AutoCAD vs. METAmakeR by iStaging

Once again, for jobs/companies where you are doing a lot of design and modelling of tanks, pipework or filling machine or basic electronics its fantastic as a 3D and 2D modelling tool, however once again when it comes to testing these actual products in the real world, I feel like AutoCAD is let down by its clunky fitting and spec management and also in very limited in-house engineering simulations.

• Compatibility of different file formats, and also exports to different file formats.
• CLI Commands as well as internal functions which are exposed can be used for automation of various tasks.
• The new 2025 comes with .NET Core support which helps AutoCAD to connect with Cloud based features.

Incentivized

• 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.

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.

Incentivized

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.

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.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

• As an educational institute there are no overall business objectives.
• As a negative, the licensing is expensive and we have to limit the number of computers we put it on.
• As a positive, many of our students will have a leg up when entering into programs or companies that use this software.

Incentivized