AutoCAD is a CAD product from Autodesk. It allows designers to work in 2D and 3D, and is available on Windows and Mac, but with extensive online collaboration tools.
$245
per month
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Score 5.1 out of 10
N/A
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) is an end-to-end engineering solution used to manage system requirements to design, workflow, and test management, extending the functionality of ALM tools for better complex-systems development.
N/A
Pricing
AutoCAD
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Editions & Modules
Monthly Subscription
$245
per month per user
Yearly Subscription
$1975
per year per user
3-Year Subscription
$5925
3 years per user
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
AutoCAD
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
AutoCAD
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Features
AutoCAD
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Computer-Aided Design Software
Comparison of Computer-Aided Design Software features of Product A and Product B
AutoCAD is the Industry best and standardized software used industry wide. This comes with support of some free to use plugins which can be downloaded form AutoDesk Store. AutoDesk has already nurtured a strong community of Developers, Students and Architects this helps any one new with Forms which help them get integrated with the commiunity very quickly.
The software is robust enough to handle highly complex software development or other product development and can be used well beyond the range to do what a client needs. However, because of the inability to hold its users to proper best practices, things can get wildly out of hand and cascade over the years, creating unnecessary technical debt. The system has a lot of usable features, but they don't funnel users toward the correct processes and practices.
The tools are easy to use and the learning curve is fairly minimal to be able to create blueprints.
The 3D application is very fun to use and it is nice to be able to see your product instead of having to imagine what it will look like.
The speed and accuracy in which students can create plans is a huge bonus. Students can plan their industrial art projects out and use their own set of plans to build them.
User Interface Customisation: AutoCAD's user interface could benefit from more robust customisation options. Allowing users to rearrange toolbars, menus, and panels according to their specific workflows and preferences would enhance productivity.
Enhanced 3D Modeling Tools: While AutoCAD is capable of 3D modeling, it's not as intuitive or feature-rich as dedicated 3D modeling software. Streamlining the process and adding more advanced modeling tools would be a welcome improvement.
Enhanced Collaboration and Version Control: AutoCAD could improve its collaboration tools, such as real-time editing and version tracking, to facilitate smoother teamwork, especially in multi-disciplinary projects.
Intelligent Object Libraries: AutoCAD could benefit from an expanded and more intelligent library of standard objects and components. This would save time for designers who often have to create custom components from scratch.
I feel like it is too heavy sometimes and updating is not very straight forward. For example, if I want to change an incident ticket (IN) to a service request (SR) and add some comment for the change, I have to first change the IN to SR, then click refresh which takes a few seconds, then add a comment. If I forget the refresh step, my comment will be discarded without warning like my ticket is not in the latest status. This also happens when somebody else changes the ticket during my edit as I can not lock the ticket exclusively.
Because rarely we [would] rather wait for a whole year to update, sometimes the new updates don't bring many new features and we are still ok with the current version. Also the change of interface is always something that takes time for every partner in the company to get comfortable with. So those are the main reasons we may want to keep the same version.
At the moment we are required by contract to continue to use the IBM DOORS software for our current client. Given that it can be expensive, if we were to use it after our current client's needs were met, we would have to secure other projects in order to justify the continued use of the software.
It is very usable once you understand the program. I believe there is room for improvement in the 2D to 3D modeling capability. We have to use other apps to 3D model and that can be time consuming and sometimes AutoCAD doesn't transfer work that well between apps. They can improve there.
The UI is terrible and not intuitive. Users need training in order to complete tasks. Much like SAP, it's not the clearest tool. The tracing feature is especially complicated because you must write the scripts yourself. There is a learning curve. Also, even the setup, installation, and logging in each time takes a considerable amount of time.
AutoCAD has the issue of crashing or slowing down the design procedure once a heavy design that includes several disciplines or multiple families/blocks is involved. Customer services gets the feedback from the crash reports but this issue seems like it has never been addressed in the software updates past several years.
It does a basic job and has the potential to complete some robust reporting tasks, however, it really is a clunky piece of software with a terrible user interface that makes using it routinely quite unpleasant. Many of our legacy and maintenance projects still use DOORS but our department and company use many alternatives and are looking for better tools.
the implementation was realy easy , to set up our workstation we pay for the licenses we are about to use , there was a little bit of delay to get the payment processed to receive the serial but after that the install runs without any problem , so you can fell secure there will be not issue with the implementation.
I use Revit far more than I use AutoCAD. AutoCAD is great for simple linework, but even then I will often create the lines in Revit and then export to AutoCAD for final touches and printing. AutoCAD is a bit easier for large-format prints, which is why I almost always end up using it after starting in Revit.
It was easier to do all the change management-related activities, even configurations were handled very effectively. New process definitions and initiatives made it easier for better project deliverables. Effective resource allocations and better reporting and defect management. The overall cost of the tool is great too and well within budget.
AutoCAD has helped our smaller firm produce lots of finished products matching that of a much larger size firm. With its many features, we have been able to do so much more and meet deadlines that much faster.
Since we do use AutoCAD, we're able to work with many other engineering firms to collaborate together to complete various building projects.
We have many clients now who expect us to provide for them at the end of a project not just printed construction drawings but also the digital AutoCAD drawing so they can in turn use it for future modifications themselves.
It's part of CLM suite so it can be used to manage the whole lifecycle with tight integration with development module (Rational Team Concert) and quality module (Rational Quality Manager).
Comprehensive reports and dashboards provide better visibility.