"Takes time and money to implement it fully, we have a small part of it for "free" in TC.
It's sort of pay for Lada and expect a Benz if we compare with prize for ArchiCad in example."
do you really mean that?
TurboCAD has been cost-effective many years ago. But now certainly not.
Example: You use building design software not for general drawing
TurboCAD - purchase 1.440 €, annual upgrade 312 €
Revit LT - standard price, rent of year € 513 (for members of the Chamber of Architects and Engineers each year is a 30% discount.Now is 30% discount for all shoppers until 27.11). So Revit LT is for € 359 per year.
Price comparison :
First year: TC 1.440 €, R 359 €,
second year TC 1.440 + 312 = 1.752 € |, RLT 359 + 359 = 718 €,
third year 1.440 + 312 + 312 = 2.064 €, RLT 1.077 €.
24. year TC 8.616 €, RLT 8.616 €
From 25 years of software usage, TurboCAD will actually be more cost-effective.
If you use TC you will pay more in 24 years. Instead of a full BIM, you have to use only "simply BIM", where you do not know whether or not everything is really missing. You can not use publicly available BIM objects, revit family libraries, you do not have sophisticated project management from floor to cut, you do not have dynamic connections, you do not have a full dynamic connection when you change (from linking objects, through listings to dimensions) you pay significantly more.
TurboCAD is more versatile. For general drawing it is definitely better. This former advantage has gradually become its major drawback. If you are designing buildings, you only use half of the tools that are included here.
This is not important to me. I would only like one. And make everything work 100% at just 98%. That's for me.