CAD Absolutely Smoked Product-Market Fit
Let’s not mince words: CAD didn’t just find product-market fit — it devoured it. By the late ‘90s, hand-drafting was hanging on by a thread, and CAD had become the default across architecture, engineering, and construction. It was fast, flexible, and frictionless.
And BIM? Well… BIM’s been “almost there” for 25 years. It’s still the future — but the future keeps getting pushed out. There is a reason why I keep coming back to this meme: We are limited by the technology of our time. Or is it something else?
CAD Solved a Pain Point Everyone Felt
Back in the day, every change to a drawing meant hours — if not days — of redrawing by hand. Coordinating between sheets? A manual, error-prone nightmare. CAD showed up and said, “Want to change a linetype? Cool — done in five seconds, and it updates everywhere.” Shout out to CTB files everywhere that some people still prefer.
• Copy/paste layout blocks? Yes.
• Adjust lineweights without redrawing? Absolutely.
• Print 10 sheets by 4 p.m.? No sweat.
It solved an immediate, universal pain, and it did so without changing how architects and engineers think. You drafted — just digitally. CAD was a better pencil, not a new language. That’s textbook product-market fit.
It Took Over Fast
AutoCAD launched in 1982 (9 years before I was born…). By the mid-1990s, most professional firms were using it. Hand drafting didn’t fade — it vanished. CAD was:
• Cheap enough to adopt. Because personal computers became so affordable, access to these tools was democratized.
• Simple enough to learn. Line command–Even better Polyline command.
• Powerful enough to scale from garages to high-rises.
By 2000, CAD had all but obliterated the drafting board. It didn’t need mandates, training programs, or cultural change — it just worked. It was the kind of adoption curve startups dream about.
Now Enter BIM… with a Parachute Full of Homework
On paper, BIM should be the natural evolution. A fully coordinated 3D model. Embedded data. Clash detection. A digital twin. What’s not to love?
But here’s the thing: BIM doesn’t just change the tool — it changes the entire process. As someone that has spent 8 years now disrupting process, I can guarantee that BIM has only thrived becuase of thought leadership, marketing, and everyone desperately wanting something better than CAD.
And most AECO teams? They’re just not built for completing projects and changing process in flight of their careers.
The Stats Tell the Story:
• 60–70% of firms globally use BIM in some capacity, but actual individual daily usage is closer to 50–60%.
• In small firms (<10 people), BIM use drops to 30–40%.
• Only 10–20% of projects are truly “BIM-only” — where CAD is completely out of the picture.
• Meanwhile, 100% of those projects still export to 2D PDFs — the common denominator.
BIM Makes Big Promises — But Only If Everyone Plays Along
That’s BIM’s core weakness. It only works when the entire team — architect, engineer, MEP, GC, fabricator, owner — is all-in. If one person’s still on 2D, the whole thing falls apart.
Compare that to CAD: you could be a one-person shop, a multinational firm, or a subcontractor drawing a single detail — and it works for all of them. No fanfare. No high-maintenance process. Just simple, precise documentation. Amazing the market-fit of drawing a thing.
BIM Has Value — But It’s Niche
Let’s give BIM credit where it’s due: in massive, high-complexity projects like airports, hospitals, and datacenters, it can deliver massive value. That’s where all the acronyms — 4D, 5D, COBie, LOD 400 — start to make sense.
But for 90% of the built world, those aren’t the kinds of buildings being designed. For schools, apartments, office buildings, single-family homes? The value case for BIM is… aspirational. If you desperately need a BIM for operations and dont want to built it? Just build the real asset using 2D documents, and have a 3D scanning company create the digital twin at the end.
Meanwhile, CAD Still Dominates Where It Counts
Even in 2025, CAD is still the dominant platform in many markets and use cases:
• Residential architecture? Largely CAD-driven.
• Smaller commercial projects? CAD with a dash of SketchUp.
• Permit drawings? CAD-to-PDF is the standard.
• Consultants and subcontractors? Many still live in AutoCAD.
• Detailing, shop drawings, fabrication docs? CAD is still king.
Even when BIM is used upstream, it’s often exported to CAD before reaching the field. Why? Because CAD is universal. Portable. Understood by everyone. That’s real product-market fit — not just adoption, but stickiness.
BIMtimidation Tactics?
Bottom Line: CAD Was a Better Pencil. BIM Wants to Be the Whole Studio.
CAD won by improving the existing world. BIM is still trying to convince us to rebuild it.
If BIM had true product-market fit, we’d see mass adoption, full-team buy-in, and measurable gains across the board. But instead, we see patchy workflows, duplicated effort, and a construction industry still clinging to PDFs.
CAD didn’t just replace drafting — it reinvented it for a digital world.
BIM? Still waiting for its breakout album.
Are you offended by this article? Think BIM the greatest thing since sliced bread? That might be true. Its for you to convince me and everyone else otherwise. In the meantime, TestFit will continue to simply slot in around existing workflows and try to not be the whole studio.