CAD Managers

Reply
*David Allen
Message 61 of 101 (460 Views)

Re: 2D Autocad vs AutoCAD 2007

03-16-2006 01:25 PM in reply to: *David Allen
Lets say my company needs 50 seats of autocad
Lets say AutoCAD sells for $3000 a pop so thats $150,000 plus tax &
subscription
Now if I was an ADN and deployed 50 seats of autocad with all the 2D
features and LiSP
what would that cost in comparison to the $150,000 for full blown autocad?

--
Dave

"Terry W. Dotson" wrote in message
news:5111185@discussion.autodesk.com...
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
*David Allen
Message 62 of 101 (460 Views)

Re: 2D Autocad vs AutoCAD 2007

03-16-2006 01:28 PM in reply to: *David Allen
From this thread I think you can see there is enough people who want LT and
LiSP
I don't think asking for one more version of AutoCAD is complaining.
They already have verticals for every market, how about the 2D market?

--
Dave

wrote in message news:5111246@discussion.autodesk.com...
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
*Matt Stachoni
Message 63 of 101 (460 Views)

Re: 2D Autocad vs AutoCAD 2007

03-16-2006 01:51 PM in reply to: *David Allen
For the life of me, I can't figure out what the problem is here.

AutoCAD (the full blown version) has just enough 3D capabilities to be
dangerous. It's not a fully-fledged 3D program in most people's eyes. It's
nowhere NEAR the 3D program VIZ or max is, with its complex lofting, subdivision
surfaces, incredible material creation, crazy lighting options, subobject
animation, etc.

And I would bet this is still true with 2007's new 3D engine. From what I've
seen it's certainly a step up, but given the current feature set that is NOT
saying much.

Almost every graphical object in AutoCAD has a 3D component - that's a property
of the coordinate system used. Sure, most often that's "0." But most people use
Acad as a basic way of drawing very accurate 2D shapes which they then import
into VIZ/max for extrusion into the 3rd dimension. I use it all the time to
create basic shapes that turn into crazy lofts in max, because 2D drawing in Max
is complete torture.

But even if you can get some decent 3D stuff from AutoCAD without the extra
gymnastics - and it imports into max without turning inside out - what's the
hurt? Editable solids? About frickin time! Sketchup like push-pull? Sweet, but,
whatevah.

The 3D command set in AutoCAD is still slight compared the the whole. Thus, it
seems nutty to demand a "2D" AutoCAD option, when in fact it wouldn't lighten
AutoCAD in the slightest. The 3D modules are all demand loaded, they don't load
by default, so it's not like Acad is slowed down because it's busily chewing up
3D system resources in your dopey PID.

And, we all know how important LISP is to a lot of folks; combined with the
other features AutoCAD has over LT, it safely ensures that people who need the
high-fidelity features pay for them with the full version, and those that can
get by with LT do not. Differentiation - especially with such a price delta - is
VERY important here.

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@bhhtait.com
*Terry W. Dotson
Message 64 of 101 (460 Views)

Re: 2D Autocad vs AutoCAD 2007

03-16-2006 05:07 PM in reply to: *David Allen
David Allen wrote:

> Now if I was ...

Contact your Autodesk Dealer/Rep.

Terry
--
The Ultimate Productivity Add-On for AutoCAD
ToolPac 9.0 from http://www.dotsoft.com
*David Allen
Message 65 of 101 (460 Views)

Re: 2D Autocad vs AutoCAD 2007

03-16-2006 05:31 PM in reply to: *David Allen
If that would have gotten me anywhere I would not have posted here.

--
Dave

"Terry W. Dotson" wrote in message
news:5113661@discussion.autodesk.com...
David Allen wrote:

> Now if I was ...

Contact your Autodesk Dealer/Rep.

Terry
--
The Ultimate Productivity Add-On for AutoCAD
ToolPac 9.0 from http://www.dotsoft.com
*Rodney McManamy - CADzation
Message 66 of 101 (460 Views)

Re: 2D Autocad vs AutoCAD 2007

03-17-2006 06:46 AM in reply to: *David Allen
David,

As I said it won't run any faster. There is no 3D overhead (just the 3D
menus) running in AutoCAD until you issue one of the 3D commands. Then it
loads the 3D modeling arx files.

I would have to agree with you on the $2000 LT with Lisp but apparenty
Autodesk's marketing and bean counter's numbers tell them otherwise.

For the independant companies then let them use LT with no customization.
If they are not smart enough to realize the value of full AutoCAD they
probably aren't smart enogh to customize it either. If you tell them LT
with Lisp is going to be $2000 then that is going to be too high for them
also.

Money is tight for everyone but considering that a new seat of AutoCAD is
going to be less than 10% of the total cost of a draftsperson for the first
year it's not hard to justify. Subscription is going to be about 1% per
year after that. Spread both of them out over 3 years and you're looking at
roughly 4% per year. And this is for a software program that is likely
going to be in use over 75% of the employees time.

Good software doesn't cost money, it saves money. Otherwise people would
still be drawing by hand on paper.

--
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:5113426@discussion.autodesk.com...
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
*Rodney McManamy - CADzation
Message 67 of 101 (460 Views)

Re: 2D Autocad vs AutoCAD 2007

03-17-2006 06:56 AM in reply to: *David Allen
David,

ADN members cannot use AutoCAD to do actual production work. You get
software
to do developement and testing on only.

ADN members can't drive AutoCAD LT either. Nobody can. And AutoCAD OEM is licensed and priced on a
per application basis and it's not intedend to be used as an AutoCAD
replacement. Also your local reseller won't help you you'll have to contact
the AutoCAD OEM sales from the website.

I'm not 100% positive but I think AutoCAD OEM doesn't allow lisp or VBA once
you compile the program. It's essentially designed for say a Window
manufacturer that wants to deploy a program to their customers that would
design up a custom window and create the DWG of it for the customer to then
load into their standard AutoCAD or any other program that opens the DWG
format.

Much like the Real DWG that will allow you to modify DWG files but they
aren't going to license Real DWG to anyone converting newer formats to older
formats or anyone trying to use it to display the DWG file or convert it to
another
format. But if you want to say make an attribute editor then they will
allow it.

In other words they aren't going to license their technology in any way that
it's going to reduce their sales.


--
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:5113415@discussion.autodesk.com...
Lets say my company needs 50 seats of autocad
Lets say AutoCAD sells for $3000 a pop so thats $150,000 plus tax &
subscription
Now if I was an ADN and deployed 50 seats of autocad with all the 2D
features and LiSP
what would that cost in comparison to the $150,000 for full blown autocad?

--
Dave

"Terry W. Dotson" wrote in message
news:5111185@discussion.autodesk.com...
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 was edited by: Discussion Admin
Distinguished Contributor
old-cadaver
Posts: 5,183
Registered: ‎12-12-2003
Message 68 of 101 (460 Views)

Re: 2D Autocad vs AutoCAD 2007

03-17-2006 08:28 PM in reply to: *David Allen
Think I'll just post once for several topics here.

First, the release of LT was a marketing nightmare for Adesk (still is), at best it added a few die-hards to their market base, but at worst it diluted their market by competing with themselves. You never want to be your own competition. The same would be true of a "2D" solution(or LT with lisp). For that reason alone I think you'll never see that as an ADESK alternative. As a full-blown cad user that desires a much more robust 3D AutoCAD, I would rather that ADESK NOT dilute their efforts by branching out with yet another "crippled" product. I would prefer that they focus on the core program and give us the future now. For us Revit (or any of the other so-called 3D programs) is no solution for several reasons that include price, user base, available training and the application for which we use the software.

Second, you say you don't need 3D. Right now that may be true. I heard the very same about CAD 15 years ago from pencil jockeys who saw no need or use for computer-aided drafting. We kinda smirk at those dinosaurs today, just as we will smirk at the 2D drafter die-hards in a few years. 3D is coming, one can get on board now and shorten the learning curve, or wait it out and make the big jump later.
Distinguished Contributor
kochcad
Posts: 198
Registered: ‎04-01-2005
Message 69 of 101 (460 Views)

Re: 2D Autocad vs AutoCAD 2007

03-18-2006 10:02 AM in reply to: *David Allen
I felt the same way till I really dug into what they did with the rez platform. We found they had about 95% of everything we needed. and I have found they will include many of our suggestions into future builds. Also, we did a review of how much time we spent trying to develop our own lisp or vba routines. obviously we don't get paid for that work and I could make more money focusing back on design and drafting then I could generate from our own programming.

have you tried out the rez program yet? If so what features or needs do you feel it is missing that you would need to build yourself (assuming it had Lisp)?

believe me I totally agree with you but I can also understand the situation autodesk is faced with. still I don't understand why they have a $900 product in LT and the next offering is $3,500 and up. IMHO, that is too large of a gap in offerings and misses out on a large market that need a sub. $3K product. Secretly I had hoped adesk would aquire the rez product for mass dist. last year but usually anything they bring on their ship get's jumbled up to be a "generic" build for commercial and residential. a big mistake in my opinion. - Terry
Distinguished Contributor
maxima10
Posts: 104
Registered: ‎12-12-2005
Message 70 of 101 (460 Views)

Re: 2D Autocad vs AutoCAD 2007

03-20-2006 03:01 AM in reply to: *David Allen
You know what I would really like, is to have AutoDesk stop releasing software every year that is not fully tested and contains software bugs.

I remember just a few years ago when Microsoft tried releasing a new version of windows too often and also had to release a bunch of patches to fix it.
And the newer windows software required more processr power and memory. The only ones who benefited were MicroSoft and Intel. They almost forced users to upgarde every couple of years. This trend has definitletly slowed down.

We the AutoCAD users need to quit jumping on the bandwagon every time AutoDesk releases a new version.
I would bet most users have less than ten new features they use since rev 13.
Announcements
Manufacturing CAD & IT Manager Resource
Additional information for installing, licensing & deploying Inventor, the Product Design Suites and Factory Design Suites.
Need installation help?

Start with some of our most frequented solutions or visit the Installation and Licensing Forum to get help installing your software.