do not try to dictate a technical solution to
Posted: Mon Dec 23, 2024 9:18 am
Need to improve performance? Implement support for multi-core processors and modern video cards. Unlike Revit, we did this from the very beginning. And if a user reports that something is working slowly, we look into it and after a couple of releases we release optimization that returns comfort to work on their project scale. And the specification is calculated in a few seconds, not 30-40 minutes.
In general, the developer. It is better to tell them what tasks you need to solve. Then phone number in vietnamese the dialogue will be more constructive, and the developer will understand which tasks are a priority.
Yes, some people don't like that we don't work on the principle: "You asked, I did it right away." And this surprises me a little, since these users worked with foreign products and couldn't ask the developer for anything. But we do just that - most of the new functionality is made according to the users' needs.
And also, regarding comparisons and questions: "What, you couldn't do it like in Revit?" The simple answer is: "No, you couldn't." You need to understand that in order to become like Revit, you need to choose the clone concept. So, in Russia, for example, they made a clone of AutoCAD. But even if you chose this approach, you still won't be able to do the same thing. And you will also run into all the same problems and limitations that exist in the original product.
But don't think that I think that we have answers to all questions and that we have everything automated. There are a huge number of wishes and suggestions from users, and we are working on them.
How exactly do you collect these wishes and suggestions? Do you have some kind of systematic approach?
The systematic approach is that we have a technical support service: the classic Service Desk is located on sd.ascon.ru, and all suggestions, wishes, comments, and errors are registered there, even by non-commercial users.
The analyst examines the proposals received, compares them with what we ourselves think about the development of a specific functionality. Then we discuss it all and make decisions. We also analyze the frequency of requests received.
We also have partners-integrators and sellers who are in constant contact with enterprises. They send emails with tables and wish lists. The wording of these wishes does not always reflect the actual task that the user wants to solve. Therefore, in this case, we often have to seek additional information.
And, of course, we follow the trends: drones, point clouds, etc. But how widespread these trends will become is a moot point. The same notorious point clouds have not yet become so.
That's why we're aiming for the mass market with our tool. And when we're asked to implement some trends, we don't refuse, but we say that these specific functions are the priority now.
In general, the developer. It is better to tell them what tasks you need to solve. Then phone number in vietnamese the dialogue will be more constructive, and the developer will understand which tasks are a priority.
Yes, some people don't like that we don't work on the principle: "You asked, I did it right away." And this surprises me a little, since these users worked with foreign products and couldn't ask the developer for anything. But we do just that - most of the new functionality is made according to the users' needs.
And also, regarding comparisons and questions: "What, you couldn't do it like in Revit?" The simple answer is: "No, you couldn't." You need to understand that in order to become like Revit, you need to choose the clone concept. So, in Russia, for example, they made a clone of AutoCAD. But even if you chose this approach, you still won't be able to do the same thing. And you will also run into all the same problems and limitations that exist in the original product.
But don't think that I think that we have answers to all questions and that we have everything automated. There are a huge number of wishes and suggestions from users, and we are working on them.
How exactly do you collect these wishes and suggestions? Do you have some kind of systematic approach?
The systematic approach is that we have a technical support service: the classic Service Desk is located on sd.ascon.ru, and all suggestions, wishes, comments, and errors are registered there, even by non-commercial users.
The analyst examines the proposals received, compares them with what we ourselves think about the development of a specific functionality. Then we discuss it all and make decisions. We also analyze the frequency of requests received.
We also have partners-integrators and sellers who are in constant contact with enterprises. They send emails with tables and wish lists. The wording of these wishes does not always reflect the actual task that the user wants to solve. Therefore, in this case, we often have to seek additional information.
And, of course, we follow the trends: drones, point clouds, etc. But how widespread these trends will become is a moot point. The same notorious point clouds have not yet become so.
That's why we're aiming for the mass market with our tool. And when we're asked to implement some trends, we don't refuse, but we say that these specific functions are the priority now.