This is pretty typical. The first step of CAD is learning simple solid modeling (i.e. producing 3d parts from sketches, features, etc).
The next step is assemblies and motion. Writing a solid modeling CAD engine is impressive, but kinematics and simulation is really the tough part (and why these CAD softwares are so expensive and so worth the money). For example, SolidWorks has a separate "motion study" package that you pay for on top of the solid modeling tool, a separate "fluid simulation package," to calculate stresses, drag, and so on on a part. Assemblies are also huge, most CAD programs have utilities for creating relations between different parts to figure out where screws, clasps, hinges, etc, should go where and in what order.
Many professional CAD packages also have things like mold tools, sheet metal tools, etc. that make manufacturing much much easier. You typically have a drawing tool, to create marked up drawings to send off to a machine shop for fabrication. Manufacturability is huge and mostly invisible to hobbyists who are doing 3-d prints. In general, software that makes manufacturing stuff easier, is where CAD packages capture the most value from their users. The manufacturing stuff is why you might pay $5,000 per year per seat for a CAD suite. It's also why they're not too worried about open source CAD, because the open source guys don't care, or know enough to care, how to add this type of value.
Finally, the big big boys (like CATIA and so on) have utilities to track part revisions, quality tracking, assembly and QC workflows etc. For when you need to manufacture hundreds of thousands of something, test it, have it fail in predictable ways, manage spare parts for it, be tracked and regulated etc. Those are generally used for stuff like cars and jets which have complex supply chains.
The next step is assemblies and motion. Writing a solid modeling CAD engine is impressive, but kinematics and simulation is really the tough part (and why these CAD softwares are so expensive and so worth the money). For example, SolidWorks has a separate "motion study" package that you pay for on top of the solid modeling tool, a separate "fluid simulation package," to calculate stresses, drag, and so on on a part. Assemblies are also huge, most CAD programs have utilities for creating relations between different parts to figure out where screws, clasps, hinges, etc, should go where and in what order.
Many professional CAD packages also have things like mold tools, sheet metal tools, etc. that make manufacturing much much easier. You typically have a drawing tool, to create marked up drawings to send off to a machine shop for fabrication. Manufacturability is huge and mostly invisible to hobbyists who are doing 3-d prints. In general, software that makes manufacturing stuff easier, is where CAD packages capture the most value from their users. The manufacturing stuff is why you might pay $5,000 per year per seat for a CAD suite. It's also why they're not too worried about open source CAD, because the open source guys don't care, or know enough to care, how to add this type of value.
Finally, the big big boys (like CATIA and so on) have utilities to track part revisions, quality tracking, assembly and QC workflows etc. For when you need to manufacture hundreds of thousands of something, test it, have it fail in predictable ways, manage spare parts for it, be tracked and regulated etc. Those are generally used for stuff like cars and jets which have complex supply chains.