Have you ever thought that there is something about the nature of Hungarians or Hungarian business traits that causes a culture of non response or a lack of care for customers. Like they are the Kings of this software and they will do it their way and in their time. Consider that Revit and Sketchup were developed in the US and are developed in a more responsive manner. Just saying ....

So the best thing is if Archicad could be bought by an US company. It will never happen and the aloofness of the company will drive it in the ground.

I just want to know why people are blindly paying their yearly subscription!

archislave wrote:
.......

I just want to know why people are blindly paying their yearly subscription!

I suspect they might lose a lot of subscriptions this year. I know that usually tends to be the sentiment voiced every year there's a weak release, and by disgruntled users, but considering a number of factors not in their favor this year unlike in previous years;

1) A good percentage of their subscription users are single/small office users and the latest three releases have had virtually no significant improvements in the program for that segment of users - especially as GS continue in their pursuit of of the large company corporate dollars.

2) Obviously the economy. A bigger factor this year more than any other for obvious reasons. If companies are busy laying off staff left, right and center because of an inability to sustain their revenue flows - how long before those financial considerations begin to be directed at the question of a Return on Investment on yearly subscriptions to a Software that seems less and less capable of addressing your requirements.

3) The competition on both ends of the BIM scale (from Vectorworks to Revit) have exhibited considerable improvements in the latest releases of their respective softwares relative to AC, such that the pressure to switch is just far more intense now than ever before. Whether it be for cost and considering the switch to a cheaper but considerably more powerful (than before) Vectorworks, or if it's just because of sheer market and peer pressure and one is having to switch to Revit because everyone else is using it or because GS promotional videos are giving your good reason to do it, but advertising the ease of use in Revit programs that their own software lacks.

4) The general GS software development and innovation culture, such as it is or as it's become, like their non-responsiveness to users, and then going off on tangents to develop "big" tools that no one really asked for (in great demand anyway)and then the lack of improvements, fixes or developments to those same tools in more recent versions like the Curtain Wall tool which is still as clunky as hell, or Tean work 2.0 which supposedly has been enhanced but had enough of it's own issues when it was introduced. And don't forget the lack of a 64-Bit Mac version still even with AC14.

I also suspect that GS are probably aware that this is likely to be the case (if it isn't already happening) as evidenced by their introduction of their license "rental" system this year - which seems aimed at people who want to go with the software, but are wary of committing to something like a subscription or people who are considering dropping subscription altogether, but may not be ready to completely switch over to another software just yet.

archislave wrote:
Have you ever thought that there is something about the nature of Hungarians or Hungarian business traits that causes a culture of non response or a lack of care for customers. Like they are the Kings of this software and they will do it their way and in their time. Consider that Revit and Sketchup were developed in the US and are developed in a more responsive manner. Just saying ....

So the best thing is if Archicad could be bought by an US company. It will never happen and the aloofness of the company will drive it in the ground.

...........

It's funny you mention that maybe GS might have been better off being bought off by an American company, because sometime back someone had mentioned that Autodesk had actually considered buying them out before they went for Revit. What actually went down to prevent that from happening is not exactly clear, but as much as that thought was disturbing back then, I now have to wonder if, for the health of their own firm and their future, if GS would not have been better off being bought off by an Autodesk-like company. Granted they were bought off by Nemetscheck, and while we appreciate the fact that Nemetschek has largely left them alone to their own devices rather than trying to create a mega software conglomeration with Allplan and Vectorworks, or meddling in with their running, I can't help but wonder whether or not leaving them to operate same as before as a compeltely insular entity completely cut-off from their user base was exactly the best thing for them.

In fact I even have to wonder whether or not the Nemetschek buy-out was of any benefit at all, since the reason given then was that GS would never survive as a solo outfit, and would need the resources of a Nemetschek-like (or Autodesk-like) larger company to move into the future, and yet, now we hear that they are forced to prioritize their development issues (and ignore more lasting issues from the wishlists) since they don't have the resources to develop the software in a more equitable way.

So what was the point of the buy-out if they are still seemingly getting run so miserly and frugally as when they were own their own?


We may hate Autodesk for their licensing quirks and aggressive marketing style, but you've got to give them credit when it does come to customer responsiveness in implementing features in their programs.

After a day at Disneyland, here's the optimist in me - Hope there is a magical surprise waiting for us as in 14.1 !