Article published DECEMBER 2007 on the Novedge Blog
I read Ralph Grabowski’s interesting post on fat CAD systems and how the Internet can change how users purchase CAD software. First of all, let me say that I agree with Ralph. Most CAD systems are packaged with an incredible collection of features; none can be purchased separately or removed from the set.
Ideally, we all like having drafting, modeling, FEM/FEA, CAM, rendering, simulation, and even more all integrated into one single program, one click away from our daily tasks. I personally know several people using modeling and rendering, drafting and modeling, or modeling and CAM. But I don’t know anyone who uses all of them. For example, if you are a senior engineer capable of running sophisticated Finite Element Analysis, it’s very unlikely that you want to invest your time in creating photo-realistic images.
What if CAD software were sold as a service with a subscription, instead of as a product?
On the other hand, based on my experience, I believe it’s very difficult to ask end users to choose the optimal combination of modules without confusing them, and clarifying their choices requires a huge investment of time. Nobody really wants to spend two days learning all the details of CAD product configuration to save at best a few hundred bucks. Furthermore, users like having everything installed and available on their computer, even if they know they will use only a subset of it.
If we look closer, we can see that most of those features are there only for marketing reasons. Didn’t the users ask for them? Yes, but most of the time, just because they were exposed to your marketing or your competitor’s marketing, not because they really need them. Let’s face it, many users like to compare software using simple checklists, without having to go into too much detail.
In my opinion, many CAD vendors add those superfluous features with two major goals:
- Attracting new users
Building an omni-comprehensive checklist of features is a way to win the sale against competitors. - Selling upgrades to existing customers
It’s easier to promote a few “life-changing” new functionalities than to have to explain the benefits of several hundred marginal improvements.
There is a way to have CAD companies invest more resources in improving and optimizing existing features instead of continually adding new gadgets that few will ever use. What if software were sold as a service on a subscription basis, rather than as a product? This could improve the current situation in a couple of ways:
- The way users approach CAD software would change. The emphasis would be on the quality of service, not on the new features. For example, when you renew your DSL subscription, you base your decision on the level of service, not on minor new features.
- CAD companies would be motivated to focus on improving and optimizing core features, thereby placing substance over flash.
