Talk:Autodesk

message: The opening line of this article is blatant press release style double speak.  "global design innovation software and services company" ???  I am removing "design innovation"12.49.153.2 (talk) 18:31, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've trimmed the history section a bit to get rid of some of the heavily POV stuff. However I've just taken out what was clearly very negative spin on their history, I've not added in more accurate and sourcable information yet. Someone really needs to go through using the reference above to put in the actual historical information. --Tnomad 10:26, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Hi, Josh. Good to hear from you. So what's wrong with editing when you have actual knowledge? It's not exactly a vanity article, after all.  Of course, I know two reasons:
*If you contribute something you know, it's Original Research; or, worse yet, Anecdotal. Must stick to stuff that somebody else has published, so we know it's true.
*The real problem: hard not to get involved and feel proprietary about the article. That's why I don't contribute to Wikipedia any more, beyond random little corrections like the one to this article -- and I'm not even gonna provide the easy Autodesk File refs to back up my point. Hoping I'll resist revisiting this and the AutoCAD article too soon. Dandrake 22:06, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

text: If you want to use it to write and source some content for the article, fine, but what you added was just a mention of the file and an inline external link. The purpose of Wikipedia is to host articles, not links. - MrOllie (talk) 19:49, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: MrOllie I don’t understand your comment. I wrote a brief description of the Autodesk File, and why it’s an important document not just in the history of Autodesk but of the industry.  Your response seems to suggest that I should repeat more content from the Autodesk File, rather than a link to it.  Wikipedia articles have lots of links - are you going to systematically remove all links that you decide don’t have sufficient content associated with them?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ambitus (talk • contribs) 07:27, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: 1) We don't embed external links in the body of articles, see WP:EL. 2) We don't link "Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a featured article" - so while it is appropriate to use the Autodesk file as a source to improve the content of this article, it is not appropriate to just point our readers at somebody else's site and have done with it rather than do the writing here. - MrOllie (talk) 12:58, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: :Image:AutoCAD 2006 drawing.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:01, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:AutoCAD 2006 drawing.png

message: The following sentence is currently incomprehensible:
"The Platform Solutions and Emerging Business division develops and manages Autodesk's flagship product, AutoCAD, AutoCAD LT, Autodesk's Geospatial solutions, Plant solutions, Extended Design offerings such as Design Review, Content and Search solutions, Autodesk Labs, and worldwide engineering."
Items in this list need to be separated with semicolons, with commas used for the parenthetical information given for the individual items. I would do this if I knew which were main items and what was parenthetical, but it's impossible to tell unless you are acquainted with the products mentioned, and I am not. — Paul G 07:44, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  First sentence in "Portfolio" section is currently incomprehensible 

message: why is this article just talking about autocad? what about autodesk's other products like 3dsmax and how they bought Alias Systems Corporation, and now own maya  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.27.232.197 (talk) 18:11, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: products

message: :Image:Autodesk logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
Autodesk has made many acquisitions, perhaps we should put them in a unified bulleted list.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wariner (talk • contribs) 07:56, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Autodesk logo.png

message: I am watching Canada AM and they are promoting the hell out of Autodesk and saying that it's a Canadian company... What gives?... --Diefromevileye (talk) 13:42, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Canadian 

message: Hi, I haven't an idea how to edit Wiki articles, but Autodesk just acquired Tinkercad. (see: http://blog.tinkercad.com/2013/05/18/autodesk_tinkercad/ )
Perhaps this would be of use to put into the article? 121.217.185.101 (talk) 07:59, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It was added. Geraldshields11 (talk) 13:33, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acquisition of Tinkercad 

message: How was Lightscape the only radiosity rendering package available in 1991? I can think of at least Radiance, which had been in development since 1985 although distributed as source code. This part needs editing for clarification or accuracy.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.208.97.156 (talk) 23:19, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discontinued products 

message: I heard that ART is based on OptiCore in here. Are there any reliable source of it? I want to know. thx. --120.75.65.162 (talk) 06:57, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Autodesk Raytracer (ART) based on OptiCore? 

message: There is no information about controversies about Autodesk, particularly the transition to subscription-only licensing. --185.183.104.83 (talk) 15:48, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It's hardly controversial when all large software producers are doing it. Just look at Microsoft Office. You can't own it anymore. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:35, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feedback - Controversies 

message: I think the discontinued products list also belongs in a collapsable table. It's not very helpful or informative, and certainly isn't very attractive. Also, where does the grossly POV section regarding Lightscape come from? And why isn't the one Autodesk product I had primary responsibility for -- CHAOS, The Software -- mentioned at all? --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇  16:02, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of discontinued products 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 15:36, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: Fusion 360 is notable enough for its own article. The article was deleted by redirection on grounds of copyright violation. Unfortunately, version  21:47, 1 March 2019‎ has been salted so the alleged copyright violation can not be checked. Jonpatterns (talk) 14:21, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: No "alleged".  Stop adding copyrighted material, or you might get blocked from editing on Wikipedia.Onel5969 TT me 14:27, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: , , I see no indication of independent notability in either of the versions that were reverted as copyvio. Jonpatterns, if you think it is notable, why not check that you have five or six solid independent reliable sources that discuss it in depth and in detail, and if you do, go ahead and start a page in draft space? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:54, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the reply. It will take time to gather the sources. Jonpatterns (talk) 19:09, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fusion 360 

message: In discontinued products : advance concret it's a french software (sorry I'm french and I'm not used to speaking English)
--Bm10 (talk) 00:11, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discontinued products