Poll Results-Autodesk release Cycle

CAD-a-Blog conducted a readers poll (completely unscientific of course) to see how often you think Autodesk should release a new version of AutoCAD. This seems to be a hot topic at the moment due to many users unhappiness with AutoCAD 2009.

Here is what you said:

Out of 45 readers participating (I know, not that many) nobody wanted a 6 month cycle. I don't even think this is possible unless there is only one item to the update.

2% of the voters would like to see an 8 month cycle!! That's fast, and again, I'm not sure that's possible either.

4% wanted a 12 month (or yearly) cycle, which Autodesk has done since the 2003 release of AutoCAD 2004. It would seem that most people are unhappy or not fully satisfied with this type of a cycle.

13% would like to see an 18 month cycle which would be every year and a half, or two releases in a three year period. They would like to see Autodesk take a little bit more time to work on the program.

49% of the voters would like to see a 24 month, or bi-annual release of AutoCAD, that's almost half.

31% of users participating said a 36 month or three release cycle is the way to go. Is that too long of a wait?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, this pole is clearly not scientific, or far reaching enough for us to make any conclusions about the users. However, it does seem to coincide with other polls and discussions on the internet. It seems that keeping up with AutoCAD every year is becoming a hassle for many of its users, managers, and companies.

How long before this rapid release cycle takes a big enough toll on companies where they stop upgrading every year? there are many problems with a yearly release cycle on the users end, cost is the biggest, or course. Everything comes down to the bottom line. Autodesk has to serve not only their clients, but their stockholders. In fact, the big guns in charge at Autodesk answer first to the stockholders. The stockholders answer to their desire for valuable stock. In order to affect change in the stockholders perspective, the stock has to change value. The more profitable it is the more they will stay the same, and more of it. The less valuable it is, the more likely they are to change policy.

My point here is that everyone involved is in this thing to make money. Autodesk wants to make money selling the software to users. Users want to make money selling drawings, models, etc. by using the software. Perhaps the best question to ask is what do the user's clients need? That will dictate what the users will purchase and how they will work and for how much. Which will in turn direct Autodesk on what and how to produce in their software.

Sometimes the software provider, in its interest, has to create a need, hence the verticals of AutoCAD. Many users didn't know that they needed new and improved software to do their jobs until it was available. It's like color TV. Nobody knew the needed it until it was available. they were happy with black and white TV.

That's my two cents, please don't ask for change!!

Happy CADDING.