DGSketcher wrote:
Just a little reminder, Sketchup was in the hands of Google for six years and they pretty much did nothing to really develop it from more than a basic modeller. The documenting process was and is I believe still a mess.
This is a simplistic (and uncharitable) assessment of Google's period of ownership and custodianship of Sketchup, that undercuts a lot things that happened and gained by the program.
Granted, it probably wasn't the most prudent of investments given where they wanted to take the program compred to where they eventually ended up, but under Google, Sketchup gained the Google (now Trimble) 3D warehouse which is the largest repository of crowdsourced 3D modeled objects from all manner of areas in life - and which are used extensively even with programs and areas other than Sketchup (including ArchiCAD itself).
And let's not forget that Graphisoft themselve tried to emulate this initiative with their own BIMcomponents portal, that had......shall we say....mixed results, but nowhere near the same level of success due to them doing things the Graphisoft-ey way (cart before the horse.)
Also an offshoot from the Google ownership was the massive global crowdsourcing of 3D constructed buildings around the world that they would then use to populate their Google 3D maps - at the time - before they switched methodologies to photogrammetry and other means of getting digital 3D information for their map.
But out of that, you had some cities and municipalities take advantage of it, and digitize and update their own city 3D maps and databases using those Sketchup models and which to this day are useful for a lot of architects and designers in saving time (where your city authorities were astute and 'on-the--ball' enough to build those databases).
They eventually sold it off to Trimble (for a good price given what they built into it) - which in retrospect was a wise choice since they weren't a good fit, based on what they had hoped to get out of Sketchup versus where they actually wanted to go. Trimble is more closely aligned to the AEC industry and to the extent that Sketchup has seen any major improvements or developments since they bought it out, it lies more at their doorstep since they would be more attuned to what the users want than Google ever could be.
Or at least theoretically should be.
It's not just about having the financial heft and resources to carry out the needed developmental changes.
Its also about knowing how best to spend those resources by knowing what needs getting done.
DGSketcher wrote:
On the Autode$k issue, did the letter make any difference? Have they actually genuinely changed direction? I doubt it, they hold a monopolistic position. There are too many hollow apologists on this planet just now, "
Short answer is yes, it did (...in the short term. ....and with caveats) have an effect, and made a differnce with Autodesk.
One of the main ones being they've become very proactive in their customer interactions and regarding future development plans (including the publishing of roadmaps - which, we here can only dream of), and emblemified by their establishment of a Trello board for direct customer interaction with, and even a peek into what developers are working on.
Trello boards are commonplace these days with Software development companies - or some versions ofthe concept (McNeel has the Serengeti forum in which the principle is the same. You get to interact with developers and get a sneek peek at beta versions and WIP version and have open back-and-forth dialogs and most importantly direct feedback for them before features are locked in. Think of how much that could have saved GS with a lot of the...how shall we say,...half-baked...features in this most recent release that seemed like they were missing just that extra level of user feedback that the Beta process seems to be failing in providing them).
AS to real concrete comprehensive changes to their system and the programs themselves, we'll have to wait and see the next versions next year which will be the first developed under this open system of back and forth with users, and check to see if they actually take anything on board.
But the implementation of the Trello board itself, and having not just actual developers, but Development heads in constant dialog with not just users but everyday users (and not exclusive the "Key client" types and insider clubs), is a good first step for them, if not a show of good faith that they're listening...
....AND responding
Can we say the same here?
This is not to say that a similar letter will work the same way on this side.
For the one thing, we certainly don't have the weight of the big name architects and customers like the Fosters and the Zaha Hadid's to sign on to it and bring along with it the glaring media coverage that Autodesk just couldn't run away from.
For another, all that negative media attention had a knock-on effect because Autodesk is a publicly traded company.
With shareholders.
To answer to.
Who don't like bad reports and press clippings, that tank stock prices and ruin their financial portfolios.
Clearly, with ArchiCAD the situation is different.
To whom would the letter be?
Graphisoft?
But they're owned by Nemetschek.
And Nemetschek themselves are serving more in the role of a 'holding' company for all the subsidiaries they own (Maxon, Vectorworks makers, Allpan...) rather than one that's actively involved in the administrative procedures of each company.
So how effective would a letter like that be to them even with any negative press coverage it could bring in its wake?
