"The way of the future! The way of the future! The way of the future! The way of the future!" - Autodesk, Dassault, H.Hughes
If Inventor (or SW for that matter) is supposed to be the way ahead... why is the "import autocad dwg" function still like the most important in the whole program? Why is the sketch mode not even up to par with a 10 year old version of ACAD LT? (I mean.. no layers? ever tried to offset anything in Inventor? It will just cry about what it can't do, while ACAD will just do it.)
Why can't this whole thing just become a tab on ACAD's ribbon instead of stupid work-around-seperate-program much like Inventor Fusion? Or hell, make ACAD the sketch mode... anything! Yes I know I'm supposed to "do it differently" and all that, but isn't it sad that you can better do a sketch in MS Paint then in these 3D programs... and they don't really offer a different way of making solids then sketch-extrude... so you'd think that sketch would be somewhat more advanced?
Sorry 'bout the rantr... just getting slightly fed up with all the calls from both Inventor and Solidworks about what they CAN'T do, find too complex etc. This way they're just a add-on to Mechanical or Draftsight (free ACAD LT! Why ever buy that again?!)... the way of the future... as long as you can handle the primitive sketch mode...
I think you will find that almost all Inventor users who were used to AutoCAD found the sketch mode difficult at first. However, I think you will also find that of those who stuck with it and learned what geometric constraints were, how sketches react to them and how to incorporate them into their sketches, most would prefer Inventor's method of sketching. I find nothing primative about it at all. In fact it is way more flexible that AutoCAD. Even now that AutoCAD has incorporated geometric constraints similar to Inventor. I would actually prefer AutoCAD to behave more like Inventor, including the offset method.
Why not just use it as you see fit? There is nobody saying "not" to use 2D or AutoCAD.
I am encouraged that they are linking ACAD more closely. It means they are allowing the user to define the work flow. (That's you)
All CAD tools have a different feel and utility. Do what you like the way you like to do it. You define that, not the software.
I have simultaneously used Inventor, AutoCAD, Illustrator, Paint, PowerPoint, SolidWorks, Acrobat, and more to get my designs and visual communication done. I didn't spend a lot of time wondering about what these tools couldn't do, I used them as I needed to get the jobs done. And usually, when I was frustrated with one, I would dig a little deeper and find out that I was wrong, learn a new skill, and prosper from that moment on.
I'm sure at some point carpenters had the big debate about screws vs. nails. One ancient way, and another more ancient way. Yet someone still invented the nail gun and improved the process. There is a nearly infinite way to combine tools and skills, this process never stops, be a part of it.
I have used AutoCAD for 20 years and now used Inventor for some 5 years. I dread even thinking about opening AutoCAD and using it. I and so much faster and actuate in Inventor. My customers want to see my designs in D so they can better understand.
Having switched to Inventor back on release 4 I doubt if I could go back to 2D. The first time I used IV, my reaction was the same as yours. Back then we didn't have CC or easy access to 3D models for a number of our components.
Different tools for different jobs, over time you will decide what works better for your enviroment.
Good training and an attitude for learning fixes everything.
If you want to draw - stick with AutoCAD. If you want to model in 3D Inventor is a great tool.
AutoCAD Drawing is NOT the same thing as Inventor sketching.
A sketch is only required to define the geometry. If you find youself wanting to use Layers to control your geometry in a sketch, you have probably put waaaay to much geometry into that sketch. Inventor sketching isn't primitive - it's simple. It doesn't need to be any more complicated than it is.
Check out this article by Curtis Waguespack:
And this one from my Blog:
Once you've got the concept of sketching you will realize that you are not comparing like with like!
Simple is nice yes... but you should see the complexity of most profiles we get here. The problem I'm hitting every time is that in the end we need to cut out a hole in the shape of them profiles, and then offset that same shape etc. Our workflow could easily be 3D, it could even be highly automated - if Inventor's offset didn't crap out at any distance beyond 0.2 mm.
if Inventor's offset didn't crap out at any distance beyond 0.2 mm.
More than likely, there is an entity of some sort that Inventor won't do an offset on, it could be a small radii that when offset the distance you desire, that radi no longer exists and Inventor isn't a mind reader so it doesn't know what to do.
Access a broad range of knowledge to help get the most out of your products and services.