You know, After downloading thru the years every Cad Demo I could find, Trying
out every new and improved cheapy 2d and 3d cad program that was available (under
$200 US), Wrestling thru some of the others..... Well, it makes me ponder.
Other than those little annoying bugs all have repeatedly reported, we've all
worked around them and continue to use the product. Why, well it is quite obvious
that Sketch has been a goldmine for the user. Truly an incredible Cad program for
cheap.
Could it be that it actually threatens a good portion of possible A-Cad lite
purchasers ? There is a big price difference.
I sat down to update some drawings I made to represent out Phone system with the
fellows who installed it. They informed me they needed a new copy of the changes
that we had them do. They've been using A-Cad Lite since it came out. Well, one
guy does anyhow.... It's way to difficult for the newer employees to figure out.
After a few minutes they noticed I was not using ACLite and became quite
interested in knowing what the program was. As they stood by stunned in silence,
literally amazed at the blazing speed and pinpoint accuracy that I could make the
necessary changes, they became even more interested. After I finally told them
the story behind Sketch and it's ability to save DWGs and what not, they wondered
why they were not using it. They only need a 2d program for floorplans and
diagrams. Sketches Drag and Drop Symbols would be Ideal for them.
I never personally could get a grip on A-Cad light because it had too much carry
over from their heavier apps. You know, all the command line junk that you really
don't need, or at least individuals who learned on apps without it didn't need
it. I really cut my teeth on Ashlars 2d engine when it was sold under the
"DrawingBoard" Label. Anyone who is familiar with Ashlar will agree that they set
the CAD standard some time ago. Many programs today actually pay royalties for
Snap and Ortho concepts they developed. I had to retire it when I needed long
file name capability and also the Database stuff. Then I found Sketch.
I am thinking that, it would not take much to make Sketch into an "A-Cad lite",
at least conceptually. What then would happen to the A-Cad Lite Market ?
If we were looking at a future A-Cad Lite, One could maybe see why they would
ignore it at this $100 level. If they would fix it they could easily ask more.
Who of use would not pay more to have the few things requested fixed or added ?
Sheez, we're not asking for a CAM program to be added..(even though I think it
would then literally "blow away" a lot of what is out there)
Just fix the "growing files" issue. The stupid line width fiasco. The Macros
concept. Really, how hard could it be ?
Macro's...... There are literally dozens of 3rd party techniqes that do similar
things...... TypeitIn, Sensiva, AutoIt, PowerPro..... But, how hard could it be
to add them BACK IN in an intregal fashion ?
Line widths: I think this is the first EVER time there was no adjustment in a
.cfg or .ini file to set the lines to the size you want in a program I use. Is
this asking too much ??
File Size and "Growing" ??? Well, that just shouldn't happen.
Makes you really wonder, Eh ? Well, it makes me wonder anyhow. It could be that
AD developers somewhere along the line created a truly great little program when
management was looking the other way. When they found out..... Maybe They Fired
them !!
Well, it's too bad. Too Bad they reprinted a box and shoved the old version in
it, if indeed thats all they did. I guess the jury is still out but thats what
it's looking like.
I am still watching for Anne Browns response but I am not holding my breath.
Maybe they canned her too for occasionally making an appearance in the group.
Something just isn't quite right.
Chris L
"L. Rafuse" wrote:
> >
> >
> >I'm a little disappointed that there hasn't
> >been any consultation from AD about what the users of this group think about
> >AS. I know that we are supposed to make comments and suggestions to AD via
> >the website,
> >
> The wish list web site was a joke. Many of us tried to post suggestions
> but they would not take. The web site never changed and the few
> suggestions that were posted were completely ignored.
>
> >
> >Also a shame we weren't offered time limited BETA testing. I have been
> >involved in many BETA programs, most of which turned out best when
> >interested party's were recruited from user newsgroups.
> >
> I think they teach lawyers not to ask any questions that they do not
> know the answer to. They know the types of answers that they will get
> if they send a beta out to people in the news group. Better to round up
> a few CAD reviewers who do not have to make their living using the
> program. A few hours to make a simple drawing, eat some donuts, write a
> few nice paragraphs and they are off to review monitors, 3D video cards
> or plotters.
>
> --
> Len Rafuse
> Vision Engineering