tasks related to it? I doubt it very much. And the situation of all software developers competing and striving for this ultimate tool seems like a waste of resource to me, so many efforts to reinvent and improve the same wheel.

What is more powerful to the user is the ability to pick the right tool for the task at hand, and this is where interop of model data is essential.

I've been working hard at exchanging model data in IFC format (as well as a couple of other neutral formats such as CIS/2 and SDNF for steel frames), and am pretty close to being in a position for a public beta. Plenty of BIM software (including REVIT, Bentley and Digital Project) exchange models in this format. For the time being it will probably be exporting only from Grasshopper (I'm open to ideas to the contrary), but importing and exporting from Rhino will be available. What will help push this development is some users that are prepared to be involved in testing and pushing the tools. For more details, get in touch with me or visit http://geometrygym.blogspot.com

Of course I'm biased, but there's my 2 cents to the discussion.

Cheers,

Jon