Archicad Development Roadmap

[Emre Senoglu]

Every major Architecture or Visualization related software has a roadmap these days, and some let people vote on what's most important. Various software use different websites for their needs, main ones being Trello and Productboard. Here are some examples:

Corona Renderer: Corona Trello Roadmap
Twinmotion: TM Productboard Roadmap
Unreal Engine: UE Productboard Roadmap
Revit: Revit Trello Roadmap

In my opinion Archicad needs to create a development roadmap that is public and easily understood. Even better if users are able to vote (much like in this forum, but in a more structured way - no need for the user to create their own poll with varying poll options). The current forum wishes section seems to be working fine, except there is no way for a user to check if the wished function is being worked on or not.

I think that the previous argument of "competition stealing ideas" is pretty invalid now that AC's arguably biggest competitor is publicly displaying their upcoming features. If this is still of concern to Graphisoft, the roadmap could simply be made private to forum users only. If this level of privacy is still not enough, I'm sure there could be a middle ground.

I think GS has perhaps been using the element of surprise as a wow factor to keep people excited about new releases, but this itself is not good enough selling point anymore seeing as a 'surprise' feature could go both ways. Happy to hear some thoughts about this.

[DGSketcher]

Well if Revit's road map has gone public it kind of eases the need for confidentiality. GS don't need to expose their full map, but they would gain a lot more credibility if they started listening to the screams for features that have been on the wish list for too long. A curated list of potential developments that we could influence would be great if they are then brought to fruition in a reasonably short timeline e.g. don't put Feature X on the map and then take 18 years to add it! But also don't ignore those desperately needed features even if they are difficult to implement. This would also be a good time to alleviate the expectation/frustration of feature filled/limited annual releases so those of us paying maintenance fees have a reasonable idea as to what improvements to expect. We could then hopefully move to updates as new features are completed.

[henryL]

DGSketcher wrote:
This would also be a good time to alleviate the expectation/frustration of feature filled/limited annual releases so those of us paying maintenance fees have a reasonable idea as to what improvements to expect. We could then hopefully move to updates as new features are completed.

Perfectly true. Graphisoft already have my yearly maintenance subscription for a software upgrade, but I don't know where it's going.

[Emre Senoglu]

DGSketcher wrote:
... but they would gain a lot more credibility if they started listening to the screams for features that have been on the wish list for too long.

On the Revit roadmap, you can see that they have already embraced this. There is a color tag next to the features that have originated from their forums. I'm not sure how democratic / picky they are with their added features, but it seems like a great way to immediately see how much is coming from user wishes and how much is based on company wishes.



None of this is revolutionary really. Dropbox has had a feature voting system since pretty much the start of their product, which must be a good 10 years by now. Being locked to a yearly contract sounds absolutely unimaginable to me in 2021. Corona for example has a very nice flexible plan that lets you pay monthy - you can cancel anytime and that's it.

[DGSketcher]

Perhaps this line from from one of Minh's (GS) recent posts holds a clue of coming changes...
"I have forwarded your suggestion to our Wish list database (please refer to it as IDEA-312) to be considered in a future release.". Previously we would have seen "(please refer to it as Wish #13066)"

[Podolsky]

Yesterday I wrote my comment here - but now cannot find it. Or I didn't press submit button, or someone did like that I'm writing what I do really think without trying to be politically correct.

So, what I want to say: Transparent Development Roadmap is absolutely democratic movement. In general every ArchiCAD user is not the same buyer from supermarket, who is getting ready product from fixed amount of money. Software is something that never ready. Originally software was something, that you cannot buy, it was always shipped together with hardware. Every phone (I'm talking about old phones with buttons) every calculator has a software inside. Apple is keeping this classical model - you cannot buy from them computer without operative system for lower price (and install Linux for example). And also this is the reason why exist GPL supporters worldwide - who think software must be open and accessible for everyone as books in library.

If it's paid software - that means every person, who bought the license (and ESPECIALLY who is on the annual subscription) - are investors into further software development. We, ArchiCAD users, are saying: "ok, we like this software, we agree to use it in our practises, even if some important parts are missing and there are bugs, but we trust you that bugs are going to be fixed and missing functions will appear soon".

But we, ArchiCAD users, have all rights to know - for what we gave the money? Where development will go in several next year? Do I agree with development course, or it's better to stop and switch to another software? If I want to improve use of ArchiCAD in my office and develop my own tools and libraries - how could I know, that in next version I will not see the same tool, that I wanted to develop?

Finally much more ArchiCAD users can take part in future development, if this communication would be more advanced than just this forum.

[Anonymous]

Podolsky,
I do not think that someone one who purchase a product has a ‘right’ to know the future plans / development strategy for the product / company.
Take, for example, you purchase a new car, as an owner of that car do you really expect the manufacturer to lay out the development roadmap and features for their new models? No, you have purchased that car and possibly an extended warranty and service plan (subscription), you have what you have paid for. How is software any different from this?

Regards
Scott

[Lingwisyer]

Emre wrote:
Being locked to a yearly contract sounds absolutely unimaginable to me in 2021. Corona for example has a very nice flexible plan that lets you pay monthly - you can cancel anytime and that's it.

Different payment models. ArchiCAD Rental, Dropbox and the Corona SaaS license are Pay to Use, so when you stop paying, you lose access*. ArchiCAD Full, Solo and Corona Box on the other hand are Buy to Use, with ArchiCAD SSA being support for a full license plus a free upgrade.



Ling.

[Podolsky]

I disagree with the statement - that you are paying for ready product when start using ArchiCAD. Because it's not a car, computer or vacuum cleaner and because it's never ready. It's constantly under development and nobody knows where development is moving.
Also, because nobody knows how software shipping, development and maintenance must happen (we have only approx. 35 years of commercial software existence in human history) - nobody can strictly say, how it must happen. Let's not to forget, that was time when ArchiCAD wasn't BIM program at all, because BIM didn't exist!
So, if big company like AutoDesk have decided to publish their development roadmap - especially after serious critique from Revit users, and it makes sense - Graphisoft must do about it also.
In general I like Graphisoft product a lot. But sometimes things are just too much - for example to wait YEARS for appearance free form modelling tool like Morph.

[henryL]

sboydturner wrote:
Take, for example, you purchase a new car, as an owner of that car do you really expect the manufacturer to lay out the development roadmap and features for their new models? No, you have purchased that car and possibly an extended warranty and service plan (subscription), you have what you have paid for. How is software any different from this?

In my opinion the car is a wrong example:
- the software decisions i take today have consequences on my future workflow for 3-4 years at least. In one day i can buy a new car and sell the old one without any problem.
- a car doesn't produce files that I may have to read/edit in 10 20 30 years.
Also users who pay an Archicad subscription actually pay in advance without knowing the next version features, and this is frustrating.