The fact that it “seems easy” is a great flag that it probably isn’t.

You are asking for industry predictions from industry professionals in an industry you know nothing about while assuming a lot about that industry.

Why do you think they should do all the heavy lifting for you?

You might as well ask ChatGPT what it thinks because it seems you already have an idea of what you want the answer to be.

AI coding agents didn't make IDEs obsolete. They just added plugins to some existing IDEs and spawned a few new ones.

It's like 2D art with more complexity and less training data. Non-AI 2D art and animation tools haven't been made irrelevant yet, and don't look like they will be soon.

What blender and other CGI software gets for free is continuity. The 3D model does not change without explicitly making it change.

Until we get AI which can regenerate the same model from one scene to the next, the use of AI in CGI will be severely limited.

I recently used WAN to generate a looping clip of clouds moving quickly, something that’s difficult to do in CGI and impossible to capture live action. It worked out because I didn’t have specific demands other than what I just said, and I wasn’t asking for anything too obscure.

At this point, I expect the quality of local video models (the only kind I’m willing to work with professionally) to go up, but prompt adherence seems like a tough nut to crack, which makes me think it may be a while before we have prosumer models that can replace what I do in Blender.

KiCAD was also a meh ECAD FOSS alternative 7-8 years ago, now it is by far the tool of choice for regular ECAD designs. I can see FreeCad getting there by 2030.

Parasolid is powering practically every major CAD system. Its development started in 1986 and it's still actively developed. The amount of effort that goes into those things is immense (39 years of commercial development!) and I don't believe it can be done pro-bono in someone's spare time. What's worse, with this kind of software there is no "graceful degradation": while something like a MIP solver can be useful even if it's quite a bit slower than Gurobi, a kernel that can't model complex lofts and fillets is not particularly useful.

3D CAD is much harder than Blender and less amenable to open source development.

You're on point that there's a tremendous amount of money captures by Autodesk for CAD software that could be better directed at the open source community instead.

Software like OpenSCAD and FreeCAD are obviously not suitable for much commercial work, and have very irritating limitations for hobbyist work, in my mind a big part of that is the UI and Blender has a good and established UI at this point so I'd love to see the open source CAD that provides an alternative to vendor lock in come from a Blender add-on instead of a separate program.

I am no expert but as I understand it the primary difficulty with developing good alternatives to commercial CAD software lie in the development of an effective geometric kernel.

It seems to me that if a developer of an opensource CAD program develops it as a Blender add-on they can effectively outsource the remainder of the development efforts to the Blender community while focus can be made on the CAD kernel itself.