owen wrote:
............
I remember when someone from GS came to our office years back and explained that at one version (think it was 7 .. please correct anyone with a better memory than I) they split their development team for the next 2 versions - i.e AC9 development was not developed following AC8 but in
So then why, oh why did they then decide to switch to a 12-month cycle if they are so clearly incapable of sustaining development on a 12-month cycle? Why, when, as even last year clearly demonstrated, they are even incapable of maintaining that 12 month cycle and ended up having to deliver the new version (AC13) 2-3 or months late anyway?
This question has been asked so many times on these forums, and it's not surprising that the quality of new AC releases began to degrade significantly with each new release as soon as they switched from their original 18-20 month cycle to this 12 month cycle which they now are on, for little other reason other than the fact that their main competitor (who d have the resources to reasonably sustain a 12-month cycle) switched to a 12 month cycle, and oh yeah, also because they can justify the subscription charging format and ludicrous subscription revenue stream even when the payback for the poor souls that opt into it simply isn't there.
And now that the cat is out of the bag about how this subscription deal is such a scam for the poor customers that opt into it and don't get any value back on their money, they are instituting or adopting a new license "rental" system to stem the flow of people opting out of subscription. Or most certainly the inevitable flow once this new version is released.
So the whole notion of using the 12-month cycle as an excuse to justify and explain the increasingly poorer and poorer releases each year, is just somewhat aggravating when you consider the fact that it was their ill-conceived decision based on poor motivations to begin with.
owen wrote:
So it would not be without precedent that AC development was forked resulting in an intermediate release which is less than compelling feature wise.
Major work has been done under the hood in AC13 and is probably continuing in AC14 (e.g they need to rewrite significant portions of code for OSX 64bit).
Oh yes, the old 'under-the-hood improvements deal.
With the exception of the shift to 64-bit platform (which, as we all know was always an inevitability anyway, given the state of computing, and which they still couldn't even do a complete job on for the Mac people), I was always of the impression that most of the 'under-the-hood' improvements were primarily to make Teamwork 2.0 and their BIM server actually function correctly as opposed to improving the day-to-day quality of use of average users or even laying the groundwork for future improvements. I really don't get the impression that they are laying groundworks for anything - but I could be wrong. I guess we'll see when version 15 rolls around. Speaking of which......
owen wrote:
I've always said maybe they need to have 1 'No New Features' release to really get the engine sorted without the distractions of new features. Maybe AC14 is it.
Actually they did do the whole 'No new Features' version back in version 9 even though that was really more as a means to stabilizing the program and its development after the mess that was ArchiCAD 8.0 and the 8.1 that they had to release to correct it. But even then the idea was that future versions could have a firm foundation from which to have new features and a more stable gradual improvement. And to be fair, version 10 right after that did have quite a number of new features. Quite a number of half-baked ones as well (Complex profiler that didn't do curves springs to mind) but new ones nonetheless.
The only problem is that since then, every other version has seemed to be pretty much a 'No new features' version. No significant new modelling tools . No significant new documentation tools, and only tools for high-end customers.
owen wrote:
OK .. but it better mean we start seeing really impressive new features in AC15 - stuff they couldn't do before because of limitations in the code and hardware.
I guess we have to wait another 12 months to find out ..
I wouldn't hold my breath, given their track record.
Not to mention what a risky and foolhardy strategy that is, as by the time they actually get to release their full bells-and-whistles feature-filled version in either AC15 and AC16, they might just find that more than half of their customer base has already bailed on them for the competition with no clear word or assurances from them as to their future plans or direction that this software is supposed to be headed towards. A little communication often goes a long way even in buying a little patience from your customer-base while to try to get your stuff together. No communication as is the case and the norm here only says 'No one is running the ship and if there is, they don't really care what you think, so keep your opinions to yourselves' - Which is the exact message they are sending to customers right now whether it's deliberate or not.
