Design Review

Reply
*Shaan Hurley, Autodesk, Inc.
Message 11 of 17 (102 Views)

Re: Word Docs

07-19-2004 02:44 PM in reply to: *David Metcalf
Michael, So in a nutshell if I understand your reply, you are saying you will choose a single solution over the better solution. I would not say what Bentley has done especially in Orlando is swallow any pride perhaps sugar coated some sales presentations, but no pride swallowing. As for your comment about DWF Composer, not everyone needs to purchase Autodesk DWF Composer at $99 just like not everyone has to shellout almost $500 to markup up a PDF file using the Adobe Acrobat Pro. The DWF creation and viewing is free and open to anyone to develop using the toolkit, even Bentley. It sounds like you may have drank up all of Keith & Greg's special brand of kool aid, hopefully for you it work . For others out there, they may actually want the better suited format for design data which exceeds PDF abilities and accuracy. I am not sure when or where the next update of PDF will be, or if it will actually make things better for electronic PDF distribution of design data or not. In any case there is choice, even if Bentley does not want you to consider choice. You can stay with the innovative Windows Notepad and Paint, while others prefer rich specific application, to twist your Windows analogy a tad. Cheers, -Shaan "MichaelK" wrote in message news:40fc0937$1_1@newsprd01... > Shaan, > > I come from a duel (Bentley and AutoDesk) shop and my bent is coming from > an > IT position. I don't believe the rhetoric that every task needs its own > specific tools, yes sometimes they do but it is not always bad. Taken > with > that approach, Windows wouldn't do have the things it does today. Product > Innovation should not be hampered by limitations the industry decides for > us. Personally, I'm tired of having to install specific apps just to add > a > few feature that we may or may not ever use. > > See comments below... > > > "Shaan Hurley, Autodesk, Inc." wrote in > message > news:40f9a777_2@newsprd01... >> Michael, >> >> PDF is good for Word documents, and it should focus on what it is good >> for >> being an old postscript based format. When it comes to design documents > the >> DWF format beats PDF hands down in more ways than just file size and > Michael >> it is not just a "slight file size difference". Bentley only chose to use >> PDF with Adobe as they could not have swallowed their pride for the >> betterment of their own customers. Bentley also had to partner with > someone >> because they had no electronic format solution. Even so, you can still >> produce a DWF from Bentley products and many others using the free and >> available DWFWriter printer driver. > > I went to Bentley's User Conference in May and they did swallow their > pride, > they choose to better their solutions on a format that nearly everyone in > the world has adopted and accepted. They actually have a proprietary > format > solution called DPR (which has been around even before DWF was even a > concept) that could have been enhanced to take on more functionality but > they actually choose PDF because it is what their USERS wanted and Adobe > was > willing to help make it a reality. > >> >> You can create PDF files from AutoCAD already so why reinvent the wheel >> inside AutoCAD when there are hundreds of PDF printer drivers and >> applications to do so. > > You can but you don't have much options or control, besides these all use > distillers and are not nearly as functional as Bentley's writer. I sound > like I am pro Bentley but I actually am quite neutral but this is a > subject > that I have a problem with when it comes to AutoDesk. You guys like to > make > everything proprietary and much like Microsoft, you want us to upgrade > every > other year by taking out functionality like saving to an older version for > instance. It is not a limitation of the software to save back to vesion > 11 > but rater a deliberate choice that forces us to upgrade. By making the > reader free it sounds like you have a great solution but IF it because a > standard in the industry your company will then have a larger base to sell > the composer to. It all comes back to money not pride... > >> >> So when discussing design documents it is not PDF that is in the lead, it > is >> DWF that wins. If the discussion were on what is best for text documents >> then PDF wins. PDF is only more accepted because of its word based >> documentation background. Do you really need to teach the old PDF dog a > new >> trick or ability for design document data? > > If they, Adobe, succeeds at creating a rich AEC content PDF (which their > representative at the Bentley conference says they are) then what is the > difference? Just because you don't want to spend the time to teach a dog > new tricks doesn't mean it can't be as good or better, it just depends on > the profesional that is doing the training. Heck, looking at the team of > Adobe has on this they may even put out a better solution they DWF... > >> >> It is about choice whether it be PDF or DWF and I just show the strengths > of >> the DWF for the design documentation output. Now if Bentley customers > were >> to ask the same questions and DWF related posts, in most cases they >> either >> get deleted by PhilTer or a snide and rude reply containing "DWF is >> proprietary", which is unfortunate in that they take the one size fits >> all >> camp. > > As an IT person I tend to agree with Bentley on this one... > >> >> There is no need to buy anything with DWF, and there are full API and >> toolkits for free with no strings. > > Time is money and if PDF can provide the tools for free and most of my > clients have the reader already installed then I would choose PDF... > >> >> There is no one size or format that fits all data types. >> What you need to do is use the best suited format for the task at hand. >> >> http://autodesk.blogs.com/between_the_lines/dwf_it/index.html >> http://autodesk.blogs.com/between_the_lines/2004/06/more_dwf_vs_pdf.html >> >> Cheers, >> -Shaan >> http://autodesk.blogs.com/between_the_lines/ >> >> >> "MichaelK" wrote in message >> news:40f87513$1_1@newsprd01... >> > PDF seems to be getting a bad rap. Autodesk choose to create their own >> > standard (probably to give us one more thing to upgrade every year) > rather >> > than working with Adobe. Bentley has proven that it can and does allow >> you >> > to put as you said "a 4x8 sheet of plywood in it" and maybe the file is >> > slightly larger but it is also their first stab at it. >> > >> > The PDF format is only going to get better and I only hope Autodesk >> > will >> not >> > ignore it when it catches up. It already handles layers, xrefs, >> searchable >> > text, plotting, intelligent links and security and from what I heard it >> will >> > soon handle measuring and much more. BTW, MicroStation also writes a > PDFs >> > directly from their product without the use of a distiller, heck you >> > can >> > even create a PDF of DWG files as well. >> > >> > Just my two cents... >> >> >> > >
*MichaelK
Message 12 of 17 (102 Views)

Re: Word Docs

07-19-2004 03:29 PM in reply to: *David Metcalf
Your assuming DWF is always going to be better. I guess we just differ on that point because I am not just listening to the Bentley's either. I spoke to the technical guy at Adobe and he along with the AEC alliance group are committed to improving the format. Do you only see what AutoDesk feeds you are do you actually get out once in awhile? When I was at AutoDesk University I talked to people about DWF and if I took a poll most users will say they use DWF to view and print the files and that is about it. So where is the benefit there? Sure it does much more but most users are not taking advantage of it yet, which really makes its use no different than a PDF that requires you to load a new viewer. You seem to ignore the fact that Bentley currently has a better solution called DPR that even shows a user elements that have changed from one DPR File to the next and they are color coded based on what was deleted, added and changed. This too works on both DGN and DWG and they even have a free viewer that allows you to mark up and post. Yet they still CHOOSE to listen to their users that asked for this capability and then worked for the industry leader to bring it to reality. It seems you also missed the point in the analogy because you would be agreeing with me that improving a word processor to do more that type text was more efficient than creating a separate application for doing graphics another for doing bar charts and so on and so on... It sounds like the sugar coated water is being handed out at AutoDesk. "Shaan Hurley, Autodesk, Inc." wrote in message news:40fc4049$1_1@newsprd01... > Michael, > > So in a nutshell if I understand your reply, you are saying you will choose > a single solution over the better solution. I would not say what Bentley > has done especially in Orlando is swallow any pride perhaps sugar coated > some sales presentations, but no pride swallowing. > > As for your comment about DWF Composer, not everyone needs to purchase > Autodesk DWF Composer at $99 just like not everyone has to shellout almost > $500 to markup up a PDF file using the Adobe Acrobat Pro. The DWF creation > and viewing is free and open to anyone to develop using the toolkit, even > Bentley. > > It sounds like you may have drank up all of Keith & Greg's special brand of > kool aid, hopefully for you it work . For others out there, they may > actually want the better suited format for design data which exceeds PDF > abilities and accuracy. I am not sure when or where the next update of PDF > will be, or if it will actually make things better for electronic PDF > distribution of design data or not. > > In any case there is choice, even if Bentley does not want you to consider > choice. You can stay with the innovative Windows Notepad and Paint, while > others prefer rich specific application, to twist your Windows analogy a > tad. > > Cheers, > -Shaan > > "MichaelK" wrote in message > news:40fc0937$1_1@newsprd01... > > Shaan, > > > > I come from a duel (Bentley and AutoDesk) shop and my bent is coming from > > an > > IT position. I don't believe the rhetoric that every task needs its own > > specific tools, yes sometimes they do but it is not always bad. Taken > > with > > that approach, Windows wouldn't do have the things it does today. Product > > Innovation should not be hampered by limitations the industry decides for > > us. Personally, I'm tired of having to install specific apps just to add > > a > > few feature that we may or may not ever use. > > > > See comments below... > > > > > > "Shaan Hurley, Autodesk, Inc." wrote in > > message > > news:40f9a777_2@newsprd01... > >> Michael, > >> > >> PDF is good for Word documents, and it should focus on what it is good > >> for > >> being an old postscript based format. When it comes to design documents > > the > >> DWF format beats PDF hands down in more ways than just file size and > > Michael > >> it is not just a "slight file size difference". Bentley only chose to use > >> PDF with Adobe as they could not have swallowed their pride for the > >> betterment of their own customers. Bentley also had to partner with > > someone > >> because they had no electronic format solution. Even so, you can still > >> produce a DWF from Bentley products and many others using the free and > >> available DWFWriter printer driver. > > > > I went to Bentley's User Conference in May and they did swallow their > > pride, > > they choose to better their solutions on a format that nearly everyone in > > the world has adopted and accepted. They actually have a proprietary > > format > > solution called DPR (which has been around even before DWF was even a > > concept) that could have been enhanced to take on more functionality but > > they actually choose PDF because it is what their USERS wanted and Adobe > > was > > willing to help make it a reality. > > > >> > >> You can create PDF files from AutoCAD already so why reinvent the wheel > >> inside AutoCAD when there are hundreds of PDF printer drivers and > >> applications to do so. > > > > You can but you don't have much options or control, besides these all use > > distillers and are not nearly as functional as Bentley's writer. I sound > > like I am pro Bentley but I actually am quite neutral but this is a > > subject > > that I have a problem with when it comes to AutoDesk. You guys like to > > make > > everything proprietary and much like Microsoft, you want us to upgrade > > every > > other year by taking out functionality like saving to an older version for > > instance. It is not a limitation of the software to save back to vesion > > 11 > > but rater a deliberate choice that forces us to upgrade. By making the > > reader free it sounds like you have a great solution but IF it because a > > standard in the industry your company will then have a larger base to sell > > the composer to. It all comes back to money not pride... > > > >> > >> So when discussing design documents it is not PDF that is in the lead, it > > is > >> DWF that wins. If the discussion were on what is best for text documents > >> then PDF wins. PDF is only more accepted because of its word based > >> documentation background. Do you really need to teach the old PDF dog a > > new > >> trick or ability for design document data? > > > > If they, Adobe, succeeds at creating a rich AEC content PDF (which their > > representative at the Bentley conference says they are) then what is the > > difference? Just because you don't want to spend the time to teach a dog > > new tricks doesn't mean it can't be as good or better, it just depends on > > the profesional that is doing the training. Heck, looking at the team of > > Adobe has on this they may even put out a better solution they DWF... > > > >> > >> It is about choice whether it be PDF or DWF and I just show the strengths > > of > >> the DWF for the design documentation output. Now if Bentley customers > > were > >> to ask the same questions and DWF related posts, in most cases they > >> either > >> get deleted by PhilTer or a snide and rude reply containing "DWF is > >> proprietary", which is unfortunate in that they take the one size fits > >> all > >> camp. > > > > As an IT person I tend to agree with Bentley on this one... > > > >> > >> There is no need to buy anything with DWF, and there are full API and > >> toolkits for free with no strings. > > > > Time is money and if PDF can provide the tools for free and most of my > > clients have the reader already installed then I would choose PDF... > > > >> > >> There is no one size or format that fits all data types. > >> What you need to do is use the best suited format for the task at hand. > >> > >> http://autodesk.blogs.com/between_the_lines/dwf_it/index.html > >> http://autodesk.blogs.com/between_the_lines/2004/06/more_dwf_vs_pdf.html > >> > >> Cheers, > >> -Shaan > >> http://autodesk.blogs.com/between_the_lines/ > >> > >> > >> "MichaelK" wrote in message > >> news:40f87513$1_1@newsprd01... > >> > PDF seems to be getting a bad rap. Autodesk choose to create their own > >> > standard (probably to give us one more thing to upgrade every year) > > rather > >> > than working with Adobe. Bentley has proven that it can and does allow > >> you > >> > to put as you said "a 4x8 sheet of plywood in it" and maybe the file is > >> > slightly larger but it is also their first stab at it. > >> > > >> > The PDF format is only going to get better and I only hope Autodesk > >> > will > >> not > >> > ignore it when it catches up. It already handles layers, xrefs, > >> searchable > >> > text, plotting, intelligent links and security and from what I heard it > >> will > >> > soon handle measuring and much more. BTW, MicroStation also writes a > > PDFs > >> > directly from their product without the use of a distiller, heck you > >> > can > >> > even create a PDF of DWG files as well. > >> > > >> > Just my two cents... > >> > >> > >> > > > > > >
*Shaan Hurley, Autodesk, Inc.
Message 13 of 17 (102 Views)

Re: Word Docs

07-19-2004 04:26 PM in reply to: *David Metcalf
Michael, Discussions are always beneficial and appreciated. I do get out from time to time and know the Acrobat team very well. In fact I was the person that assisted the US Navy in publishing large format E size PDF file back in the 90s when most everyone did not have Acrobat installed on their machines and they also could not plot a large format design document without a booklet. I have yet to see Bentley make any headway on an electronic format of theirs, in fact they have publicly in the past told users to post the DGN and use their DGN viewer. Correct me if I am wrong but the DPR was Intergraph and not Bentley. The Digital Print Room format was only developed in the late nineties long after DWF and PDF. The early DPR also required a server to serve up an HTML view of the document unlike PDF or DWF. I will also disagree on the DPR being superior to PDF or DWF as the DPR views like a low resolution TIFF at best. In any case AutoCAD can publish either DWF or PDF but we did not embed a Adobe proprietary technology into our product at a cost to be passed on to the customers. We also felt it was the best option and format for design data to continue with the DWF format in our applications as have other non Autodesk CAD applications and viewers choosing DWF in their products. You have a choice and if you choose the DPR, PDF or DWF hopefully you will choosing based on their strengths and benefits and not just because your secretary has acrobat installed. Thank you for the discussion and I am not really out to get you to switch, just educating on what you may be missing if selecting PDF as your design document format. Cheers, -Shaan "MichaelK" wrote in message news:40fc4b56_3@newsprd01... > Your assuming DWF is always going to be better. I guess we just differ on > that point because I am not just listening to the Bentley's either. I > spoke > to the technical guy at Adobe and he along with the AEC alliance group are > committed to improving the format. Do you only see what AutoDesk feeds > you > are do you actually get out once in awhile? When I was at AutoDesk > University I talked to people about DWF and if I took a poll most users > will > say they use DWF to view and print the files and that is about it. So > where > is the benefit there? Sure it does much more but most users are not > taking > advantage of it yet, which really makes its use no different than a PDF > that > requires you to load a new viewer. > > You seem to ignore the fact that Bentley currently has a better solution > called DPR that even shows a user elements that have changed from one DPR > File to the next and they are color coded based on what was deleted, added > and changed. This too works on both DGN and DWG and they even have a free > viewer that allows you to mark up and post. Yet they still CHOOSE to > listen > to their users that asked for this capability and then worked for the > industry leader to bring it to reality. > > It seems you also missed the point in the analogy because you would be > agreeing with me that improving a word processor to do more that type text > was more efficient than creating a separate application for doing graphics > another for doing bar charts and so on and so on... > > It sounds like the sugar coated water is being handed out at AutoDesk. >
*MichaelK
Message 14 of 17 (102 Views)

Re: Word Docs

07-19-2004 04:42 PM in reply to: *David Metcalf
Fair enough. I too find these discussion beneficial. As for DPR, it used to be an Intergraph product and was sold years ago to Bentley. Since then Bentley has changed the product and it does not require server, while it does support server HTML viewing it also handles stand alone viewing as well. The format it is based on was developed, I believe in the early eighties, but it was then moved to DPR in the nineties. As for its resolution, it is comparable to PDF or DWF. I have never found resolution an issue in a DPR file as a matter of fact it is so accurate that we use its measuring tools and trust it without fail. It definitely is NOT low TIFF at best and you might want to take a look at it again. I guess I will see how things pan out and save my judgment until my needs surpass PDF capabilities. Regards, Mike "Shaan Hurley, Autodesk, Inc." wrote in message news:40fc583b$1_1@newsprd01... > Michael, > > Discussions are always beneficial and appreciated. > > I do get out from time to time and know the Acrobat team very well. In fact > I was the person that assisted the US Navy in publishing large format E size > PDF file back in the 90s when most everyone did not have Acrobat installed > on their machines and they also could not plot a large format design > document without a booklet. I have yet to see Bentley make any headway on an > electronic format of theirs, in fact they have publicly in the past told > users to post the DGN and use their DGN viewer. Correct me if I am wrong but > the DPR was Intergraph and not Bentley. The Digital Print Room format was > only developed in the late nineties long after DWF and PDF. The early DPR > also required a server to serve up an HTML view of the document unlike PDF > or DWF. I will also disagree on the DPR being superior to PDF or DWF as the > DPR views like a low resolution TIFF at best. > > In any case AutoCAD can publish either DWF or PDF but we did not embed a > Adobe proprietary technology into our product at a cost to be passed on to > the customers. We also felt it was the best option and format for design > data to continue with the DWF format in our applications as have other non > Autodesk CAD applications and viewers choosing DWF in their products. You > have a choice and if you choose the DPR, PDF or DWF hopefully you will > choosing based on their strengths and benefits and not just because your > secretary has acrobat installed. > > Thank you for the discussion and I am not really out to get you to switch, > just educating on what you may be missing if selecting PDF as your design > document format. > > Cheers, > -Shaan > > > > "MichaelK" wrote in message > news:40fc4b56_3@newsprd01... > > Your assuming DWF is always going to be better. I guess we just differ on > > that point because I am not just listening to the Bentley's either. I > > spoke > > to the technical guy at Adobe and he along with the AEC alliance group are > > committed to improving the format. Do you only see what AutoDesk feeds > > you > > are do you actually get out once in awhile? When I was at AutoDesk > > University I talked to people about DWF and if I took a poll most users > > will > > say they use DWF to view and print the files and that is about it. So > > where > > is the benefit there? Sure it does much more but most users are not > > taking > > advantage of it yet, which really makes its use no different than a PDF > > that > > requires you to load a new viewer. > > > > You seem to ignore the fact that Bentley currently has a better solution > > called DPR that even shows a user elements that have changed from one DPR > > File to the next and they are color coded based on what was deleted, added > > and changed. This too works on both DGN and DWG and they even have a free > > viewer that allows you to mark up and post. Yet they still CHOOSE to > > listen > > to their users that asked for this capability and then worked for the > > industry leader to bring it to reality. > > > > It seems you also missed the point in the analogy because you would be > > agreeing with me that improving a word processor to do more that type text > > was more efficient than creating a separate application for doing graphics > > another for doing bar charts and so on and so on... > > > > It sounds like the sugar coated water is being handed out at AutoDesk. > > > > >
*Rodney McManamy - CADzation
Message 15 of 17 (102 Views)

Re: Word Docs

07-20-2004 12:13 PM in reply to: *David Metcalf
Michael, I doubt that when it comes to design data that PDF will ever catch up. If everything that Autodesk wants to do with working with non-native formats could have been done in the PDF format they would have done it. I've spent the last 2.5 years working with PDF and converting CAD drawings to it and for the last year on DWF and I can see where in the long run the DWF is going to have some great possibilities in viewing and working with design data. We're talking about way more than just a pretty picture here. Microstation and Adobe partnered together in my eyes so both could get some free press and take a stab at Autodesk. I've been to 2 Adobe presentations and our VP was just at another one last week specifially for AUGI members. And not once did the Adobe rep even have AutoCAD installed on the machine to show how it publishes from AutoCAD. And they still don't convert multiple layouts from a single AutoCAD drawing and we've been doing that from day one with our software. So it's obvious that even though they say they are going to work to make it better for the AEC world in reality the AEC market is maybe 5-10% of Adobe's overall market. So you tell me which basket is going to get their eggs and how much the PDF format will really change for the engineering market. For 90% of the world the PDF is a great format. Nobody wants or cares about anything that they can't see on the screen (paper) when it comes to office type of documents. But when it comes to CAD data there are going to be some incredibly cool uses for actually having and being able to see additional data. Think of the time savings in electronic format if the guy putting the phone in a building can zoom in and get the model number and color instead of seeing the item number and then zooming over to the BOM to see what really goes in that room. -- Rodney McManamy President CADzation ------------------------- rmcmanamy@cadzation.com ------------------------- 518 South Route 31 Suite 200 McHenry, IL 60050 www.cadzation.com Providing Industrial Strength PDF & DWF Solutions to the Global CAD Marketplace. "MichaelK" wrote in message news:40f87513$1_1@newsprd01... > PDF seems to be getting a bad rap. Autodesk choose to create their own > standard (probably to give us one more thing to upgrade every year) rather > than working with Adobe. Bentley has proven that it can and does allow you > to put as you said "a 4x8 sheet of plywood in it" and maybe the file is > slightly larger but it is also their first stab at it. > > The PDF format is only going to get better and I only hope Autodesk will not > ignore it when it catches up. It already handles layers, xrefs, searchable > text, plotting, intelligent links and security and from what I heard it will > soon handle measuring and much more. BTW, MicroStation also writes a PDFs > directly from their product without the use of a distiller, heck you can > even create a PDF of DWG files as well. > > Just my two cents... > > "Rodney McManamy - CADzation" wrote in message > news:40dad9ec$1_1@newsprd01... > > I think the problem really comes back to Autodesk's own marketing which > has > > been educating the users by marketing the DWF against the PDF. It's like > > Ford marketing an Escort against a Chevy Pickup. No doubt the Escort > get's > > better mileage but try to put a 4x8 sheet of plywood in it. > > > > In my opionion where DWF will end up being the choice is where you are > going > > to need intelligent data downstream. PDF if you just need to view and > print > > but DWF if you need to view, plot, measure, or view intelligent data. Or > if > > you are working mainly with vector CAD data. > > > > And users also have to realize that the DWF Writer was created to support > > the Autodesk apps that don't have direct DWF output. It's no easy task > > printing every Windows application to a hybrid vector/raster format. > There > > are PDF companies that have been working on this (and only this) for years > > and they still aren't perfect and they charge you for it. Adobe's own > > driver doesn't print worth a darn from Illustrator 10 but Distiller > usually > > works pretty well or you can save directly to it. > > > > > > -- > > Rodney McManamy > > President > > CADzation > > ------------------------- > > rmcmanamy@cadzation.com > > ------------------------- > > 518 South Route 31 Suite 200 > > McHenry, IL 60050 > > www.cadzation.com > > Providing Industrial Strength > > PDF & DWF Solutions to the > > Global CAD Marketplace. > > > > "Garrick Evans" wrote in message > > news:40d9c2bf$1_1@newsprd01... > > > Scott is right on - DWF is not intended for Office documents just as PDF > > is > > > not intended for design data. DWFWriter was designed to capture design > > data > > > from applications that do not export DWF directly, in particular, > however, > > > no claim has ever been made that it supports (or ever will) Microsoft > > > Office. One of the reasons for this is the nature of the graphics flow > > > through GDI and the driver framework, in many cases items like those > > > mentioned previously ultimately arrive at the driver as a bitmap. Take > > the > > > case of the gradient fill. This is easy to do in a W2D stream, however, > > > even though there is a DrvGradientFill() driver hook, no Office > > application > > > will EVER invoke it, so no simple op-code describing these graphics will > > > ever exist. As a result, the driver might end up with a large bitmap > with > > a > > > masking region or, worse, lots of little gradually colored polygons or > > rects > > > with masks. There is no state communicated across driver calls, in the > > > latter case, the driver couldn't possibly hope to reassemble these > regions > > > as a single shaded polygon, so the DWF ends up with lots of rectangles > in > > > the best case or lots of images in the worst. This is one of the main > > > reasons Autodesk discourages use of the DWFWriter for applications that > > can > > > export DWF natively, those will always produce smaller DWF with the > > highest > > > possible fidelity. > > > > > > hth, > > > > > > > > > g > > > > > > "Scott Sheppard" wrote in message > > > news:40d9b293$1_1@newsprd01... > > > > I don't think they want to compete against PDF for nonCAD. They want > CAD > > > > data to stay in DWF, so they can do intelligent processing on the > > objects. > > > I > > > > think DWF Composer and DWF Writer are good for situations where you > have > > > 99 > > > > DWGs and 1 Word DOC. You can make one DWF with all 100 items. If you > > have > > > 99 > > > > DOCs and 1 DWG, even Autodesk would probably recommend that you make a > > PDF > > > > for the Word parts and one small DWF for the DWG. People in the > > newsgroup > > > > seem to be apologetic when they mention PDF, e.g., "I'm sorry - I have > > to > > > > use it.", but they shouldn't be. IMHO Autodesk is adamant about CAD > data > > > NOT > > > > going to PDF. For other types of data, I don't think they care. > > > > > > > > "Rodney McManamy - CADzation" wrote in > message > > > > news:40d97b23_2@newsprd01... > > > > > The DWF format is optimized for AutoCAD drawings. What we have > > noticed > > > is > > > > > that anything from Word or Excel that uses gradiant fills, Word Art, > > > fancy > > > > > text, or lot's of graphics does not convert well with the DWF Writer > > and > > > > is > > > > > typically as you said 3 or more times larger. The PDF on the other > > hand > > > > is > > > > > optimized for Word style documents and small format but doesn't > > > understand > > > > > shx fonts so it's larger on AutoCAD drawings. > > > > > > > > > > The DWF Writer is still fairly new (and was developed mainly to > > support > > > > > Revit and other non-AutoCAD CAD applications) and I'm sure will get > > > better > > > > > at office documents because it's going to have to if they want it to > > > > really > > > > > compete against the PDF. In the real world it's about more than > just > > > > > AutoCAD drawings that need to go to the client. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
*MichaelK
Message 16 of 17 (102 Views)

Re: Word Docs

07-20-2004 01:12 PM in reply to: *David Metcalf
You are right that they don't mention AutoCAD but that is only because AutoDesk basically alienated Adobe. Multiple layouts currently plot to a multi-page PDF from MicroStation (DWG or DGN) just fine along with layers and the ability for you to turn them on and off. The PDF file format was originally optimized for text and graphic files but they seemed to be very enthusiastic about changing their format to better compete in this market since AutoDesk started bashing on their format. Considering that Adobe's revenue is about twice that of AutoDesk I would not rule them out is all I am saying. I just don't take the hype of AutoDesk, Bentley or Adobe for that matter since I believe this battle is just beginning. So far Adobe has made significant strides in this area, which is why I am saving judgment. "Rodney McManamy - CADzation" wrote in message news:40fd6ee0_1@newsprd01... > Michael, > > I doubt that when it comes to design data that PDF will ever catch up. If > everything that Autodesk wants to do with working with non-native formats > could have been done in the PDF format they would have done it. I've spent > the last 2.5 years working with PDF and converting CAD drawings to it and > for the last year on DWF and I can see where in the long run the DWF is > going to have some great possibilities in viewing and working with design > data. We're talking about way more than just a pretty picture here. > > Microstation and Adobe partnered together in my eyes so both could get some > free press and take a stab at Autodesk. I've been to 2 Adobe presentations > and our VP was just at another one last week specifially for AUGI members. > And not once did the Adobe rep even have AutoCAD installed on the machine to > show how it publishes from AutoCAD. And they still don't convert multiple > layouts from a single AutoCAD drawing and we've been doing that from day one > with our software. So it's obvious that even though they say they are going > to work to make it better for the AEC world in reality the AEC market is > maybe 5-10% of Adobe's overall market. So you tell me which basket is going > to get their eggs and how much the PDF format will really change for the > engineering market. > > For 90% of the world the PDF is a great format. Nobody wants or cares about > anything that they can't see on the screen (paper) when it comes to office > type of documents. But when it comes to CAD data there are going to be some > incredibly cool uses for actually having and being able to see additional > data. Think of the time savings in electronic format if the guy putting the > phone in a building can zoom in and get the model number and color instead > of seeing the item number and then zooming over to the BOM to see what > really goes in that room. > > -- > Rodney McManamy > President > CADzation > ------------------------- > rmcmanamy@cadzation.com > ------------------------- > 518 South Route 31 Suite 200 > McHenry, IL 60050 > www.cadzation.com > Providing Industrial Strength > PDF & DWF Solutions to the > Global CAD Marketplace. > > "MichaelK" wrote in message > news:40f87513$1_1@newsprd01... > > PDF seems to be getting a bad rap. Autodesk choose to create their own > > standard (probably to give us one more thing to upgrade every year) rather > > than working with Adobe. Bentley has proven that it can and does allow > you > > to put as you said "a 4x8 sheet of plywood in it" and maybe the file is > > slightly larger but it is also their first stab at it. > > > > The PDF format is only going to get better and I only hope Autodesk will > not > > ignore it when it catches up. It already handles layers, xrefs, > searchable > > text, plotting, intelligent links and security and from what I heard it > will > > soon handle measuring and much more. BTW, MicroStation also writes a PDFs > > directly from their product without the use of a distiller, heck you can > > even create a PDF of DWG files as well. > > > > Just my two cents... > > > > "Rodney McManamy - CADzation" wrote in message > > news:40dad9ec$1_1@newsprd01... > > > I think the problem really comes back to Autodesk's own marketing which > > has > > > been educating the users by marketing the DWF against the PDF. It's > like > > > Ford marketing an Escort against a Chevy Pickup. No doubt the Escort > > get's > > > better mileage but try to put a 4x8 sheet of plywood in it. > > > > > > In my opionion where DWF will end up being the choice is where you are > > going > > > to need intelligent data downstream. PDF if you just need to view and > > print > > > but DWF if you need to view, plot, measure, or view intelligent data. > Or > > if > > > you are working mainly with vector CAD data. > > > > > > And users also have to realize that the DWF Writer was created to > support > > > the Autodesk apps that don't have direct DWF output. It's no easy task > > > printing every Windows application to a hybrid vector/raster format. > > There > > > are PDF companies that have been working on this (and only this) for > years > > > and they still aren't perfect and they charge you for it. Adobe's own > > > driver doesn't print worth a darn from Illustrator 10 but Distiller > > usually > > > works pretty well or you can save directly to it. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Rodney McManamy > > > President > > > CADzation > > > ------------------------- > > > rmcmanamy@cadzation.com > > > ------------------------- > > > 518 South Route 31 Suite 200 > > > McHenry, IL 60050 > > > www.cadzation.com > > > Providing Industrial Strength > > > PDF & DWF Solutions to the > > > Global CAD Marketplace. > > > > > > "Garrick Evans" wrote in message > > > news:40d9c2bf$1_1@newsprd01... > > > > Scott is right on - DWF is not intended for Office documents just as > PDF > > > is > > > > not intended for design data. DWFWriter was designed to capture > design > > > data > > > > from applications that do not export DWF directly, in particular, > > however, > > > > no claim has ever been made that it supports (or ever will) Microsoft > > > > Office. One of the reasons for this is the nature of the graphics > flow > > > > through GDI and the driver framework, in many cases items like those > > > > mentioned previously ultimately arrive at the driver as a bitmap. > Take > > > the > > > > case of the gradient fill. This is easy to do in a W2D stream, > however, > > > > even though there is a DrvGradientFill() driver hook, no Office > > > application > > > > will EVER invoke it, so no simple op-code describing these graphics > will > > > > ever exist. As a result, the driver might end up with a large bitmap > > with > > > a > > > > masking region or, worse, lots of little gradually colored polygons or > > > rects > > > > with masks. There is no state communicated across driver calls, in > the > > > > latter case, the driver couldn't possibly hope to reassemble these > > regions > > > > as a single shaded polygon, so the DWF ends up with lots of rectangles > > in > > > > the best case or lots of images in the worst. This is one of the main > > > > reasons Autodesk discourages use of the DWFWriter for applications > that > > > can > > > > export DWF natively, those will always produce smaller DWF with the > > > highest > > > > possible fidelity. > > > > > > > > hth, > > > > > > > > > > > > g > > > > > > > > "Scott Sheppard" wrote in message > > > > news:40d9b293$1_1@newsprd01... > > > > > I don't think they want to compete against PDF for nonCAD. They want > > CAD > > > > > data to stay in DWF, so they can do intelligent processing on the > > > objects. > > > > I > > > > > think DWF Composer and DWF Writer are good for situations where you > > have > > > > 99 > > > > > DWGs and 1 Word DOC. You can make one DWF with all 100 items. If you > > > have > > > > 99 > > > > > DOCs and 1 DWG, even Autodesk would probably recommend that you make > a > > > PDF > > > > > for the Word parts and one small DWF for the DWG. People in the > > > newsgroup > > > > > seem to be apologetic when they mention PDF, e.g., "I'm sorry - I > have > > > to > > > > > use it.", but they shouldn't be. IMHO Autodesk is adamant about CAD > > data > > > > NOT > > > > > going to PDF. For other types of data, I don't think they care. > > > > > > > > > > "Rodney McManamy - CADzation" wrote in > > message > > > > > news:40d97b23_2@newsprd01... > > > > > > The DWF format is optimized for AutoCAD drawings. What we have > > > noticed > > > > is > > > > > > that anything from Word or Excel that uses gradiant fills, Word > Art, > > > > fancy > > > > > > text, or lot's of graphics does not convert well with the DWF > Writer > > > and > > > > > is > > > > > > typically as you said 3 or more times larger. The PDF on the > other > > > hand > > > > > is > > > > > > optimized for Word style documents and small format but doesn't > > > > understand > > > > > > shx fonts so it's larger on AutoCAD drawings. > > > > > > > > > > > > The DWF Writer is still fairly new (and was developed mainly to > > > support > > > > > > Revit and other non-AutoCAD CAD applications) and I'm sure will > get > > > > better > > > > > > at office documents because it's going to have to if they want it > to > > > > > really > > > > > > compete against the PDF. In the real world it's about more than > > just > > > > > > AutoCAD drawings that need to go to the client. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
*David Metcalf
Message 17 of 17 (102 Views)

Re: Word Docs

08-02-2004 09:42 AM in reply to: *David Metcalf
If I may step in.... IT guys do not necessarily set the standard, they are like politicians, they look at what people are moving to and lead the way. : ) We have a client with lease agents all over the USA. They are moving to DWF for publishing and markup of their properties. They will still use PDF for many instances. DWF is being used for design collaboration and to add a couple other formats i.e. Photos and DWF'd spreadsheets. These are execellent tools when setting prototyping or design requirements. Big plus is that they can markup photos, diagrams and have clear notes in electronic format into one document with comments. Just like a PDF. And no more smudged faxes and phone calls for clarifications. They still use PDF as a document standard, but DWF fulfills the design collaboration over long distances between the corp. office and leasing agents. Since viewers are free and embedded into IE, managers and executive officers can view properties in IE from the internal server with no CAD expertise as with PDF and that is a plus. If you know PDF you adopt and use DWF with almost no learning curve. Size differential isn't a great concern. Unless you factor in 10,000 plus design documents stored on the server for downloading or viewing. The number of downloading and viewing in the corporation have grown exponentially since the implementation of Mapguide and DWF. Hence, the adoption of DWF was an natural outcome since the use of graphical and database tools are based on the smaller and easy to use DWF format. Now the beef about Bentley, who cares? I don't know their user base percentage wise and since it is an engineering product, I am sure engineers being what they are, will make choice what is best to use. But if Bentley's actions are true about hiding the ability of using DWF format via the free download are true. They are doing their user base a disservice. Using a $500 acrobat distiller product or a free DWF driver should be left to the users. Back to real work. David "MichaelK" wrote in message news:40fc5c6a$1_1@newsprd01... > Fair enough. I too find these discussion beneficial. > > As for DPR, it used to be an Intergraph product and was sold years ago to > Bentley. Since then Bentley has changed the product and it does not require > server, while it does support server HTML viewing it also handles stand > alone viewing as well. The format it is based on was developed, I believe > in the early eighties, but it was then moved to DPR in the nineties. > > As for its resolution, it is comparable to PDF or DWF. I have never found > resolution an issue in a DPR file as a matter of fact it is so accurate that > we use its measuring tools and trust it without fail. It definitely is NOT > low TIFF at best and you might want to take a look at it again. > > I guess I will see how things pan out and save my judgment until my needs > surpass PDF capabilities. > > Regards, > Miken > > > "Shaan Hurley, Autodesk, Inc." wrote in message > news:40fc583b$1_1@newsprd01... > > Michael, > > > > Discussions are always beneficial and appreciated. > > > > I do get out from time to time and know the Acrobat team very well. In > fact > > I was the person that assisted the US Navy in publishing large format E > size > > PDF file back in the 90s when most everyone did not have Acrobat installed > > on their machines and they also could not plot a large format design > > document without a booklet. I have yet to see Bentley make any headway on > an > > electronic format of theirs, in fact they have publicly in the past told > > users to post the DGN and use their DGN viewer. Correct me if I am wrong > but > > the DPR was Intergraph and not Bentley. The Digital Print Room format was > > only developed in the late nineties long after DWF and PDF. The early DPR > > also required a server to serve up an HTML view of the document unlike PDF > > or DWF. I will also disagree on the DPR being superior to PDF or DWF as > the > > DPR views like a low resolution TIFF at best. > > > > In any case AutoCAD can publish either DWF or PDF but we did not embed a > > Adobe proprietary technology into our product at a cost to be passed on to > > the customers. We also felt it was the best option and format for design > > data to continue with the DWF format in our applications as have other non > > Autodesk CAD applications and viewers choosing DWF in their products. You > > have a choice and if you choose the DPR, PDF or DWF hopefully you will > > choosing based on their strengths and benefits and not just because your > > secretary has acrobat installed. > > > > Thank you for the discussion and I am not really out to get you to switch, > > just educating on what you may be missing if selecting PDF as your design > > document format. > > > > Cheers, > > -Shaan > > > > > > > > "MichaelK" wrote in message > > news:40fc4b56_3@newsprd01... > > > Your assuming DWF is always going to be better. I guess we just differ > on > > > that point because I am not just listening to the Bentley's either. I > > > spoke > > > to the technical guy at Adobe and he along with the AEC alliance group > are > > > committed to improving the format. Do you only see what AutoDesk feeds > > > you > > > are do you actually get out once in awhile? When I was at AutoDesk > > > University I talked to people about DWF and if I took a poll most users > > > will > > > say they use DWF to view and print the files and that is about it. So > > > where > > > is the benefit there? Sure it does much more but most users are not > > > taking > > > advantage of it yet, which really makes its use no different than a PDF > > > that > > > requires you to load a new viewer. > > > > > > You seem to ignore the fact that Bentley currently has a better solution > > > called DPR that even shows a user elements that have changed from one > DPR > > > File to the next and they are color coded based on what was deleted, > added > > > and changed. This too works on both DGN and DWG and they even have a > free > > > viewer that allows you to mark up and post. Yet they still CHOOSE to > > > listen > > > to their users that asked for this capability and then worked for the > > > industry leader to bring it to reality. > > > > > > It seems you also missed the point in the analogy because you would be > > > agreeing with me that improving a word processor to do more that type > text > > > was more efficient than creating a separate application for doing > graphics > > > another for doing bar charts and so on and so on... > > > > > > It sounds like the sugar coated water is being handed out at AutoDesk. > > > > > > > > > > >
Post to the Community

Have questions about Autodesk products? Ask the community.

New Post
Announcements
Do you have 60 seconds to spare? The Autodesk Community Team is revamping our site ranking system and we want your feedback! Please click here to launch the 5 question survey. As always your input is greatly appreciated.