Autodesk Technology Managers Forum
Share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage with fellow CAD/BIM Managers.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

2D Autocad vs AutoCAD 2007

100 REPLIES 100
Reply
Message 1 of 101
Anonymous
1823 Views, 100 Replies

2D Autocad vs AutoCAD 2007

After reviewing all the great new 3D features of 2007 I really have to say
who cares.
If I want to do 3D design I'm going to use inventor or revit.
But really I'm thinking how can we get a 2D only AutoCAD?
I wish some company would come out with a 2D only clone of AutoCAD
and sell it for less. Hey autodesk could do it and just concentrate on the
2D
features. I'm sure a 2D only AutoCAD would run faster then the current
bloatware.
My company pays alot of money each year to Autodesk and for that money
Autodesk
is giving us 3D features that we will never use. Maybe 1% of my company
will use any of the 3D
features of AutoCAD. That 1% probably would be better off using Revit
anyways.

I want a 2D only AutoCAD.
We already have 3D CAD software, how about a 2D CAD software for less money
and better features!

Am I alone in this opinion?

--
Dave
100 REPLIES 100
Message 41 of 101
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

I really like that idea that visionrez is doing
But I would still want LiSP.

--
Dave

wrote in message news:5109914@discussion.autodesk.com...
There already is a company that developed something much like you are
describing on adt. Look into a procduct called visionrez.com

Last time I looked it was going for only about $2300 which made for good
middle ground for us b/c we couldn't afford (or needed) a full seat of
autocad or adt but LT was well too LT

It is primarily built for residential but I am sure it could handle many
light commercial projects. No lisp so probably still wouldn't fit David's
needs but worth a look at what can be done. - Terry
Message 42 of 101
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

you have your point but my point is that I have been paying for years for 3D
features that I do not use.
With Autodesk pushing BIN and we are buying it, why should I pay for 3D
features when I already
paying for 3D in another autodesk product? Like I said, take out the 3D and
charge less.
Autodesk has already done this with LT. Look at the DWG viewer, you can
tell its using the
autocad engine and they are giving it away for free. I'm sure it would not
be that difficult to ship
an AutoCAD version sans the 3D, or LT with LiSP

--
Dave

"Rodney McManamy - CADzation" wrote in message
news:5110535@discussion.autodesk.com...
David,

Actually it would cost more to do a pure 2D. AutoCAD is the core of which
everything else is built around. 3D, ADT, LDT, even LT are different
flavors of the base AutoCAD. In the case of LT it's AutoCAD with a bunch of
features disabled. In the case of 3D it's AutoCAD with additional modeling
functionality.

So to create an AutoCAD 2D along with LT would be mean a whole new set of
documentation, licensing and support. Not to mention another team to
program it and test it.

Yes it does seam like 2D users are getting very little for their money out
of 2007 but 3D users got very little out of their money for 2006. It's a
delicate balance but I'm guessing most of the 3D editing they now have is
because of work done for the dynamic blocks in the old versions. And the
new file format in 2007 which they say is needed for the new 3D stuff will
probably bring 2D enhancements in 2008 that couldn't be done in the old
format.

The other (3D) users have complained for years that AutoCAD didn't do enough
for 3D users who didn't want to move up to Inventor. So now it's fair to
them.

If they continue on with 2008 being mainly 2D features and 2009 being mainly
3D features it's probably not a bad way to do it. An upgrade every 12
months is too much for most companies to handle anyways.

--
Rodney McManamy
President
CADzation
-------------------------
rmcmanamy@cadzation.com
-------------------------
518 South Route 31 Suite 200
McHenry, IL 60050
http://www.cadzation.com
Providing Industrial Strength
PDF & DWF Solutions to the
Global CAD Marketplace.

"David Allen" wrote in message
news:5109573@discussion.autodesk.com...
I guess I should have been more explentative
But as the subject says "2D AutoCAD"
To me AutoCAD with no 3D features would be
smaller, cost less and run faster with the 3D code
taken out. I don't need it but I'm paying for it
as shown in AutoCAD 2007.
I (my company) paid alot of money for 2007 and
I think we are getting a horrible return on our money.
We want 2D features, not 3D features for our money.
If I want 3D features then we buy Revit.
Simple as that.

--
Dave

"Jason Hickey" wrote in message
news:5109513@discussion.autodesk.com...
hector@work wrote:
> he has, what LT doesn't have is lisp


Well, yeah, but he didn't mention the need of LISP. I put that under
some of the "bloatware" that he was wanting to get rid of. It's also
missing Sheet Set Manager, but he didn't mention needing that. If he
wants everything BUT 3D, then he should just purchase AutoCAD and not
use 3D...


--
Jason Hickey

http://beneaththelines.blogspot.com
Message 43 of 101
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

David Allen wrote:

> I wonder if the 3D features can be taken out of the OEM and what does
> the OEM cost per seat?

OEM is priced based on the features you intend to include. However its
designed for developers who want to produce a closed system with a fixed
target audience. I don't think you could get it, and you wouldn't want
it if you could.

Terry
Message 44 of 101
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

David Allen wrote:

> So that would me I would just need to purchase an ADN license and the OEM
> licenses?
> Do you have to know C to deploy OEM? Anyone used it before?

Yes, I've been 'involved' in a couple of OEM rollups. Trust me, you
don't want OEM if you could get it.

Terry
Message 45 of 101
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

David Allen wrote:

> Who would want to work in an enviroment where they could not use the
> lisp routines that they have been using for the last 10 years.

Lets face, your choice is the IWORD or keep on paying the piper. Don't
rule out the possibility that the IWORD won't be able to read modern
drawings in a few years.

So just give it up and write the subscription check. Next year it'll be
useful stuff again. Request one for me while your at it. :0)

Terry
Message 46 of 101
Daniel Membry
in reply to: Anonymous

Here's an idea, how bout Autodesk release a version of AutoCAD specifically taylored for everyone who complains. I'm trying to not be to critical but if you don't like the software and it does not do what you need, don't use it, stop buying it. There are other options for people, I think you called them "cad users", who can only handle the concept of 2D and they will fit in with your "cheaper" requirement.

AutoCAD is designed to be used in a large variety of situations and hence may have features you will never use, but for the majority of its users, lets call them "design draftsperson" its exactly what they need.

My Dad says "look at the job, get the right tool, do the job, done" Message was edited by: Daniel Membry
Message 47 of 101
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Thank you. I always wanted to be considered non-traditional. And for the AEC
world there is a brand new slick program that is heavily into 3D called
Civil 3D.

Allen

"David Allen" wrote in message
news:5111140@discussion.autodesk.com...
There is going to be a certain number of people who want 3D autocad
I bet there is alot more autocad users who could care less about 3D
There is 50 cad users in my office. I would gestimate that maybe 3 have
ever done any real world work in 3D. I'm not talking about learning 3D
at the community college or ITT. Thats why I say that 3D is worthless
to traditional autocad users in the AEC world.

--
Dave

"Allen Jessup" wrote in message
news:5110214@discussion.autodesk.com...
This type of application would be correct for you. I won't argue that.
However I go to the 2004 NG and see a post from someone who want to know how
to automatically generate Isometric views from the 2D floorplan he has
drawn. The answer is of course it can't be done because it's 2D.

I've also seen many posts from people trying to do the type of 3D
applications that are being included in 2007. When told they need Inventor
the answer is; "Why should I have to pay for Inventor when I can do
everything I need in Autocad except loft?". They wanted a 3D autocad that
was just a little more powerful. Just like you want an LT that is just a
little more powerful. Autodesk listened to them this time. Maybe you will be
the next ones they listen to.

Remember to submit your wishes directly to autodesk and to the AUGI web
site.

Allen
Message 48 of 101
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

>>I'm sure it would not be that difficult to ship
>>an AutoCAD version sans the 3D, or LT with LiSP

Excellent, since it will be so easy, we all look forward to "your" OEM
version of the software!


--
Craig
_______________
Dreamers don't have strategic grill locations...

.blogspot.com
Message 49 of 101
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Even the cheap AutoCAD clones now have 3D features also so if you don't like
it you are free to switch but your investment in their software is also
going to fund 3D developement.

Everyone would like LT with LiSP (thousands of ADN developers for sure) but
the truth of the matter is that it's likely never going to happen. They've
ran the numbers and they would lose X dollars in lost AutoCAD sales and gain
Y dollars in LT sales and X is far greater than Y so it doesn't make
business sense. They could not include 3D in the base AutoCAD and charge
extra for 3D but it wouldn't make it any cheaper and in this release you
probably still would have the exact same 2D enhancements. They include 3D
in the base AutoCAD so people who want to move to 3D can start getting a
feel for it instead of loosing customers to Solidworks or other products.

If you buy a car you are partially paying for all the fancy upgrades even if
you don't get them. Cars are made today with extra wires in them regarless
of if the options are installed because in the long run it's cheaper for the
majority. The guy buying the base model pays more but the guy buying all
the options pays slightly less than he would have if they do it the other
way. Can they make a car that will last 20 years, not rust, and run a
million miles? Sure they can. But it's not profitable.

Like it or not Autodesk needs to be profitable also. If they didn't inlcude
the 3D into the base AutoCAD the programming would have to be done anyways
for the vertical products. Most of the 3D work is likely funded by ADT,
LDT, MDT, Inventor and the rest of the vertical products. So you really
haven't been paying for the 3D features but more likely getting them for
free.

If you remember the old days (10-2000i) everyone always joked that you never
wanted to upgrade to an odd number release. It was always speculated that
there were 2 different teams working on releases. While Team1 is wrapping
up AutoCAD 10 Team 2 is already developing the features for Release 11. I'm
guessing it's likely no different now. Consider that AutoCAD 2007 is just
nearing release. In 8 months they will probably debut AutoCAD 2008 at AU.
In 10 months it will be in full Beta. So it would make logical sense to
have one team dedicated to 3D features and one to 2D.

As a developer I can tell you we all hate that we can't program around LT.
But it's their company and their decision and it's been well thought out by
people far smarter in business than we are. They've ran more numbers than
we could ever imagine. They didn't get to where they are at by not being
smart, that's for sure.


--
Rodney McManamy
President
CADzation
-------------------------
rmcmanamy@cadzation.com
-------------------------
518 South Route 31 Suite 200
McHenry, IL 60050
http://www.cadzation.com
Providing Industrial Strength
PDF & DWF Solutions to the
Global CAD Marketplace.

"David Allen" wrote in message
news:5111157@discussion.autodesk.com...
you have your point but my point is that I have been paying for years for 3D
features that I do not use.
With Autodesk pushing BIN and we are buying it, why should I pay for 3D
features when I already
paying for 3D in another autodesk product? Like I said, take out the 3D and
charge less.
Autodesk has already done this with LT. Look at the DWG viewer, you can
tell its using the
autocad engine and they are giving it away for free. I'm sure it would not
be that difficult to ship
an AutoCAD version sans the 3D, or LT with LiSP

--
Dave

"Rodney McManamy - CADzation" wrote in message
news:5110535@discussion.autodesk.com...
David,

Actually it would cost more to do a pure 2D. AutoCAD is the core of which
everything else is built around. 3D, ADT, LDT, even LT are different
flavors of the base AutoCAD. In the case of LT it's AutoCAD with a bunch of
features disabled. In the case of 3D it's AutoCAD with additional modeling
functionality.

So to create an AutoCAD 2D along with LT would be mean a whole new set of
documentation, licensing and support. Not to mention another team to
program it and test it.

Yes it does seam like 2D users are getting very little for their money out
of 2007 but 3D users got very little out of their money for 2006. It's a
delicate balance but I'm guessing most of the 3D editing they now have is
because of work done for the dynamic blocks in the old versions. And the
new file format in 2007 which they say is needed for the new 3D stuff will
probably bring 2D enhancements in 2008 that couldn't be done in the old
format.

The other (3D) users have complained for years that AutoCAD didn't do enough
for 3D users who didn't want to move up to Inventor. So now it's fair to
them.

If they continue on with 2008 being mainly 2D features and 2009 being mainly
3D features it's probably not a bad way to do it. An upgrade every 12
months is too much for most companies to handle anyways.

--
Rodney McManamy
President
CADzation
-------------------------
rmcmanamy@cadzation.com
-------------------------
518 South Route 31 Suite 200
McHenry, IL 60050
http://www.cadzation.com
Providing Industrial Strength
PDF & DWF Solutions to the
Global CAD Marketplace.

"David Allen" wrote in message
news:5109573@discussion.autodesk.com...
I guess I should have been more explentative
But as the subject says "2D AutoCAD"
To me AutoCAD with no 3D features would be
smaller, cost less and run faster with the 3D code
taken out. I don't need it but I'm paying for it
as shown in AutoCAD 2007.
I (my company) paid alot of money for 2007 and
I think we are getting a horrible return on our money.
We want 2D features, not 3D features for our money.
If I want 3D features then we buy Revit.
Simple as that.

--
Dave

"Jason Hickey" wrote in message
news:5109513@discussion.autodesk.com...
hector@work wrote:
> he has, what LT doesn't have is lisp


Well, yeah, but he didn't mention the need of LISP. I put that under
some of the "bloatware" that he was wanting to get rid of. It's also
missing Sheet Set Manager, but he didn't mention needing that. If he
wants everything BUT 3D, then he should just purchase AutoCAD and not
use 3D...


--
Jason Hickey

http://beneaththelines.blogspot.com
Message 50 of 101
GROSSMOE
in reply to: Anonymous

Nicely put!!!

"AutoCAD is designed to be used in a large variety of situations and hence may have features you will never use, but for the majority of its users, lets call them "design draftsperson" its exactly what they need."

As someone above stated those of us 3D based have not been excited to see a release in some time. We've found that many of the great features like sheet set and dynamic blocks were great but that they didn't apply to us. For a number of years we used an add-on package, paying dearly for it, but that became cost prohibitive based on the amount of features we were using. Many people learn to make do with a slightly lesser package or pay for things they aren't going to use. I'm sure there are many things we would all love to customize but it isn't feasible.

I'm grateful for the fact that 3D has been updated to the point it has, and let's not forget the new rendering aspects. What hoops I use to have to jump through to get that accomplished in an economical manner. We are a small company and tend to find ways to get things to work or give us what we're looking for.
Message 51 of 101
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

I bought a car once that had a back seat. I didn't carry any passengers and
didn't plan on ever carrying any in the future. I like the car but don't
think I should be charged for a back seat I'm not going to ever use.

Then I go married and the back seat came in handy. Then I had kids and the
back seat really came in handy and now has a DVD player.
Message 52 of 101
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Last year I bought a CAD program at the dollar store. It cost $1.00. It had
3D!

Allen

"Rodney McManamy - CADzation" wrote in message
news:5111506@discussion.autodesk.com...
Even the cheap AutoCAD clones now have 3D features also so if you don't like
it you are free to switch but your investment in their software is also
going to fund 3D developement.

Everyone would like LT with LiSP (thousands of ADN developers for sure) but
the truth of the matter is that it's likely never going to happen. They've
ran the numbers and they would lose X dollars in lost AutoCAD sales and gain
Y dollars in LT sales and X is far greater than Y so it doesn't make
business sense. They could not include 3D in the base AutoCAD and charge
extra for 3D but it wouldn't make it any cheaper and in this release you
probably still would have the exact same 2D enhancements. They include 3D
in the base AutoCAD so people who want to move to 3D can start getting a
feel for it instead of loosing customers to Solidworks or other products.

If you buy a car you are partially paying for all the fancy upgrades even if
you don't get them. Cars are made today with extra wires in them regarless
of if the options are installed because in the long run it's cheaper for the
majority. The guy buying the base model pays more but the guy buying all
the options pays slightly less than he would have if they do it the other
way. Can they make a car that will last 20 years, not rust, and run a
million miles? Sure they can. But it's not profitable.

Like it or not Autodesk needs to be profitable also. If they didn't inlcude
the 3D into the base AutoCAD the programming would have to be done anyways
for the vertical products. Most of the 3D work is likely funded by ADT,
LDT, MDT, Inventor and the rest of the vertical products. So you really
haven't been paying for the 3D features but more likely getting them for
free.

If you remember the old days (10-2000i) everyone always joked that you never
wanted to upgrade to an odd number release. It was always speculated that
there were 2 different teams working on releases. While Team1 is wrapping
up AutoCAD 10 Team 2 is already developing the features for Release 11. I'm
guessing it's likely no different now. Consider that AutoCAD 2007 is just
nearing release. In 8 months they will probably debut AutoCAD 2008 at AU.
In 10 months it will be in full Beta. So it would make logical sense to
have one team dedicated to 3D features and one to 2D.

As a developer I can tell you we all hate that we can't program around LT.
But it's their company and their decision and it's been well thought out by
people far smarter in business than we are. They've ran more numbers than
we could ever imagine. They didn't get to where they are at by not being
smart, that's for sure.


--
Rodney McManamy
President
CADzation
-------------------------
rmcmanamy@cadzation.com
-------------------------
518 South Route 31 Suite 200
McHenry, IL 60050
http://www.cadzation.com
Providing Industrial Strength
PDF & DWF Solutions to the
Global CAD Marketplace.
Message 53 of 101
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

And of your $1.00 half of their developement probably went into the 3D
portion on their software no matter if you use it or not. And if you're
doing serious 3D design I'm betting the $1.00 program won't cut it for you
or it will end up taking longer to do your designs.

AutoCAD knows their market and knows that they don't have to play in that
cheap market. You can buy a $10 pair of running shoes at Walmart but if
you're a serious runner or run alot you're going to spend the extra bucks
for the Nike's because it's well worth it to you and you feel and perform
better. Now Walmart makes their money buy selling millions at a small
profit each. Nike makes there's by selling fewere but at a larger profit.
Both companies are successful at what they do because they both fill
different voids in the marketplace and both know their markets.

When I was big into waterskiing I easily spent $600 on a slalom ski. I
couldn't perform well on a $100 one and it was worth every penny of it to
me. But when I taught someone how to slalom ski I would never let them use
mine because they would never be able to learn on it as it wasn't designed
to go straight or to be easy to get up on. With their experience level a
$100 ski was the better option.

You can't please everyone all the time but what Autodesk has done is to
provide different levels for different users without stretching themselve to
thin and to keep themselves in business.
LT - Basic drafting, No Lisp, No 3D
AutoCAD - Advanced drafting, Lisp, basic 3D
MDT - Inventor - Advanced 3D

If you don't like it your free to go to one of the competitors and they will
be more than happy to take your money.

In our market you can create PDF files for free and AutoCAD is including
basic output into 2007 but you probably won't find a single one of our
customers who will opt to use the free drivers or Autodesks. Even if they
buy our AcroPlot Pro at $249 they probably pay for it in the first month or
use and have had some people pay for it the first day. The lines merge,
smaller file sizes, true type text support, bookmarks, and batch publishing
of multiple formats is well worth it to them. So free isn't always the way
to go. It doesn't hurt me if someone doesn't like or use our software
because around the corner is someone who did and just processed 600 drawings
overnight and had the PDF waiting for them to send to the client in the
morning.

--
Rodney McManamy
President
CADzation
-------------------------
rmcmanamy@cadzation.com
-------------------------
518 South Route 31 Suite 200
McHenry, IL 60050
http://www.cadzation.com
Providing Industrial Strength
PDF & DWF Solutions to the
Global CAD Marketplace.

"Allen Jessup" wrote in message
news:5111861@discussion.autodesk.com...
Last year I bought a CAD program at the dollar store. It cost $1.00. It had
3D!

Allen

"Rodney McManamy - CADzation" wrote in message
news:5111506@discussion.autodesk.com...
Even the cheap AutoCAD clones now have 3D features also so if you don't like
it you are free to switch but your investment in their software is also
going to fund 3D developement.

Everyone would like LT with LiSP (thousands of ADN developers for sure) but
the truth of the matter is that it's likely never going to happen. They've
ran the numbers and they would lose X dollars in lost AutoCAD sales and gain
Y dollars in LT sales and X is far greater than Y so it doesn't make
business sense. They could not include 3D in the base AutoCAD and charge
extra for 3D but it wouldn't make it any cheaper and in this release you
probably still would have the exact same 2D enhancements. They include 3D
in the base AutoCAD so people who want to move to 3D can start getting a
feel for it instead of loosing customers to Solidworks or other products.

If you buy a car you are partially paying for all the fancy upgrades even if
you don't get them. Cars are made today with extra wires in them regarless
of if the options are installed because in the long run it's cheaper for the
majority. The guy buying the base model pays more but the guy buying all
the options pays slightly less than he would have if they do it the other
way. Can they make a car that will last 20 years, not rust, and run a
million miles? Sure they can. But it's not profitable.

Like it or not Autodesk needs to be profitable also. If they didn't inlcude
the 3D into the base AutoCAD the programming would have to be done anyways
for the vertical products. Most of the 3D work is likely funded by ADT,
LDT, MDT, Inventor and the rest of the vertical products. So you really
haven't been paying for the 3D features but more likely getting them for
free.

If you remember the old days (10-2000i) everyone always joked that you never
wanted to upgrade to an odd number release. It was always speculated that
there were 2 different teams working on releases. While Team1 is wrapping
up AutoCAD 10 Team 2 is already developing the features for Release 11. I'm
guessing it's likely no different now. Consider that AutoCAD 2007 is just
nearing release. In 8 months they will probably debut AutoCAD 2008 at AU.
In 10 months it will be in full Beta. So it would make logical sense to
have one team dedicated to 3D features and one to 2D.

As a developer I can tell you we all hate that we can't program around LT.
But it's their company and their decision and it's been well thought out by
people far smarter in business than we are. They've ran more numbers than
we could ever imagine. They didn't get to where they are at by not being
smart, that's for sure.


--
Rodney McManamy
President
CADzation
-------------------------
rmcmanamy@cadzation.com
-------------------------
518 South Route 31 Suite 200
McHenry, IL 60050
http://www.cadzation.com
Providing Industrial Strength
PDF & DWF Solutions to the
Global CAD Marketplace. Message was edited by: Discussion Admin
Message 54 of 101
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Hi Rodney;

Nice comments my friend... 🙂

Have fun!
Luis.
--
http://www.geometricad.com



Rodney McManamy - CADzation

And of your $1.00 half of their developement probably went into the 3D
portion on their software no matter if you use it or not. And if you're
doing serious 3D design I'm betting the $1.00 program won't cut it for you
or it will end up taking longer to do your designs.
Message 55 of 101
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Sorry. I think I wasn't clear in what I was saying. I meant to say as you
have that if the autodesk products don't fit you needs there are plenty of
options.

No I couldn't do any meaningful 3D in that $1 program. Turning out a 2D set
of simple plans wouldn't bee difficult. If all you are doing is using the
program as a digital pencil. Then you don't need much. Line, Arc, Offset,
Text and maybe some dimensioning and you could do it.

I'm heavily in 3D work. Just not too much of what will be included in 2007.
But I will be glad to see it for those few times I need it. I work in Land
Desktop and am transitioning to Civil 3D. I do a lot of 3D site design and
need an accurate model to calculate soil quantities and create proposed
elevations. I ran through a least half a dozen grading scenarios on a
proposed condo complex last night. The software is not about drawing plans.
Its about design.

Allen

"Rodney McManamy - CADzation" wrote in message
news:5112777@discussion.autodesk.com...
And of your $1.00 half of their developement probably went into the 3D
portion on their software no matter if you use it or not. And if you're
doing serious 3D design I'm betting the $1.00 program won't cut it for you
or it will end up taking longer to do your designs.

AutoCAD knows their market and knows that they don't have to play in that
cheap market. You can buy a $10 pair of running shoes at Walmart but if
you're a serious runner or run alot you're going to spend the extra bucks
for the Nike's because it's well worth it to you and you feel and perform
better. Now Walmart makes their money buy selling millions at a small
profit each. Nike makes there's by selling fewere but at a larger profit.
Both companies are successful at what they do because they both fill
different voids in the marketplace and both know their markets.

When I was big into waterskiing I easily spent $600 on a slalom ski. I
couldn't perform well on a $100 one and it was worth every penny of it to
me. But when I taught someone how to slalom ski I would never let them use
mine because they would never be able to learn on it as it wasn't designed
to go straight or to be easy to get up on. With their experience level a
$100 ski was the better option.

You can't please everyone all the time but what Autodesk has done is to
provide different levels for different users without stretching themselve to
thin and to keep themselves in business.
LT - Basic drafting, No Lisp, No 3D
AutoCAD - Advanced drafting, Lisp, basic 3D
MDT - Inventor - Advanced 3D

If you're someplace in between any of them there are plenty of companies out
there who have filled the void for you with 3rd party plug-ins for less than
the cost to move up to the next level of Autodesk's products.

If you don't like it your free to go to one of the competitors and they will
be more than happy to take your money.

In our market you can create PDF files for free and AutoCAD is including
basic output into 2007 but you probably won't find a single one of our
customers who will opt to use the free drivers or Autodesks. Even if they
buy our AcroPlot Pro at $249 they probably pay for it in the first month or
use and have had some people pay for it the first day. The lines merge,
smaller file sizes, true type text support, bookmarks, and batch publishing
of multiple formats is well worth it to them. So free isn't always the way
to go. It doesn't hurt me if someone doesn't like or use our software
because around the corner is someone who did and just processed 600 drawings
overnight and had the PDF waiting for them to send to the client in the
morning.

--
Rodney McManamy
President
CADzation
-------------------------
rmcmanamy@cadzation.com
-------------------------
518 South Route 31 Suite 200
McHenry, IL 60050
http://www.cadzation.com
Providing Industrial Strength
PDF & DWF Solutions to the
Global CAD Marketplace.

"Allen Jessup" wrote in message
news:5111861@discussion.autodesk.com...
Last year I bought a CAD program at the dollar store. It cost $1.00. It had
3D!

Allen
Message 56 of 101
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Terry

Its not just this year its all lame upgrades
All I'm saying is that I'd rather see a 2D only AutoCAD with LiSP
It should cost less and should run faster

--
Dave

"Terry W. Dotson" wrote in message
news:5111189@discussion.autodesk.com...
David Allen wrote:

> Who would want to work in an enviroment where they could not use the
> lisp routines that they have been using for the last 10 years.

Lets face, your choice is the IWORD or keep on paying the piper. Don't
rule out the possibility that the IWORD won't be able to read modern
drawings in a few years.

So just give it up and write the subscription check. Next year it'll be
useful stuff again. Request one for me while your at it. :0)

Terry
Message 57 of 101
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

That I agree with. I wans't necessarily responding just to your thread but
to overall threads on the post also.

The long and short of this thread is that no package is ever going to be
perfect and you are always going to end up paying for features you will
never use. But other people pay for features you use and they never will.
Any sofware company has to balance both what is best for their users and
what is best for their profits. It does the users no good if they don't
because then they will be out of business and the users will never have new
software.

If you're on subscription you are basically investing in the future of the
company. Your money helps to fund not only the next release but future
releases years down the road. What nobody has mentioned is that Autodesk
looks like they have added a considerable amount of value into AutoCAD 2007
on top of probably having to dedicate significant resources for porting up
to the next release of Windows. And what you are investing is pennies
compared to the total cost of an employees. The software that they are
using day in and day out for probably the majority of the day is about 1/2
to 1% of the total cost of the employee on the company. Most peoples car
payment and insurance for a month is about equivalent to the cost of an
AutoCAD subscription for a year.

Sure you're not always going to get features you can use but overall for the
cost you pay I think users would have to agree that Autodesk has done a
pretty decent job. If you're not satisfied with them then leave to another
software package, it's that simple.

I was a mechanical engineer before I started into the programming side and
used everything from AutoCAD 2.1 to AutoCAD 2007 to CADKey to a unix based
program called Medusa and even a high end 3D modeling package called SDRC
Ideas that ran on a $30,000 HP Unix Workstation. Not one of them has
everyting I would want in the ideal package. For the work that I did 3D
AutoCAD was some cusomization was probably the closest. But I can tell you
that the company I was working for dumped the SDRC Ideas as I told them they
would and ended up going with Autodesk products. SDRC Ideas was probably a
costly 2 to 3 million dollar mistake on their part but it's probably saved
others of their clients hundreds or millions.

So not getting much from one release of AutoCAD for a $500 subscription
isn't such a bad deal. If you don't get anything for 3 or 4 releases then
either you're not implementing the new advancements or you are on the wrong
software to begin with.

--
Rodney McManamy
President
CADzation
-------------------------
rmcmanamy@cadzation.com
-------------------------
518 South Route 31 Suite 200
McHenry, IL 60050
http://www.cadzation.com
Providing Industrial Strength
PDF & DWF Solutions to the
Global CAD Marketplace.

"Allen Jessup" wrote in message
news:5112853@discussion.autodesk.com...
Sorry. I think I wasn't clear in what I was saying. I meant to say as you
have that if the autodesk products don't fit you needs there are plenty of
options.

No I couldn't do any meaningful 3D in that $1 program. Turning out a 2D set
of simple plans wouldn't bee difficult. If all you are doing is using the
program as a digital pencil. Then you don't need much. Line, Arc, Offset,
Text and maybe some dimensioning and you could do it.

I'm heavily in 3D work. Just not too much of what will be included in 2007.
But I will be glad to see it for those few times I need it. I work in Land
Desktop and am transitioning to Civil 3D. I do a lot of 3D site design and
need an accurate model to calculate soil quantities and create proposed
elevations. I ran through a least half a dozen grading scenarios on a
proposed condo complex last night. The software is not about drawing plans.
Its about design.

Allen

"Rodney McManamy - CADzation" wrote in message
news:5112777@discussion.autodesk.com...
And of your $1.00 half of their developement probably went into the 3D
portion on their software no matter if you use it or not. And if you're
doing serious 3D design I'm betting the $1.00 program won't cut it for you
or it will end up taking longer to do your designs.

AutoCAD knows their market and knows that they don't have to play in that
cheap market. You can buy a $10 pair of running shoes at Walmart but if
you're a serious runner or run alot you're going to spend the extra bucks
for the Nike's because it's well worth it to you and you feel and perform
better. Now Walmart makes their money buy selling millions at a small
profit each. Nike makes there's by selling fewere but at a larger profit.
Both companies are successful at what they do because they both fill
different voids in the marketplace and both know their markets.

When I was big into waterskiing I easily spent $600 on a slalom ski. I
couldn't perform well on a $100 one and it was worth every penny of it to
me. But when I taught someone how to slalom ski I would never let them use
mine because they would never be able to learn on it as it wasn't designed
to go straight or to be easy to get up on. With their experience level a
$100 ski was the better option.

You can't please everyone all the time but what Autodesk has done is to
provide different levels for different users without stretching themselve to
thin and to keep themselves in business.
LT - Basic drafting, No Lisp, No 3D
AutoCAD - Advanced drafting, Lisp, basic 3D
MDT - Inventor - Advanced 3D

If you're someplace in between any of them there are plenty of companies out
there who have filled the void for you with 3rd party plug-ins for less than
the cost to move up to the next level of Autodesk's products.

If you don't like it your free to go to one of the competitors and they will
be more than happy to take your money.

In our market you can create PDF files for free and AutoCAD is including
basic output into 2007 but you probably won't find a single one of our
customers who will opt to use the free drivers or Autodesks. Even if they
buy our AcroPlot Pro at $249 they probably pay for it in the first month or
use and have had some people pay for it the first day. The lines merge,
smaller file sizes, true type text support, bookmarks, and batch publishing
of multiple formats is well worth it to them. So free isn't always the way
to go. It doesn't hurt me if someone doesn't like or use our software
because around the corner is someone who did and just processed 600 drawings
overnight and had the PDF waiting for them to send to the client in the
morning.

--
Rodney McManamy
President
CADzation
-------------------------
rmcmanamy@cadzation.com
-------------------------
518 South Route 31 Suite 200
McHenry, IL 60050
http://www.cadzation.com
Providing Industrial Strength
PDF & DWF Solutions to the
Global CAD Marketplace.

"Allen Jessup" wrote in message
news:5111861@discussion.autodesk.com...
Last year I bought a CAD program at the dollar store. It cost $1.00. It had
3D!

Allen
Message 58 of 101
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

David Allen wrote:

> Its not just this year its all lame upgrades All I'm saying is that
> I'd rather see a 2D only AutoCAD with LiSP

You'll see it when people stop buying the 4k+ product or a middleweight
contender gives them some competition. I don't see either happening.

Terry
--
The Ultimate Productivity Add-On for AutoCAD
ToolPac 9.0 from http://www.dotsoft.com
Message 59 of 101
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

No arguments here. We were on Subscription for Land Desktop among other
things. We have gotten the freshly written Civil 3D program to replace it
for no extra charge. Not just the same old program with a few new features.
But a totaly new program. Admitedly those who have been using it are realy a
pool of beta testers so far. But that is good too. It means the finished
software will work the way the users want it.

Allen
Message 60 of 101
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

All I am saying is that for me I'd rather have a smaller code that should
run faster.
For the little guy, the one to 2 man shop, most that I deal with could care
less about
3D when they just need to get CD's out the door. Most of these people have
been
doing 2D autocad their entire career. Even when I tell them to go with
revit they don't
want to relearn anything. So any non autocad solution is out. But every
independant
company I deal with thinks the $3000 price for AutoCAD is too much. I think
that is
is for features they will never use. I would pay $2000 for a LT with LiSP
and I think
most small business people would.

--
Dave

"Rodney McManamy - CADzation" wrote in message
news:5111506@discussion.autodesk.com...
Even the cheap AutoCAD clones now have 3D features also so if you don't like
it you are free to switch but your investment in their software is also
going to fund 3D developement.


As a developer I can tell you we all hate that we can't program around LT.
But it's their company and their decision and it's been well thought out by
people far smarter in business than we are. They've ran more numbers than
we could ever imagine. They didn't get to where they are at by not being
smart, that's for sure.


--
Rodney McManamy
President
CADzation
-------------------------
rmcmanamy@cadzation.com

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums  

Administrator Productivity


Autodesk Design & Make Report