Autodesk Design Review

[#1]

You have never been in the military have you? Murph "Scott Sheppard" <> wrote in message ... > The paperless construction site is as distant as the paperless > bathroom. >

[#2]

If I may add, I often want to preview a drawing to see if it has the content I am looking for without opening it in Autocad. Having a quick way to view a drawing is needed. Also, there are times when the engineer needs to view a drawing. He does not need or use autocad. So having the ability to view drawings is a big benefit in my opinion. As to sharing Cad Files, that is entirely optional. If you don't want someone to have the CAD file, send DWF. "Darren J. Young" wrote in message news:MPG.1af82a4664779ecb98970c@discussion.autodesk.com... > > Great discussion guys! With DWG Viewer, we're just trying to be realistic, as there are still a whole lot of DWG's out there in the world. I agree that moving to DWF for sharing, communicating, and marking up is the right place to go. However there are still a lot of people who are still just now finding out about the value of a published file format like DWF. Hopefully with the introduction of DWF Composer, they will find some positive reasons to switch. > > You should never get rid of the DWG viewing capabilities for work flow > reasons alone. I don't need to be sold on the advantages of DWF, I'm a > big fan, but it just doesn't make sense in a lot of cases. > > As an example, here we get DWG files sent by customers and architects. > Our sales, project managers and estimators use them with VoloView to > look at the job, see what's there, print hard copies, etc. There's no > need for DWF because our drafters also need the DWG's for producing our > shop drawings and ticket drawings for the plants. Because we ultimately > do use the DWG (for our drafters) it makes no sense whatsoever to > introduce a second file format. This would be a duplication of data and > information and something that just doesn't make sense or take advantage > of the benefits of proper electronic data practices. > > The only real question is, will DWF Composer be as efficient as AutoCAD > at opening and viewing DWG files. VoloView can often take a considerable > amount more time to open the same DWG as AutoCAD or AutoCAD LT. Almost > to the point that we prefer to use LT for a viewing application or a > networked license of AutoCAD. > > -- > Darren J. Young > CAD/CAM Systems Developer > > Cold Spring Granite Company > 202 South Third Avenue > Cold Spring, Minnesota 56320 > > Email: dyoung@coldspringgranite.com > Phone: (320) 685-5045 > Fax: (320) 685-5052

[#3]

The only real thing that is missing in the DWG Viewer but present in VV3 and DWF Composer is the ability to measure.

There can be no significant discussion about these programs as improvements if basic functionality is lost in the development.

DWG Viewer is the best DWG viewer out there.

It needs to be understood that not everyone needs to colloborate or electronically mark-up. To equate similar goals for DWF Composer and DWG Viewer is flawed as they have disparately different capabilities.

Keep DWF Composer for those out-of-house, don't-trust-the-receiver-with-my-DWG's solutions. As mentioned in a previous message, keep the DWG Viewer for the in-house, I-drafted-for-Corbu, non-computer types.

That simple purpose is invalid without a Distance Tool.

Everything else is great.

Refocus the goal of the DWG viewer: quit hiding it by bun(d/g)ling it with DWF Composer; add a couple of tools that would make it useful for In-House use; charge a $50 for it.

That would make me and my staff happy.

Thanks!

[#4]

DWF Viewer is for those out-of-house, don't-trust-the-receiver-with-my-DWG people. Volo View is for those in-house, trusted partners who are part of the design collaboration. The DWG Viewer is for those out-of-house, don't-trust-the-receiver-with-my-DWG people who inadvertently get a DWG instead of a DWF. "tomk_rlba" wrote in message news:6533876.1093468274068.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum1.autodesk.com... > The only real thing that is missing in the DWG Viewer but present in VV3 and DWF Composer is the ability to measure. > > There can be no significant discussion about these programs as improvements if basic functionality is lost in the development. > > DWG Viewer is the best DWG viewer out there. > > It needs to be understood that not everyone needs to colloborate or electronically mark-up. To equate similar goals for DWF Composer and DWG Viewer is flawed as they have disparately different capabilities. > > Keep DWF Composer for those out-of-house, don't-trust-the-receiver-with-my-DWG's solutions. As mentioned in a previous message, keep the DWG Viewer for the in-house, I-drafted-for-Corbu, non-computer types. > > That simple purpose is invalid without a Distance Tool. > > Everything else is great. > > Refocus the goal of the DWG viewer: quit hiding it by bun(d/g)ling it with DWF Composer; add a couple of tools that would make it useful for In-House use; charge a $50 for it. > > That would make me and my staff happy. > > Thanks!