CAD software

[Snowy_River]

Thanks for all the suggestions, guys. I read through a few other threads on different forums and it doesnt seem straight forward to get a good 3D CAD package.
I only actually do one semster of CAD directly...

If you're only going to do one semester of CAD, I'd recommend that the CAD application you get for yourself be the one that'll run on your platform of choice. This would be something you'll use for your own projects, for assistance with class work, etc. During that one semester, you'll use whatever the school is using. When you get out into the 'real world' you'll use whatever your employer wants you to use. Most of the basic principles are pretty universal across different CAD programs, so experience with one can apply to another, as conceptual understanding of a CAD environment, if nothing else.

I'll take a look at Form-Z anyway...

A word of warning...
Form-Z is NOT a CAD program. It's a modeling program. There is a BIG difference. I know engineers who use Form-Z, but it is a supplemental application to their primary CAD program. If CAD is what you're looking for, don't go to Form-Z.

...get a bit of a head start for when i actually have use the PTC programs for my course...

The best way to get a head start on the course would be to go in and work with PTC. As a novice, you're going to spend most of your time getting to know the user interface, and that's something that differs dramatically from one program to another. From the conceptual stand point, any good basic CAD program will do the trick.

Anyway, cheers for the all the help!

David

You're welcome. Good luck!

 

[jaromski]

Vectorworks & LISP

For what it's worth, everyone that I know who's moved from ACAD to VectorWorks (regardless of what platform they choose to use, as VectorWorks is cross platform) has found that VectorWorks offers a better user interface, equal functionality (or better) for a fraction of the cost...

AutoCAD 2005 $3500
VectorWorks 11 $800

I think, regardless of which platform I was on, I know which I'd choose...

Switching CAD packages is a big deal. I am sure their DWG importer works swell, but I have never seen a non-AutoCAD CAD package import a "native" AutoCAD dwg with 100% efficacy. Something is always jacked. The dimensions , some text style, just enough to really tweak your sensibilities. But just because I haven't "seen" it in action doesn't mean there is a solution out there that works. Let's just say I am highly-suspicious of any claims that say 100% compatible with Autocad dwg. Anything less than 100% just won't cut the mustard once you have the inertia of a few hundred drawings in your system.

At this point it makes no sense to me to migrate to a different solution. I do realize that AutoCAD charges a premium for their products, and I am not arguing that there are other ways to skin a cat, I am just saying that it isn't really cost effective for me to switch. Plus, I have written a great deal of LSIP software to customize my "Autocad experience" for serious production. AutoCAD, out of the box, is pretty close to worthless when it comes to production. But, the customization really makes it so you can take quantum leaps forward in production and response times. And that is how you can run a business and pay your bills at the end of the day. And a one-time cost of 3500 is just the cost of doing business. Now I would agree with you if it was an annual/recurring subscription cost, that would definately tip the scales to dumping AutoCAD. But a one-time cost is peanuts for any business/professional. Plus, you can always use LT for $700 if you don't want to use AutoCAD's archaic 3D subsystem. You can even get 3rd party lisp from drcauto for $300 so $1000/machine is completely do-able.

Does VectorWorks even have a command line? I am a command line junkie, and it may be harder at first, but nothing compares once you get the commands memorized. Just like playing the piano, your muscles just remember commands and menu-driven CAD just can't compete.

Just my two cents, I could be completely off-kilter on this one.

jaromski

 

[Snowy_River]

Switching CAD packages is a big deal. I am sure their DWG importer works swell, but I have never seen a non-AutoCAD CAD package import a "native" AutoCAD dwg with 100% efficacy. Something is always jacked. The dimensions , some text style, just enough to really tweak your sensibilities. But just because I haven't "seen" it in action doesn't mean there is a solution out there that works. Let's just say I am highly-suspicious of any claims that say 100% compatible with Autocad dwg. Anything less than 100% just won't cut the mustard once you have the inertia of a few hundred drawings in your system.

At this point it makes no sense to me to migrate to a different solution. I do realize that AutoCAD charges a premium for their products, and I am not arguing that there are other ways to skin a cat, I am just saying that it isn't really cost effective for me to switch. Plus, I have written a great deal of LSIP software to customize my "Autocad experience" for serious production. AutoCAD, out of the box, is pretty close to worthless when it comes to production. But, the customization really makes it so you can take quantum leaps forward in production and response times. And that is how you can run a business and pay your bills at the end of the day. And a one-time cost of 3500 is just the cost of doing business. Now I would agree with you if it was an annual/recurring subscription cost, that would definately tip the scales to dumping AutoCAD. But a one-time cost is peanuts for any business/professional. Plus, you can always use LT for $700 if you don't want to use AutoCAD's archaic 3D subsystem. You can even get 3rd party lisp from drcauto for $300 so $1000/machine is completely do-able.

Does VectorWorks even have a command line? I am a command line junkie, and it may be harder at first, but nothing compares once you get the commands memorized. Just like playing the piano, your muscles just remember commands and menu-driven CAD just can't compete.

Just my two cents, I could be completely off-kilter on this one.

jaromski

There is one, and only one, argument that you put forward that I'd be inclined to agree with. That is your LISP customizations. It would be a hard pill to swallow to have to rewrite those in VectorScript. Yes, VW has its own scripting language, as well as a complete SDK, if you want to do things that go a bit beyond the scripting language's capabilities and can write a little C++.

While it's true that VW's DWG import is not flawless, it must also be pointed out that neither is ACAD's. I've had a devil of a time with trying to open R12 ACAD files in R14, or R14 files in 2000i. So, using that as a reason for not converting is a little weak. Certainly, VW opens older ACAD files almost completely flawlessly, in my experience. Certainly as well as ACAD itself. It's only when you get up to the latest version, when VW hasn't completely adapted to whatever changes have been implemented in the ACAD file format, that there are some bugs that crop up.

As for the cost question, well, it's not a one-time cost, unless you're never planning on upgrading. Yes, the upgrade isn't as much as the full purchase price, but the same is true of VW. However, overall, these aren't issues to be hashed over too much. As you said, this is part of the cost of doing business, and the right tool is easily worth a few thousand if it helps you get the job done fast and better.

The fact that ACAD Lt is price competitive with VW is such a joke to me. VW is a complete 2D/3D modeling and drafting environment (the 3D in VW is worlds better than that in basic ACAD), whereas ACAD Lt is really nothing more than a program to draw lines and circles.

And, to answer your final question, no, VW doesn't have a command line. VW handles the UI through a completely customizable keyboard shortcut/menu/tool palette workspace. Having worked extensively with both (five years using ACAD and eight years using VW), I can freely say that both are highly effective means of providing an interface. Personally, I prefer VWs method. On the whole, there are fewer keystrokes to get the exact same job done.

In any event, there's no denying that ACAD is an effective tool. I simply say it's not worth the money, and it pales in comparison to some of the other tools that are on the market for a lot less.

 

[jaromski]

autocad / vector works

There is one, and only one, argument that you put forward that I'd be inclined to agree with. That is your LISP customizations. It would be a hard pill to swallow to have to rewrite those in VectorScript. Yes, VW has its own scripting language, as well as a complete SDK, if you want to do things that go a bit beyond the scripting language's capabilities and can write a little C++.

While it's true that VW's DWG import is not flawless, it must also be pointed out that neither is ACAD's. I've had a devil of a time with trying to open R12 ACAD files in R14, or R14 files in 2000i. So, using that as a reason for not converting is a little weak. Certainly, VW opens older ACAD files almost completely flawlessly, in my experience. Certainly as well as ACAD itself. It's only when you get up to the latest version, when VW hasn't completely adapted to whatever changes have been implemented in the ACAD file format, that there are some bugs that crop up.

As for the cost question, well, it's not a one-time cost, unless you're never planning on upgrading. Yes, the upgrade isn't as much as the full purchase price, but the same is true of VW. However, overall, these aren't issues to be hashed over too much. As you said, this is part of the cost of doing business, and the right tool is easily worth a few thousand if it helps you get the job done fast and better.

The fact that ACAD Lt is price competitive with VW is such a joke to me. VW is a complete 2D/3D modeling and drafting environment (the 3D in VW is worlds better than that in basic ACAD), whereas ACAD Lt is really nothing more than a program to draw lines and circles.

And, to answer your final question, no, VW doesn't have a command line. VW handles the UI through a completely customizable keyboard shortcut/menu/tool palette workspace. Having worked extensively with both (five years using ACAD and eight years using VW), I can freely say that both are highly effective means of providing an interface. Personally, I prefer VWs method. On the whole, there are fewer keystrokes to get the exact same job done.

In any event, there's no denying that ACAD is an effective tool. I simply say it's not worth the money, and it pales in comparison to some of the other tools that are on the market for a lot less.

Well, to be honest, I haven't used enough of the other tools to make a fair comparison which is better. You have tried both, I have only tried AutoCAD. I agree that AutoCAD is overpriced, and IMO, stifled innovation with their death grip on the CAD industry. If I started anew I can't say I would pick AutoCAD. But it is what I learned as a part-time job to make some money in high school. I have always thought AutoCAD was dreadful out of the box, the reality is customization (via LISP and all the other ARX/VBA stuff) can make or break the whole package.

In fact, the LISP routines I wrote simply cut down on keystrokes for the most -used operations, stuff like switching layers on/off, locking layers, and all the other functions. Let's just say it wasn't rocket science, but it has paid huge dividends throughout the years.

Mainly my issue is with inertia. I have too many drawings that I just don't have time to convert, nor the inclination. I know the longer I use ACAD the more tied I become to it, but my engineers (civil and structural) all use AutoCAD; it is just impractical for me to switch.

I do realize there is an upgrade cost, Autodesk needs some recurring revenue so they release the same product with a few more bells and whistles every year/two. But I stopped upgrading at AutoCAD 2002 because I don't need additional features. It works well enough to get the job done, and I have no interest in "upgrading" to XP from 2000. It is just a production machine to me. What will be interesting is when VPC for the G5 comes out, then maybe I can "upgrade" to a VPC. Now that would be swell.

I just am getting to that breaking point with Windows where I want to chuck the whole machine with the viruses and bloatware. I love Macs/Unix.

Oh well,

jaromski

 

[Pandakin]

CAD is an important cat too.

This topic really highlights what i have been thinking about a lot recently - switching back to Windows. As a product design student, it just seems that CAD companies don't take OS X seriously. We have had OS X out for ages now and still we don't have many 3d cad packages, look at Rhino, 3D Studio Max, Alias Wavefront StudioTools, Pro/E. NONE are avaialble on mac and this is really disappointing. It makes doing CAD terrible. You folks can shout as much as u want about vectorworks but autocad is the standard. And have u seen the quality of the rendering architecture within Vectorworks? Does it support raydiosity? No. Did you know that Apple's Product Development teams use pcs to design their next generation hardware. I think it is time to see Apple moving into the 3d area or they are gonna loose a whole bunch of customers. Btw: Alias deserves a kick up the backside for releasing Maya Complete years later.

Do mac users deserve second class products like ashlar vellum's cobalt nope - i think apple should do something fast. Cos however nice the mac is all my class has just switched from macs to pcs.

 

[mkrishnan]

Do mac users deserve second class products like ashlar vellum's cobalt nope - i think apple should do something fast. Cos however nice the mac is all my class has just switched from macs to pcs.

I totally agree it would be good for Apple to play hin this market.

So I'm just curious...for the major areas that use CAD...aerospace, mechanical engineering, architecture, electrical engineering, 3D animation...to what extent is a multi-platform environment common?

My direct experience in Automotive and 2nd hand info on Aerospace is that pure PC environments are very rare -- that there are almost always some kind of Unix boxes present (usually Solaris).

What's it like in the other fields? Same? I'm guessing Architecture FWIW is different -- I'm guessing Unix boxes never got popular in that world.

 

[Snowy_River]

It makes doing CAD terrible.

No, it doesn't. It means that your choices are more limited, but if you have a program that you like working with, then it doesn't mean anything about the quality of doing CAD on the Mac.

You folks can shout as much as u want about vectorworks but autocad is the standard.

Well, by that argument, you can shout as much as you want about Mac, but Windows is the standard. So, if using the 'standard' is that important to you, the by all means use AutoCAD on Windows. Sheesh.

And have u seen the quality of the rendering architecture within Vectorworks?

Well, as I work with VW almost every day, yes I have seen the rendering capabilities. Have you? How about these:

Does it support raydiosity?

No, but as the above examples show, raydiosity isn't everything. And, if you need more powerful rendering, it's not hard to get. Art•Lantis is available on the Mac, and with it you can get that tiny bit closer to 'true photo realism' that you seem to think is so important, and get results like

In general, VW is very competitive with ACAD on a feature-to-feature basis, and is extremely more economical. If you feel the need to be working on the 'standard' (which is rarely synonymous with 'best'), then work on a PC using ACAD. But, in any event, don't try to come in here and put things down because they aren't the 'standard'. You're preaching to the wrong people here.

What's that old saying? "Think Different".... Hmm...

 

[wPod]

In general, VW is very competitive with ACAD on a feature-to-feature basis, and is extremely more economical. If you feel the need to be working on the 'standard' (which is rarely synonymous with 'best'), then work on a PC using ACAD. But, in any event, don't try to come in here and put things down because they aren't the 'standard'. You're preaching to the wrong people here.

What's that old saying? "Think Different".... Hmm...

ahhh standards. . . how evil they are. im an ME and use autocad everyday. i dont know anyone i work with that doest complain about microsoft at least once a day. autocad and other big cad companies would rock if theyd ever port to mac. think about it, CAD in general is a graphical representation of objets and what better computer system for graphics than a mac?!!!!! not to mention much more stable! unfortunatly every other company we work with, mostly architects, use autocad, so we MUST use autocad as well, otherwise we would waste tons and tons of money converting or re-drawing much of the work. as nice as VW looks and probably is, quite simply autocad must make a mac version otherwise . . . at least here in texas. . . no autocad users would touch a mac! (the day autocad comes out for mac i am having the company i work for buy me the most tricked out mac with a 30" display)

 

[Snowy_River]

ahhh standards. . . how evil they are. im an ME and use autocad everyday. i dont know anyone i work with that doest complain about microsoft at least once a day. autocad and other big cad companies would rock if theyd ever port to mac. think about it, CAD in general is a graphical representation of objets and what better computer system for graphics than a mac?!!!!! not to mention much more stable! unfortunatly every other company we work with, mostly architects, use autocad, so we MUST use autocad as well, otherwise we would waste tons and tons of money converting or re-drawing much of the work. as nice as VW looks and probably is, quite simply autocad must make a mac version otherwise . . . at least here in texas. . . no autocad users would touch a mac! (the day autocad comes out for mac i am having the company i work for buy me the most tricked out mac with a 30" display)

I understand your reasoning for staying with ACAD. Compatibility is not an insignificant issue. However, I know many VW users that successfully navigate the compatibility issue with ACAD and other applications. I've dealt with conversions to and from ACAD, ProE, SolidWorks, and others.

As it is, I doubt that AutoDesk will put out a new Mac version of AutoCAD, as they are tending to move their advanced products away from AutoCAD. I've read that AutoDesk eventually will be eliminating AutoCAD, leaving only AutoCAD Lt, and their advanced products (Revit, Inventor, etc.). A program that is being phased out is not likely to be ported. Inventor and Revit are both rumored to have alpha versions on Mac OS X, but whether these will see the light of day remains to be seen.

 

[susansan]

CAD for mac - anything equivalent to Rhino?

hi all,

does anyone have any reccomendations on a CAD program? I just made the switch from PC to mac. I used Rhino on my pc and i'm just now discovering that it does not work on mac (unless you use virtual PC, which is a total dog). I need something that's NURBS based and produces machinable models - meaning it HAS to be accurate. I do jewelry design and when I used Rhino, I could easily bring my files into a CAM program and mill straight from there. no extra CAD programs needed. i've read up on some 3D modelers, but what's really confusing is that some websites call them CAD, while others say they integrate with CAD. i've looked at vectorworks, amapi 7 pro, and solidthinking. vectorworks doesn't have enough NURBS capability and i'm not sure i like amapi pro. solidthinking looks pretty good, but again it's one of those ones that says "integrates with CAD". any advice is really appreciated!