I saw a video of a doctor using an iPad during surgery to view the endoscope images/ pinch to zoom etc as needed. Not sure if he was creating content by using the iPad to generate real time video or consuming content by using the video as he performed the surgery. He was definitely doing serious work.
The last I heard, AutoCAD is 2D only and it costs another $3000 or so for 3D. That may be from years ago, so I could be wrong there.
I think more like decades. The main reason some people have said it wasn't 3D is that the regular version doesn't support full solid modeling, which has been broken off into add-on packages. To me, that's a lot more subtle distinction than saying "not 3D". There was a 2D-only version, didn't support 3D in any form, but it was called "Lite".
Quote:
AutoCAD is also a beast to learn, if I take the opinions of AutoCAD using colleagues seriously.
AutoCAD has never seemed to be that hard to learn, but maybe it depends on what you're trying to do with it. I've never had this CAD elitism to think that other packages can't be good because they're easy, in some cases it might be true, but whatever.
I think more like decades. The main reason some people have said it wasn't 3D is that the regular version doesn't support full solid modeling, which has been broken off into add-on packages. To me, that's a lot more subtle distinction than saying "not 3D". There was a 2D-only version, didn't support 3D in any form, but it was called "Lite".
AutoCAD has never seemed to be that hard to learn, but maybe it depends on what you're trying to do with it. I've never had this CAD elitism to think that other packages can't be good because they're easy, in some cases it might be true, but whatever.
I think most CAD programs can be hard to learn for people who are not or have never been exposed to Linear Algebra, Multi-variable Calculus and Vector Spaces where the x-y-z coordinate system is like breathing to one who has that background.
I suppose this is good news if only to push Bentley into the same direction. At my company we use Microstation and it's add ons 95% of the time. We keep AutoCAD for compatibility with those few vendors that still use it. I haven't had a CAD program at home since I switched to a Mac.
I think most CAD programs can be hard to learn for people who are not or have never been exposed to Linear Algebra, Multi-variable Calculus and Vector Spaces where the x-y-z coordinate system is like breathing to one who has that background.
That may very well be part of it, though I think it's more basic, if you don't get geometry then it's going to be confusing. It helps to have started with drafting first. I learned AutoCAD, both 2D & 3D, in a high school class, a few years before I learned those fields of math in college. MV Calc and its vector math did help me understand how the software did its job.
Like nearly any specialization, there are complexities to overcome and one might say it requires some talents too.
I have to admit, I really dislike Autodesk, but this is great news for Apple.
I used a version of AutoCAD back in the 90s and hated every minute of it. Talk about user unfriendly. Also, how stupid must they be to wait this long to offer a version of their software that people have been requesting and willing to pay for? They are backward.
Happy to see Autodesk finally taking action. Hopefully it doesn't turn out like the other program I need Parallels for (Quickbooks).
That said, I think it is time for Autodesk to grow up on AutoCAD licensing. I know they have a lot to loose from casual piracy, but they either need to drop price by 20-30% (to justify purchasing 15-20% more seats) or loosen up the issues with their license systems.
...and the fact that there is no dual-licensing for Revit and AutoCAD is really stupid for architectural engineers.
You're absolutely correct. AutoCAD, like it's platform of choice Windows, is a bloated, over-priced, ugly, byzantine, entrenched beast. It became "the industry standard" simply because it was first.
snip
Quote:
Too many clicks, too much mousing around, with some ancient command line stuff stirred in. It remains the perfect by-and-for engineer's tool: difficult, opaque and ridiculously complex to use.
Its a clunky dinosaur hacked and patched and adapted to do all sorts of things it was never intended to do ...yet .. for all its obtuse clunkiness and beegesus awful interface it remains the industry standard. Why? Its mind boggling. I agree with the assessment that perverse machismo idiocy mindset. Like an "in club" of sorts complete with software hazing.
There is not a single worthwhile CAD app out there which is not brain bending difficult to learn and infinitely complex in use. There is no need to add to the problem by using a program which is the software equivalent of a Model T patched to run on a modern interstate.
Nonetheless, because it is the industry standard, others will follow and that will be a good thing for the Mac.
I've been working professionally with AutoCAD and MicroStation for 18 years... I've taught AutoCAD to inner-city youth for 6 years, full time. Whomever said that AutoCAD is 2D only is wrong. I've been 3D modeling with AutoCAD since release 12 (1992?). I wouldn't say AutoCAD is great for 3D modeling, but you can create fairly elaborate stuff, you'd be amazed.
AutoCAD can do wireframe, surface, and solid modeling. It does NOT offer parametric solid modeling however... that requires a little bit different kind of software like Pro-engineer, or Solidworks, etc.
AutoCAD is very difficult to learn and use because AutoDESK designs half-assed features to sell the newest version, then "fixes" them with enhanced future releases. The company is money-grubbing and have never really cared about the complexity / user-unfriendliness of their software. Here's why.
AutoCAD is marketed to nerdy engineer professionals. People who thrive in complex environments and are pretty smart already. AutoCAD takes some serious training to learn and use professionally. My tech school I taught at was 1 year, 30+ hours per week, and we still didn't have proper time to get into some of the higher end features.
I'm kinda glad AutoCAD is such a difficult program. It acts like a filter for those who don't have the technical brains to work in the Engineering Drawing industry. Plus, if it was easier to use, I'd get paid less because you could hire any old joker who took a weekend seminar to do it.
On one hand AutoCAD sucks ass, on the other I've made plenty of money off of it!
I'm glad it's coming to Mac. Now all I need is MS Publisher on Mac (although Swift Publisher is a nice alternative) and I can get rid of my PC entirely.
The machine requirements for AC for Mac are more than a MP 2.66 rev 1.1 with standard graphics card. You mean my 2500$ Mac won't run this program? Yes-sir-ree it won't.
I'm kinda glad AutoCAD is such a difficult program. It acts like a filter for those who don't have the technical brains to work in the Engineering Drawing industry. Plus, if it was easier to use, I'd get paid less because you could hire any old joker who took a weekend seminar to do it.
On one hand AutoCAD sucks ass, on the other I've made plenty of money off of it!
Is exactly the "Having worked with tons of AutoCAD users over the years, there's a kind of prevalent and twisted machismo attitude, that if a thing isn't difficult to do, if the work is actually enjoyable, it's not "real work" and therefore invalid. These are the types who scoffed at the "toy" Mac for years."
Quoted earlier which is utter nonsense. A programs ease of use translates into productivity, not a filter. How long does it take a given person to accomplish a given task in how many steps? I'm a builder. I actually build what I design. My customers need the job done. I don't need to spend more hours at the computer wrangling with an out of date dinosaur to complete a set of prints just to prove some sort of perverse macho nerdiness.
Is exactly the "Having worked with tons of AutoCAD users over the years, there's a kind of prevalent and twisted machismo attitude, that if a thing isn't difficult to do, if the work is actually enjoyable, it's not "real work" and therefore invalid. These are the types who scoffed at the "toy" Mac for years."
Quoted earlier which is utter nonsense. A programs ease of use translates into productivity, not a filter. How long does it take a given person to accomplish a given task in how many steps? I'm a builder. I actually build what I design. My customers need the job done. I don't need to spend more hours at the computer wrangling with an out of date dinosaur to complete a set of prints just to prove some sort of perverse macho nerdiness.
That was my quote.
Anyway, I'm a lapsed sculptor who came to CAD as a design builder, so I know where you're coming from. (I have next to zero math skills, so when I run out of toes, I'm fucked). I bought MiniCAD 2.0 back in early 1990 (became Vectorworks) for my Mac and taught myself how to use it.
I've worked on many a project as a designer or project manager and watched the hoops AutoCADets leap through to accomplish the simplest things... like dimension something. I'm talking from AutoCAD 11 to the current version. Even setting up a drawing or sketch to print was an exercise in misery. If it wasn't so damned inefficient, it would actually be quite hilarious.
These days in addition to designing (and even occasionally building) I teach Vectorworks and have trained quite a few AutoCAD refugees, who over-think every little thing. Once they get the ease, spontaneity and straightforwardness of the Mac and Vectorworks, it's as if they've been released from prison. A few never get it.
It amazes me that such a bestial kludge as AutoCAD/Windows could be considered "the standard". Thank whatever Gods there are that it's changing.
I think most CAD programs can be hard to learn for people who are not or have never been exposed to Linear Algebra, Multi-variable Calculus and Vector Spaces where the x-y-z coordinate system is like breathing to one who has that background.
Linear Algebra, Multi-variable Calculus and Vector Spaces?
WTF is that? You can't be serious.
If I need complex structural crap worked out, I hire an engineer.
I think most CAD programs can be hard to learn for people who are not or have never been exposed to Linear Algebra, Multi-variable Calculus and Vector Spaces where the x-y-z coordinate system is like breathing to one who has that background.
Lives x-y-z coordinate space. Its what you do.
Another thought about AutoDesks motivation ... if you look at Geekbench ..while there are a few high end workstations reporting results which run Windows ..the vast majority of kick ass high end machines are .. Mac Pro's. They are simply the most accessible and affordable high end workstation on the market .. not custom made but ready to go out of the box.
If they have complied AC Mac to utilize all the cores available ... a 12 core workstation is pretty tempting candy for machismo AC nerds.
Anyway, I'm a lapsed sculptor who came to CAD as a design builder, so I know where you're coming from. (I have next to zero math skills, so when I run out of toes, I'm fucked). I bought MiniCAD 2.0 back in early 1990 (became Vectorworks) for my Mac and taught myself how to use it.
I've worked on many a project as a designer or project manager and watched the hoops AutoCADets leap through to accomplish the simplest things... like dimension something. I'm talking from AutoCAD 11 to the current version. Even setting up a drawing or sketch to print was an exercise in misery. If it wasn't so damned inefficient, it would actually be quite hilarious.
These days in addition to designing (and even occasionally building) I teach Vectorworks and have trained quite a few AutoCAD refugees, who over-think every little thing. Once they get the ease, spontaneity and straightforwardness of the Mac and Vectorworks, it's as if they've been released from prison. A few never get it.
It amazes me that such a bestial kludge as AutoCAD/Windows could be considered "the standard". Thank whatever Gods there are that it's changing.
Yeah, AutoCAD has a lot of commands you HAVE to use command line for. Or it's better or quicker at least. And for most, there is no excuse. Just seems they are lazy. Bringing it to Mac could result in a "better" AutoCAD. That would be cool for everyone.
Comments
I saw a video of a doctor using an iPad during surgery to view the endoscope images/ pinch to zoom etc as needed. Not sure if he was creating content by using the iPad to generate real time video or consuming content by using the video as he performed the surgery. He was definitely doing serious work.
The correct term is "medical tricorder"
The correct term is "medical tricorder"
I stand corrected. Now if there was an app for making tea, earl grey, hot.
The last I heard, AutoCAD is 2D only and it costs another $3000 or so for 3D. That may be from years ago, so I could be wrong there.
I think more like decades. The main reason some people have said it wasn't 3D is that the regular version doesn't support full solid modeling, which has been broken off into add-on packages. To me, that's a lot more subtle distinction than saying "not 3D". There was a 2D-only version, didn't support 3D in any form, but it was called "Lite".
AutoCAD is also a beast to learn, if I take the opinions of AutoCAD using colleagues seriously.
AutoCAD has never seemed to be that hard to learn, but maybe it depends on what you're trying to do with it. I've never had this CAD elitism to think that other packages can't be good because they're easy, in some cases it might be true, but whatever.
On the requirements front, will this run on an imac circa 2006/2007 or am I just dreaming?
Excuse my ignorance, but what are these?
Thanks for the excellent post.
CFD-- Computational Fluid Dynamics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computa...fluid_dynamics
FEA-- Finite Element Analysis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite_element_method
Applications:
ANSYS 12: http://www.ansys.com/products/default.asp
ANSYS Fluent: http://www.fluent.com/solutions/whatcfd.htm
Pro/ENGINEER: http://www.ptc.com/products/proengineer/
ALGOR[owned by Autodesk]: http://www.algor.com/
I think more like decades. The main reason some people have said it wasn't 3D is that the regular version doesn't support full solid modeling, which has been broken off into add-on packages. To me, that's a lot more subtle distinction than saying "not 3D". There was a 2D-only version, didn't support 3D in any form, but it was called "Lite".
AutoCAD has never seemed to be that hard to learn, but maybe it depends on what you're trying to do with it. I've never had this CAD elitism to think that other packages can't be good because they're easy, in some cases it might be true, but whatever.
I think most CAD programs can be hard to learn for people who are not or have never been exposed to Linear Algebra, Multi-variable Calculus and Vector Spaces where the x-y-z coordinate system is like breathing to one who has that background.
I think most CAD programs can be hard to learn for people who are not or have never been exposed to Linear Algebra, Multi-variable Calculus and Vector Spaces where the x-y-z coordinate system is like breathing to one who has that background.
That may very well be part of it, though I think it's more basic, if you don't get geometry then it's going to be confusing. It helps to have started with drafting first. I learned AutoCAD, both 2D & 3D, in a high school class, a few years before I learned those fields of math in college. MV Calc and its vector math did help me understand how the software did its job.
Like nearly any specialization, there are complexities to overcome and one might say it requires some talents too.
I have to admit, I really dislike Autodesk, but this is great news for Apple.
I used a version of AutoCAD back in the 90s and hated every minute of it. Talk about user unfriendly. Also, how stupid must they be to wait this long to offer a version of their software that people have been requesting and willing to pay for? They are backward.
That said, I think it is time for Autodesk to grow up on AutoCAD licensing. I know they have a lot to loose from casual piracy, but they either need to drop price by 20-30% (to justify purchasing 15-20% more seats) or loosen up the issues with their license systems.
...and the fact that there is no dual-licensing for Revit and AutoCAD is really stupid for architectural engineers.
You're absolutely correct. AutoCAD, like it's platform of choice Windows, is a bloated, over-priced, ugly, byzantine, entrenched beast. It became "the industry standard" simply because it was first.
snip
Too many clicks, too much mousing around, with some ancient command line stuff stirred in. It remains the perfect by-and-for engineer's tool: difficult, opaque and ridiculously complex to use.
Bingo! Obtuse in a word
Try Architosh for Mac CAD news. http://www.architosh.com
Its a clunky dinosaur hacked and patched and adapted to do all sorts of things it was never intended to do ...yet .. for all its obtuse clunkiness and beegesus awful interface it remains the industry standard. Why? Its mind boggling. I agree with the assessment that perverse machismo idiocy mindset. Like an "in club" of sorts complete with software hazing.
There is not a single worthwhile CAD app out there which is not brain bending difficult to learn and infinitely complex in use. There is no need to add to the problem by using a program which is the software equivalent of a Model T patched to run on a modern interstate.
Nonetheless, because it is the industry standard, others will follow and that will be a good thing for the Mac.
AutoCAD can do wireframe, surface, and solid modeling. It does NOT offer parametric solid modeling however... that requires a little bit different kind of software like Pro-engineer, or Solidworks, etc.
AutoCAD is very difficult to learn and use because AutoDESK designs half-assed features to sell the newest version, then "fixes" them with enhanced future releases. The company is money-grubbing and have never really cared about the complexity / user-unfriendliness of their software. Here's why.
AutoCAD is marketed to nerdy engineer professionals. People who thrive in complex environments and are pretty smart already. AutoCAD takes some serious training to learn and use professionally. My tech school I taught at was 1 year, 30+ hours per week, and we still didn't have proper time to get into some of the higher end features.
I'm kinda glad AutoCAD is such a difficult program. It acts like a filter for those who don't have the technical brains to work in the Engineering Drawing industry. Plus, if it was easier to use, I'd get paid less because you could hire any old joker who took a weekend seminar to do it.
On one hand AutoCAD sucks ass, on the other I've made plenty of money off of it!
I'm glad it's coming to Mac. Now all I need is MS Publisher on Mac (although Swift Publisher is a nice alternative) and I can get rid of my PC entirely.
How do I know this?
Been testing this thing for the past 3 months.
It basically sucks.
Sorry to rain on your parade.
I'm kinda glad AutoCAD is such a difficult program. It acts like a filter for those who don't have the technical brains to work in the Engineering Drawing industry. Plus, if it was easier to use, I'd get paid less because you could hire any old joker who took a weekend seminar to do it.
On one hand AutoCAD sucks ass, on the other I've made plenty of money off of it!
Is exactly the "Having worked with tons of AutoCAD users over the years, there's a kind of prevalent and twisted machismo attitude, that if a thing isn't difficult to do, if the work is actually enjoyable, it's not "real work" and therefore invalid. These are the types who scoffed at the "toy" Mac for years."
Quoted earlier which is utter nonsense. A programs ease of use translates into productivity, not a filter. How long does it take a given person to accomplish a given task in how many steps? I'm a builder. I actually build what I design. My customers need the job done. I don't need to spend more hours at the computer wrangling with an out of date dinosaur to complete a set of prints just to prove some sort of perverse macho nerdiness.
"It just works" comes to AutoCAD users. Welcome to Macintosh. Your nightmare is over
That's valid, except for the AutoCAD part of the equation.
AutoCAD, it just HURTS.
Is exactly the "Having worked with tons of AutoCAD users over the years, there's a kind of prevalent and twisted machismo attitude, that if a thing isn't difficult to do, if the work is actually enjoyable, it's not "real work" and therefore invalid. These are the types who scoffed at the "toy" Mac for years."
Quoted earlier which is utter nonsense. A programs ease of use translates into productivity, not a filter. How long does it take a given person to accomplish a given task in how many steps? I'm a builder. I actually build what I design. My customers need the job done. I don't need to spend more hours at the computer wrangling with an out of date dinosaur to complete a set of prints just to prove some sort of perverse macho nerdiness.
That was my quote.
Anyway, I'm a lapsed sculptor who came to CAD as a design builder, so I know where you're coming from. (I have next to zero math skills, so when I run out of toes, I'm fucked). I bought MiniCAD 2.0 back in early 1990 (became Vectorworks) for my Mac and taught myself how to use it.
I've worked on many a project as a designer or project manager and watched the hoops AutoCADets leap through to accomplish the simplest things... like dimension something. I'm talking from AutoCAD 11 to the current version. Even setting up a drawing or sketch to print was an exercise in misery. If it wasn't so damned inefficient, it would actually be quite hilarious.
These days in addition to designing (and even occasionally building) I teach Vectorworks and have trained quite a few AutoCAD refugees, who over-think every little thing. Once they get the ease, spontaneity and straightforwardness of the Mac and Vectorworks, it's as if they've been released from prison. A few never get it.
It amazes me that such a bestial kludge as AutoCAD/Windows could be considered "the standard". Thank whatever Gods there are that it's changing.
I think most CAD programs can be hard to learn for people who are not or have never been exposed to Linear Algebra, Multi-variable Calculus and Vector Spaces where the x-y-z coordinate system is like breathing to one who has that background.
Linear Algebra, Multi-variable Calculus and Vector Spaces?
WTF is that? You can't be serious.
If I need complex structural crap worked out, I hire an engineer.
I think most CAD programs can be hard to learn for people who are not or have never been exposed to Linear Algebra, Multi-variable Calculus and Vector Spaces where the x-y-z coordinate system is like breathing to one who has that background.
Lives x-y-z coordinate space. Its what you do.
Another thought about AutoDesks motivation ... if you look at Geekbench ..while there are a few high end workstations reporting results which run Windows ..the vast majority of kick ass high end machines are .. Mac Pro's. They are simply the most accessible and affordable high end workstation on the market .. not custom made but ready to go out of the box.
If they have complied AC Mac to utilize all the cores available ... a 12 core workstation is pretty tempting candy for machismo AC nerds.
"It just works" comes to AutoCAD users. Welcome to Macintosh. Your nightmare is over
Exactly. Now all we need is ArcGIS!
That was my quote.
Anyway, I'm a lapsed sculptor who came to CAD as a design builder, so I know where you're coming from. (I have next to zero math skills, so when I run out of toes, I'm fucked). I bought MiniCAD 2.0 back in early 1990 (became Vectorworks) for my Mac and taught myself how to use it.
I've worked on many a project as a designer or project manager and watched the hoops AutoCADets leap through to accomplish the simplest things... like dimension something. I'm talking from AutoCAD 11 to the current version. Even setting up a drawing or sketch to print was an exercise in misery. If it wasn't so damned inefficient, it would actually be quite hilarious.
These days in addition to designing (and even occasionally building) I teach Vectorworks and have trained quite a few AutoCAD refugees, who over-think every little thing. Once they get the ease, spontaneity and straightforwardness of the Mac and Vectorworks, it's as if they've been released from prison. A few never get it.
It amazes me that such a bestial kludge as AutoCAD/Windows could be considered "the standard". Thank whatever Gods there are that it's changing.
Yeah, AutoCAD has a lot of commands you HAVE to use command line for. Or it's better or quicker at least. And for most, there is no excuse. Just seems they are lazy. Bringing it to Mac could result in a "better" AutoCAD. That would be cool for everyone.