MCAD: Autodesk Products "Relatively Unimportant"

SeanDotson · **Posted:** Fri, 20 Nov 2009 08:18:07 +0000

http://www.newslettersonline.com/user/u ... &P=article

Quote:

Because Autodesk's products are cheap and used for relatively
unimportant tasks, such as drafting, customers can get by without upgrading
them or renewing their subscriptions during tough times. In contrast, the
products of Dassault Systèmes and Parametric Technology are critical to newproduct development.

That has to be one of the dumbest statements I have ever heard. And I'm sure even the Solidworks and PTC guys are level headed enough to agree.

Relatively unimportant? Personally I take offense at the statement as should all Inventor users.

Steve_Bahr · **Posted:** Fri, 20 Nov 2009 08:40:07 +0000

Drafting is "relatively unimportant"?

Until the Vulcan Mindmeld is perfected, I don't see any other way to communicate your design to the shop floor.

This guy sounds like a first class bozo. I love my Inventor. It does exactly what I need it to do without the heaviness of UG, Solid Edge or Catia.

iDS! · **Posted:** Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:24:27 +0000

...yeah ditto...has no merit in my book...what a jacka$$!

...this must be one of those reverse negative publicity stunts :roll:

kellings · **Posted:** Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:26:59 +0000

Quote:

A contrarian viewpoint from the most respected and feared writer in engineering technology journalism.

Seems his goal is to say stuff that is controversial to stir the pot. There are a few people in the computer industry that do this to generate page views and buzz. This guy might be the same way.

Steve_Bahr · **Posted:** Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:34:25 +0000

Feared in much the same way that Ann Coulter was feared?

This guy didn't seem to make the connection that maybe Inventor sales have dropped because manufacturing in the U.S. is taking a beating?

kellings · **Posted:** Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:36:50 +0000

I sent him an invitation on Twitter to come over and discuss this article. Lets see if he shows up or not.

SeanDotson · **Posted:** Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:09:45 +0000

I send him an email this AM inviting him here as well. Steve is a smart guy. I've had discussion with him at COFES. So this statement baffles me...

A discussion going on here too:

http://www.deelip.com/?p=790

kellings · **Posted:** Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:32:31 +0000

It seems the point of contention as the autor and Evan see it is that the products that are designed using PTC/Dassault products are important things like cars, transmissions, and aerospace stuff whereas the things that Autodesk products are used for are houses, roads, buildings, and some mechanical things that are not important.

In my opinion, Autodesk and the Inventor team are really starting to put some resources into Inventor. It is adding a lot of functionality with each release.

The last company that I worked for used Pro/E for the design. I was kind of excited to use it at first because this was one of the big dogs in the industry, a high end modeller. It was also one of the most complex and difficult programs that I have ever used. I'm no longer at that job and I hope I never see Pro/E again.

SeanDotson · **Posted:** Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:45:33 +0000

It's stupid to say that cars, planes etc are "more important" than all the other machinery that makes the world go around.

It's like saying Boeing, GM, Xerox are "more important" than the millions of other small businesses that fuel the economy. If you add up all the small businesses they MORE than eclipse the large ones.

SeanDotson · **Posted:** Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:55:47 +0000

Steve replied to my email... I don't make it a habit to post other people's emails but I have no issue posting my reply. I invited him here to discuss. Doubt he will show up...

Quote:

Wow. That quite a high opinion you have of yourself. After 4 years of AU and a couple of user group meetings you are able to discern the "importance" of a particular CAD package. That's an impressive skill. I have just as many AU and user group meetings. Do I have the skill as well? In fact I've spoken at all 4 AUs. Maybe I'm better at it? </sarcasm>

There are numerous Fortune 100 companies that use Inventor to develop new products. Even these industrial equipment manufacturers you speak of (we work with many of them daily) use the product to evolve their designs. Companies that do not evolve their designs die in this economy. How are we an "exception" to this rule of yours?

To categorize a company as "unimportant" based solely on the software they choose is absurd.

It's ridiculous to say that cars, planes etc (I assume this is what you meant when referring to Catia and UGS etc..) are "more important" than all the other machinery that makes the world go around.

It's like saying Boeing, GM, Xerox are "more important" than the millions of other small businesses that fuel the economy. If you add up all the small businesses they MORE than eclipse the large ones.

I am not enamaoured with Inventor. It is my tool of choice. I would have called you out if you had said the same of Solidworks, PTC or any other package. To label an entire group of people's work as "unimportant" based on the tool they use is a slap in the face of the engineers that use these tools.

To try to make the conclusions you are claiming based solely on revenue is like trying to guess my favorite colors by analyzing my breakfast.

I welcome you to take this discussion public. There are more people than I who disagree with you.

SeanDotson · **Posted:** Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:41:02 +0000

I just noticed Steve retitled the article... however keep the rest of the insulting content unchanged...

Not sure what that means...

mcadae · **Joined:** 06 Apr 2004 **Posts:** 20

Seriously??? :shock:

Does he really think that slamming competitors will really win business? I for one have been an Inventor user since Beta of R1, I have had the benifit of learning the package as it grew. Just because a package is "more expensive" doesn't make it better. I think it makes those that purchase it more wasteful of money. I have also sold Autodesk Inventor over the last 10 years as well as taught it and very rarely have I come across a problem that I had to say "No Inventor can't do that". That has to be one of the most ridiculous asinine statements I have ever heard. Wonder how much DASSUALT SYSTEMS SillyQwerks had to pay him to make that statement? LOL

This guy just lost any credibility he might have had in my book. Why would anyone listen to this guy? :$:

kellings · **Posted:** Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:15:20 +0000

Al Dean's reply nailed it at the link to the discussion that Sean provided.

I really like Al's Magazine and website too. www.develop3d.com.

Inv_kaos · **Posted:** Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:34:49 +0000

I work in Oil and Gas.. I think rescources are important.. I mean all those important cars and planes would not get off the ground w/o fuel..

cbliss · **Posted:** Sat, 21 Nov 2009 02:36:16 +0000

Quote:

"Autodesk’s products are cheap and used for relatively unimportant tasks"

Steve hasn't priced out AIP or Alias Studio. Does he consider the aerospace, automotive, power, oil / gas, medical, manufacturing..... unimportant industries?

MCAD: Autodesk Products "Relatively Unimportant"

Who is online