You know Bentley HAD to open the DGN to make their attempts at acquisition of DWG format SEEM less duplicitous. Without the ability to open and save DWG, Microstations market share would have dwindled more than it has. Their ONLY hope is to TAG along behind on the DWG coat tails. If their product was nearly as robust as they have claimed, why not compete head to head against DWG, instead of getting in bed wih it.
Oddly enough (or not) we've discovered that V8 DGN files are more compatible with DWG files than they are with earlier versions of Microstation.
I know the advantage Bentley had in aligning with ODA, but that does not answer my question. What possible benefit would AutoDESK have in such an alignment,other than a major loss of revenue?
The ODA merely wants access to AutoDESK's work product without paying AutoDESK for it.
Message was edited by: Randy Culp
Again you display your total ignorance of the software. We've been modeling full refineries in 3D for several years, complete with all structures, piping, electrical, instrumentation, material control, and iso generation. But then based on another thread, I understand that you're incapable of doing your own development, so you're stuck with out of the box tools and that's pretty sad.
"" Your 3D means poor texture, lights and render?""
Again the display of ignorance of the software. AutoCAD is not a presentation tool and has never claimed to be one. It's display features are for visualization only and are not intended for final presentation renderings. For that use a different tool. Oh, I forgot, you're the one size fits all guy.
"" Although ADSK forget the most important thing in a 3D application: an easy and multidirectional 3D cursor. ""
Easily manipulatable UCS has been a feature of AutoCAD for some time.
"" using wires trough several steps to have at the end primitives volume ""
You really would do yourself well to learn something about the software before you make these attempts a disparaging it. Wireframe manipulation is a Microstation method.
"" Not to mention the horrible task has been to get projections or views in previous releases ""
DVIEW for most of us is a rather simple procedure. Again, learning to use the software will go far in helping you past these blind spots.
"" top or "develop" 1500 macros. ""
See, there you are. You don't wish to take the time to learn the software or tailor the software to your needs, you just wish to bit... gripe about it.
BTW, we have a HEAVILY customized system in place that runs 600 functions tops. These functions include pipe, electrical and structural steel parametrics with embedded intelligence along with material extraction, iso-generation, view clipping, and automatic labeling and annotation. But then we know what we want and how we want it to look and are not waiting on someone else to tell us how to draw.
"" You have to see how 3DS or Maya work to clearly distinct what is 3D and what is 2D with a Z coordinate. ""
Oh I'm quite familiar with both. Neither provided the full spectrum of development we required for our end product and were not as easily customized to provide it.
You see AutoCAD is quite a lot more than 2D with a Z coordinate, you just need to learn how to use it. Waiting around for someone to hand it to you on a platter will leave you less than knowledgeable about the software..
And it's just such a shame that you can't do the same thing with the
Unless of course the Al Qaeda folks return to somewhere near your area
Randy, with their sights upon that particular FP.
But maybe that FP isn't even near your neck of the woods.
I've thoroughly enjoyed your discussion/education with Senor Ledezma.
I'm sure he will return for a further lesson or two.
Keep up the good work.
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual 2.01GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
Dual WD800JD Hard Drives - 149GB Nvidia Stripe
Nvidia Quadro FX 1300 128MB
Dual ViewSonic 19-inch VA902b monitors
wrote in message news:email@example.com...
The only image I can find on this machine is a screen shot of a partial area
in a unit that's 2 or 3 years old, but it'll give you a glimpse of what we
do with your "funny 3D thing".
Very amusing. A link on that site lead me to the Open Design Alliance web
site. On that web site they offer free utilities to View, Test and Convert
DWG files. Lets read that again - View, Test and Convert DWG files. See DWG
files. Nothing to do with DGN files. If you a member you can download the
Bentley DGN Specification. But no one has done anything with them. So even
when they release their format for free. Nobody seems to be interested in
If Bentley hadn't come up with a very smart marketing strategy years ago. I
don't think you would hear that much about them. Back then they practically
gave away copies of the software to municipalities. Especially state DOTs.
So since the municipalities all had their free copies of MSTA they started
requiring their consultants submit their work in DGN format. So consultants
that wanted municipal work had to buy MSTA. That's where I see the greatest
use on MSTA. In municipal consultants.
This sounds familiar doesn't it. Give the stuff away and maybe enough people
will jump on the band wagon.
Another very amusing thing is that one of the tools offered on the ODA site
is a program that "Tests DWG files for possible corruption." "Files that
fail this test are reported as corrupt." So with "Trusted DWG" autodesk is
simply following in a path already blazed by ODA.
Autodesk also helped pioneer the XML data transfer strategy. I work in Civil
and use LandXML regularly to save the proprietary objects used in LDT in a
format that can be read by many Civil Design programs. Including Bentley's
InRoads software. Although these were independent developments. Autodesk
lent their full support to these tools.
wrote in message news:firstname.lastname@example.org...
DGN V8 Spec:
Unfortunately the world isn't so black and white. I work in an industry
where dwg is pretty much the industry standard. It is the format my clients
as well as my subcontractors expect data in. With that being said it saving
our data in another file format and then converting it back and forth isn't
really a viable option.
The comment about me plotting out a hard copy and retrieving my data from
there is pretty much the stupidest thing I have ever heard. There is quite a
bit more data in a dwg file than can be retrieved from a hardcopy. Can I
programmatically calculate the area of a rectangle or extract BOM text from
a hardcopy? I submit not.
Please tell me what market share Autodesk will lose by releasing the
specifications to the dwg format? Do you honestly think that if they were
to release the specifications that a solid chunk of their user base would
jump ship to another CAD package? People don't use AutoCAD for the dwg
format, they use it because it's a solid product.
For the record comparing Adobe to Autodesk isn't like comparing "apples and
pomegranates". Last time I checked pdf and dwg were both file formats for
storing information. Sure one may contain information regarding a quote for
stainless steel plate and the other a design for a drainage system, but both
are still extremely valuable information to a business.
wrote in message news:email@example.com...
"" As an end user I feel I should be able to accurately acquire my data with
or without the use of an Autodesk product. ""
You are more than welcome to do so... UNTIL you encapsulate that data in a
proprietary format by YOUR choice. It has been known for over 2 decades
that the format is proprietary. If you have chosen to encapsulate your data
in that format, you've done so, aware of the fact that AutoDESK software
will be required to retrieve that data electronically. However, you are
more than free to plot the data out and have free access to the hard copy at
"" If I want to access the data via an Autodesk product, a Bentley product
or a tool of my own creation I should be able to as it is my property. ""
Why? Why should AutoDESK give up it's work product because you chosen to
encapsulate your data in that format KNOWING that AutoDESK software would be
REQUIRED to retrieve that data. If you want the data retrievable in some
other format, you need to encapsulate that data in some other format.
"" Autodesk should take a lesson from Adobe ""
Why should they? What advantage would AutoDESK receive by giving up it's
work product? Answer=none, it would be a liability to future sales of their
product, and as such would be a very poor business decision.
Adobe may have made out doing so, but considering the massive differences in
the products and their markets, its apples and pomegranates.
The fact of the matter is they opened their format, as did Adobe. Heck even
Microsoft's new office xml has an open specification. I guess they're
really aren't worried about their "major loss in revenue".
wrote in message news:firstname.lastname@example.org...
You know Bentley HAD to open the DGN to make their attempts at acquisition
of DWG format SEEM less duplicitous. Without the ability to open and save
DWG, Microstations market share would have dwindled more than it has. Their
ONLY hope is to TAG along behind on the DWG coat tails. If their product
was nearly as robust as they have claimed, why not compete head to head
against DWG, instead of getting in bed wih it.
Oddly enough (or not) we've discovered that V8 DGN files are more compatible
with DWG files than they are with earlier versions of Microstation.
I know the advantage Bentley had in aligning with ODA, but that does not
answer my question. What possible benefit would AutoDESK have in such an
alignment,other than a major loss of revenue?
The ODA merely wants access to AutoDESK's work product without paying
AutoDESK for it.
ah, so you are saying you are a 3dmax/maya person?
No wonder you want to latch on to that aspect of acad, its the only one you relate to.
I sure wish you would post things like "hey, I know 3d progs but not acad, anyone out there have questions on how to
make pretty pictures of things in the 3d progs?"
You would get a lot of response because many of us would like to know that realm.
So redeem yourself, tell us what your specialty is so we can get useful things out of you.
The posts on dwg ownership and trusted dwg are rediculous, stop wasting everyones time on them.
|>You mean "3D" to join several pieces of wire? oh! I have doing that a lot of time ago.
|>-Your 3D means:
|>1. draw a rectangle
|>2. extrude it
|>3. get a fixed dimensions volume which can't be edited at all?
|>-Your 3D means poor texture, lights and render? oh I see.
|>My 3D is like the 2K7 "presspull" tool, the new 3D environment, the 3D grips, the render engine and the improved textures. Although ADSK forget the most important thing in a 3D application: an easy and multidirectional 3D cursor.
|>The fact that AutoCAD has had the Z coordinate doesn't mean 3D capabilities, because you have to built everything by yourself, using wires through several steps to have at the end a primitive volume, which after that can't be edited! Not to mention the horrible task has been to get projections or views in previous releases. If you want nice 3D you have to buy a desktop or "develop" 1500 macros.
|>You have to see how 3DS or Maya work to clearly distinct what is 3D and what is 2D with a Z coordinate.
Civil Engineer and Programmer
jmaeding - athunsaker - com
then run intellicad you bonehead! This discussion is stupid. Everyone buys acad because the clones do not support the
custom stuff like arx, vlx, fas and so on.
Jorge, start talking about the comparison between acad and its clones, and you will have a useful discussion as it will
reveal the clones are not ready yet.. I know that is way over your head though, so good luck.
You talk about dwg's as though they are fixed and generic. You add in custom entities and now you have to start asking
adesk to open up its arx laguage to everyone. Did you ever stop and ask how adesk got to where it is?
Instead you just want to discuss some theoretical question as if that will lead to the downfall of acad's monopoly.
|>"If I want to access the data via an Autodesk product, a Bentley product or a tool of my own creation I should be able to as it is my property."
|>Excelent! I am agree 100%
Civil Engineer and Programmer
jmaeding - athunsaker - com