How Did Fusion 360 Begin? The Full History (Vs Inventor)

[@Neil3D]

Salutations! This was a big one, hopefully worth the effort! Just one correction that I know of so far, that being that the D-Cubed solver isn't using in Fusion 360 but is in Inventor. The source I found that info in was incorrect!

[@skyhighgaminguk]

Glad you are still doing videos mate. Most underrated channel on KZbin. Funny, friendly, informative, and no "bloat". Well done mate, keep them coming! 👌

[@TheCADWhisperer]

If a company wants to sell me a new car or CAD or phone - I expect the new phone to do everything the old phone plus a bit more. Years ago when Autodesk came out with Inventor I told my students, "We will take a look at this new Inventor, but the class will be taught using MDT." Within a couple of weeks we no longer bothered with MDT. That is what I expect to see from Fusion 360. But all these years later (6-8 week release cycle is smoke and mirrors) Fusion still isn't a professional tool. It still doesn't have what Inventor (or SOLIDWORKS) had 10 years ago and what Inventor had at it's same age. If I were still teaching (retired now) - I would have to eliminate entire courses from the curriculum if I was limited to Fusion 360. 2D Documentation. Still horrendous in Fusion 360. There goes a couple of courses. Weldments - not in Fusion 360. There goes another course. Sheet metal - missing significant functionality. There goes a couple of weeks of instruction in two courses. Routed Systems - missing entirely in Fusion. There goes a course and a week of related instruction in another course. Plastic Mold design. Not in Fusion. There goes another course. Frame Generator. Not in Fusion. Another couple of weeks in multiple related courses. Thin body and beam element analysis. Another couple of weeks. 3D Annotation. A couple of days of instruction in related courses. Dynamic Simulation. There goes two entire courses. Unwrap. Nope. Sweep Cut with solid body. Nope. Robust helix. Nope. Design Accelerators. Nope. Configurations. Nope. Every week I see more stuff missing when users present issues on the Fusion forum. One thing I notice is that most of the questions of the Fusion forum are hobby level use questions compared to more professional level questions on the Inventor forum. This doesn't mean that there aren't professionals trying to use Fusion. But when someone states that, "They don't need Inventor, they do what they need in Fusion" - I know they are really amateur level users. (Except in what I call the "upper division" of Fusion - the analysis tools and generative design. Autodesk is clearly targeting these in Fusion rather than Inventor.) With the glacially slow pace of development of Fusion (recall the smoke and mirrors statement I made earlier) - I can't help but wonder if Fusion has made 10 cents over development costs. Regarding this lack of basic development I see frequent references to development team restrictions. Given this and the number of (free) hobbyist users I see active - I suspect that Fusion is a money pit for Autodesk. But why. Why is Autodesk pushing Fusion marketing (but not development) so heavily when it is clearly inferior to SOLIDWORKS. Andrew Anagnost told me point blank he wants to beat SOLIDWORKS. If they can't convert the free users to paid subscription then they can't win this battle. If Autodesk cannot deliver a new CAD that does everything SOLIDWORKS does - plus a bit more - they cannot win this battle. I think Autodesk is searching for their own SOLIDWORKS - a tool that comes out of nowhere to dominate the space. But at the same time Dassault Systemes is searching for their next "SOLIDWORKS". There isn't even a SolidWorks conference anymore. 3DEXPERIENCE - their cloud solution. I see the same user consternation over there that I see between Inventor and Fusion.

[@Neil3D]

Yea to be clear, when I said "tell me it's professional without using the word professional"... that was purely because the marketing pages give off... or at least are trying to give off that perception. But I completely agree, it's missing an outrageous stack of critical functionality for engineering which made that marketing statement at the end all the more infuriating to me. Re Solidworks though, I think I've also heard Eggnog say that, I might have been there when he said that to you or maybe another time, or maybe I just heard you say it before and now I'm getting confused... either way... I suspect or would like to hope they've dropped that strategy. There was early campaigns and targetted poaching going on, not gonna lie I haven't been looking for it in recent times but I haven't seen much of it lately. For me, I honestly believe the true end goal lies within what I said at the end... that some time in the future the landscape will shift, platforms will evolve, and Inventor will get left behind. Fusion will evolve alongside a changing technological ecosystem, and elevate into being probably a modular service serving MFG. Autodesk will be acutely aware of what it's lacking in order to achieve that, but none of this will happen overnight.

[@TheCADWhisperer]

I might clarify that I doubt many free users will be converted to paid subscription. That is exactly why they love Fusion - because they get a reasonable design tool for free. Funny thing, at last AU Manufacturing Main-Stage Derrick stood in front of a huge projection of a disaster timeline showing multiple red and yellow highlighted unresolved issues. This was supposed to be an exemplar of Fusion user? I see an astonishing number of users happily go about creating rubbish and not aware that they are doing so.

[@maxencedelannoy4178]

Great list of what is missing. I will add iProperties, iParts, iAssemblies... and the biggest one, no way to store files locally...

[@jdmather5755]

@@maxencedelannoy4178 Files can be stored locally in Fusion. The majority of *.f3d files that I create are stored locally. Adding to the list - one of my most frequently missed issues - fully parametric reference (driven) dimensions in any formula in any place (sketch and feature).

[@TheCADWhisperer]

Two more missing - no Sketch Block and also Extrude within multi-body permits selection of Cut or Intersect body but not Join body. These sorts of missing functionality would drive professional Inventor or SOLIDWORKS users crazy. Nearly every day I see someone post a new problem on the Fusion forum that was solved years ago (usually before Fusion even existed) in Inventor and SOLIDWORKS. My students were still small children when these issues were solved.

[@davidtruyens]

Thanks Neil! You just sumerised my whole cad journey. It's been an awesome ride. We now have a company that makes one hardware product and Fusion was by far the best tool. I also help a friend of mine who makes furniture and again, Fusion is the only option. I f he would like to make a copy of a fully parametric model, just do exactly that, copy... No messing around with data management and copy design exploding the amount of files that you couldn't care less about.. Finally the nesting also got rid of it's horrible history and is now a fast 3d nester, all in one. It is not a good tool for bigger engineering firms with complex release cycles, but then again, I think a lot of companies are making this too complicated for themselves..

[@colinsmith1410]

What a great trip down memory lane! I was one of the first product managers for Fusion 360. I looked after t-splines, surface modeling, and rendering (I think you and I had a couple meetings during those days, Neil). I worked on Fusion from 2012 to 2017 and it was one of the best products and product teams I had the privilege to work with. The product management team alone grew from 2 to 10 over the years as more and more functionality was added to the platform. It wasn't perfect but you could see the potential F360 had. Whenever I see a you-tube maker video and Fusion pops on the screen I feel a bit of pride.

[@cekuhnen]

Yeah and I was with fusion before it was even fusion360 ;)

[@Malledeus86]

These CAD/CAM software companies are doing a great service by giving out educational or free licenses out for students and hobbyists. About 13 years ago I wanted to become a CNC programmer but was just an Operator at the time. We used this software called SurfCAM to program our machines and Catia was our CAD software. I had to beg for training, I had to work my arse off to finally get it. So much favoritism was in the way. The….”well his dad is the safety manager so we have to teach him first” kinda stuff going on. Now it’s years later and I’m so happy people who want to move their career foreword don’t have to go through that anymore. Mastercam is 100% free to learn, Fusion 360 honestly haven’t used it in a few years, but I learned modeling on it for free, Solidworks, and Catia for 60-80$ you can get a cloud based license. I work as a CAD/CAM designer now and still play around with software I don’t use day to day just to stay current. Esprit if your reading, give out demo software love to see what I could do via UV axis in Wire EDM with your CAM software haha.

[@markcrane6959]

Interesting Insights thankyou for sharing your experience

[@jazzGT]

Great video! I was trying to find among your videos something about the file structure used on Fusion 360, but could not find any of the sort. Are you planning a future video on differences between file structure on Inventor vs. Fusion? It could be so useful for Inventor users as myself. Great channel by the way, been suscribed for a few years now, keep on the awesome work!

[@hyperformancellc]

Great video. Ive used fusion since 2013 and I am happy to pay for it. The updates started getting alot better after they got rid of the free versions. I pay for some of the add ons and those do add up. Im hoping to see more inventor and rhino features added to fusion like unwrap and some of the surface modeling tools. z I have taught probably 50+ people to use fusion in just a few hours and the shared projects are great for when I am machining or manufacturing something for a start up that is also using fusion. I can quickly change a fillet for better cycle time and send it back over for them to look at. It is the best.

[@qabalah78]

Thank you!! I have been so confused as well. I had both under an Educational Licence and always found myself going to Fusion360. It just looked nicer, worked better and did what I wanted how I expected it to. When I upgraded my PC I didn't bother with the the Inventor install. What was the point?

[@paulo_lf_]

Excellent video and information. Inventor + Vault are in a very different league from Fusion 360 when it comes to large and complex models, automated tools and data management.

[@JamesLenane]

Superb video mate...I've so many comments I could write a novel so won't start but there are many Inventor user's pissed and unsure of wtf the future hold's.I started with AutoCAD then Inv pro so got to dip my toe in when it mysteriously appeared in Inv but most hardcore user's thought what am I supposed to with that🤷‍♂️if I could go back I like NX....nice work Neil great stuff for CADnuts

[@JamesLenane]

Just reading some of the comments' few Fusion user's I have tried but feel way more at home in Inv or SW maybe I'm getting old

[@peterbosse9059]

Thanks Neil for once again putting this big matter in to discussion. As it is right now it's totally up to the resellers to explain the customers when an why fusion is "enough". Autodesk marketing isn't helpful in this case. 😒 With those kind of money spended in Fusion it will of caused be the main platform for mechanical construction one day, but the way is long and will at the end be painfull for the existing inventor customers. Think of all the inventor data - arrrrrrgh! the migration will be painful....

[@southerngentleman5321]

the bewildering array of Autodesk products is very hard to wrap your head around... even just doing buildings the amount of packages is just.. well.. a lot.. and many are still so buggy, Revit alone just keeps getting new releases but so many simple issues persist.. cant help but wonder if Autodesk would do well to simplify its product line and at the same time improve its base / core its often the case that we throw our hand's in the air and open AutoCAD.. be it buildings or machine parts.

[@glenpiggott5815]

one of my issues is having to buy an entire design suite or what ever they are calling it this year to get cam with inventor, so now they getting a fusion subscription not an inventor subscription, this is definitely pushing some users that would prefer inventor to go to fusion

[@Neil3D]

Yea I've jabbed at them for that, not sure what their motivation is for this... why do you need an upsell into a product that includes 3DS Max and Navisworks just to get CAM with their flagship design and manufacturing software.

[@koverpet220]

It's a shame that some features that were in Inventor fusion were thrown in the trash when you switched to fusion 360, such as edit edge (and other tools related to it), the merge option for patterns, circular pattern without copy rotation, dimensions and limiters for 3D solid objects, the ability to freely move edges and facets of solid objects, the SteeringWheels navigation tool, and most frustratingly, they removed the ability to select adjacent edges and facets (including selecting the edge cycle on an edge), and to select Feature, Protrusion and Depression.

[@Z-add]

So 3dsmax maya and softimage had no effect on the history of fusion360.

[@furyan9382]

Fusion 360 into Linux....I am Hooray!!

[@Neil3D]

Where's that?!

[@gerritvisser]

which one of the dozens of Linux, which desktop?? More time down the drain in support, and taking away from actual development.

[@Neil3D]

@@gerritvisser Not sure where a Linux visual was in this video, possibly a flashed up clip somewhere midway but if it was it'll have been a very old preproduction build of Fusion. The majority of the clips used in here were unseen archived footage from Autodesk from when Fusion was in development before it was released in 2013.

[@TheCADWhisperer]

@Phurien How much of a premium would you be willing to pay for a Linux version of Fusion.

[@arthurny3914]

Few things....first am glad to see that you're aren't drinking the Kool Aid saying F360 is the greatest. It's definitely lowered the barrier to entry in terma of giving users access to software they'd generally not have access to. Few things, and I could be mistaken on some of these: Generative Design came from the acquisition of Within. SpaceClaim originally an add on for Solidworks I do take issue with the fact that the F360 dev team built this from the ground up and have similar 2D sketching issues that plague the likes of Solidworks or Inventor. Just not acceptable for a package that claims to have looked at what "could" be diffent from the others already out there. I will 100% agree that DDS has done as horribly with the whole transition of Solidworks to 3D Expereince platform. I'm not sure they couldn't have done a worse job than what they've been pushing for the past 10 or so years. Last but not least the comparison of F360 to Solidworks also needs to stop. (Not saying you are doing this) just in general users of F360 need to be ok with it being what it is, it just not and never will be Inventor or Solidworks and am not sure why some users are always trying to make themselves feel better by making this comparison.

[@industrialmachinearts]

Generative design did not come from within. Spaceclaim was originally written by David Taylor and was not connected to SolidWorks in any way.

[@arthurny3914]

@@industrialmachinearts Mike Payne or it could have been Jon Hirschtick.... was working on this being an add on for Solidworks. Some of this is even what started some of the conversation which then became OnShape years later. There was a huge internal fallout about this. I know, I was there. Then within was just bought and shelved then, as per usual AD modus operandi.

[@furyan9382]

Add a beard... He's your brother ?!?

[@Neil3D]

Who... Hoop Dog?!

[@Ada-pe6ie]

🤗 ᵖʳᵒᵐᵒˢᵐ

[@spikeypineapple552]

For me, it's pretty obvious that fusion is a blue collar usage specific tool. It won't match another tool quite as well, but it'll do it all, and it'll do it much cheaper, and much quicker. For example: In the machining use case, fusion costs at minimum 10K less than another cad+cam solution. It has stronger integration between the two envrinoments, and it's easier to use. There are a few, very specific things you cannot do. But 95% of people wern't using those things anyway. As a way to break into users that wouldn't have traditionally use cad/cam there was no other way but this one. As for the price increase, it didn't bother me at all. By the time I'd started using it, it was clear that the value was far in exccess of what I was paying before. I think they could probably take modeling+CAM up to 100$/month and still retain a large amount of their paying customers.

[@rc-cnc3431]

I've been using Fusion close to 6 years. I've recently got an engineering position where they use Inventor and Vault. I honestly think Inventor is outdated and I'd like to see ito see it replaced by Fusion.

[@fsfabricationltd5476]

Scare me, the software have serious problems of functionality, full in problems, losing dates, every 10 update one work and 9 doesn't, I never manager to finish one drawing without problems.