I can see other CAD/CAM companies following suit (Do you hear me Solidworks!). Maybe one day Macs will be designed on MacPros.
Now if they could get the iPad with a much more sensitive screen to allow real drawing with pressure sensitivity built into the pen tip and desktop control a la Wacom Cintiq...
That aside Autocad is an crazy application. I had a friend teach it to me, but I had no vision for it. As in I could not build anything in 3D and all the tools got me more confused then I've ever been. I'd say it's like Photoshop on MAJOR Steroids. That said architects and engineers swear by that thing and I am happy it's coming to the mac.
Just had to plug myself here as iPad is for viewing. There was a thread a while back when someone got pissed at me for saying iPad was mostly for consuming info. Here is some more proof.
And again you are quite wrong. You are not seeing the picture. The iPad is very well suited for a lot of creative software, once they are programmed for this device, and infact a lot of productive and creative applications, which use the advantages of the iPad, already exist. In the case of 3D design Software you ought to have realized (since you mentioned that you got some teaching) it's all about working on a big screen or better multiple screens. You want to see the objects or scenes fron different ankles using muliple virtual cameras. And this of course does'n fit on an iPad. But this fact, does absolutely not imply, that the iPad is at a lack of usability for productive work. But what I can agree is to say, for a lot of consumption centered application the iPad is clearly better suited then a desktop or a laptop. But that's maybe my personal experience. And may as well be a liitle biased by my enthusiasm for this device.
1) Looks like the return of AutoDesk is distinctly tied to iDevices as much as it is to the Mac platform itself. Before anyone screams bloody murder, there is nothing wrong with this and it's far better than a developer pursing just the iOS instead of OS X. If anything, it proves how far Apple has come in creating a whole ecosystem that thrives in its diversity and possible applications of its technology.
2) I don't use CAD and have barely heard the term mentioned since my college days, but reading these comments reminds me of another product from my past: QuarkXpress. I get the impression that AutoCAD might be to CAD programs what QuarkXpress was to desktop publishing in the late 90's - the 800 lb. gorilla that everyone supported because they felt like they had to in order to compete but everyone also realized that it was getting long in the tooth and younger competition was nipping at its heels.
Just had to plug myself here as iPad is for viewing. There was a thread a while back when someone got pissed at me for saying iPad was mostly for consuming info. Here is some more proof.
That's really just a matter of timing. Desktop software makers have to rethink how people interact with software on a touchscreen instead of a keyboard and mouse. Apple's spent a long time on this and it's still incremental improvements... just look at iPhone as the early iPad. At first it didn't run apps, then it did, then copy and paste, then it had to learn how to multitask. This is all stuff that computers had done before, but Apple had to re-think it because it's a new form factor and they wanted a degree of quality in how it did these things.
Now software makers will have to do the same thing since it's not a direct port over type of situation, hence the delay in productivity applications. Few people knew for sure that it was even coming out earlier this year, then you have to wait and see if it's going to flop or not. Obviously it hasn't, and so now you've got the mystery of what OS 4 is going to do for it, and what can your software do with the processing power it has.
For people who want to port over iPhone apps, no big deal. For people who want to make apps that play video, surf the web, and do audio, no big deal. There's limited interaction you need to do. But with something like Photoshop or After Effects, well, there's just a lot more potential buttons in programs like that, and how you interact with those buttons, and how powerful those buttons can be has to be considered. Thus it leans excessively toward consumption apps for the time being. It's easier.
... but reading these comments reminds me of another product from my past: QuarkXpress. I get the impression that AutoCAD might be to CAD programs what QuarkXpress was to desktop publishing in the late 90's - the 800 lb. gorilla that everyone supported because they felt like they had to in order to compete but everyone also realized that it was getting long in the tooth and younger competition was nipping at its heels.
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.
In time, AutoCad dominated to such an extent that users were forced to use it for file compatibility alone. AutoDesk craftily published only a small portion of their file formats (DXF, DWG, now DWF) making simple file translations convoluted, difficult, time consuming and often inaccurate. There is an industry group that's tried to cajole AutoDesk into publishing their ENTIRE AutoCAD file format specs, with limited success.
There were and are far better CAD packages available, regardless of platform. On the Mac, Vectorworks and ArchiCAD are the leaders. I've used, trained and taught Vectorworks (once MiniCAD) for years.
Given AutoDesk's Mac history, I fail to be able to summon much enthusiasm for AutoCAD reappearing on the Mac, after a nearly 20 year absence. AutoDesk hasn't brought any of the applications they acquired (and superior to AutoCAD in their respective fields) to the Mac and why not? Yes, it is good for more developers to write software for the Mac, but AutoDesk has done no one any favors over the years. The only interesting software in their stable of titles has been in the form of acquisitions; shades of Microsoft!
One of the only reasons AutoDesk is coming back to the Mac is because of AutoCAD's steadily falling market share over the years. I believe it's somewhere in the high 40's percentage wise, all CAD packages, all platforms.
I had a copy of the first Mac AutoCAD (v12 or 14, I think. I have a copy that runs on Mac System 7) and it was dreadful. Word got around and it was avoided like the plague it was. I had the "opportunity" to use AutoCAD 2010 recently and they still don't get interface design. 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.
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.
If this "new" Mac AutoCAD is anything like their current Windows version, I expect a short life. Although there are enough switchers with seriously low expectations of software and interface quality, that it may trick enough users to gain a toe hold.
Also, I believe that SolidWorks announced that they're developing a Mac OS X version. Release date is unclear. Try Architosh for Mac CAD news. http://www.architosh.com
This is great news! We use AutoCAD for network design but has custom build additions. Thus we need all the scripting (such as LISP), database and similar stuff working.
There seems to be some here testing and knowing more. How about these things?
Seriously I hope so. AutoCad and 2D / quasi 3D, CAD is really under a lot of pressure from solid modeling programs and the like. I'd like to have a personal installation but if this gets well over a grand it would be hard to justify right now.
In any event the iPad/iPhone viewer would be fantastic. It would be nice to be able to stuff the entire catalog for a project in your pocket and have that info anywhere you might be.
On the requirements front, will this run on an imac circa 2006/2007 or am I just dreaming?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
It's all finally coming together. Next, bring on the CFD and FEA heavyweights.
Excuse my ignorance, but what are these?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffharris
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.
In time, AutoCad dominated to such an extent that users were forced to use it for file compatibility alone. AutoDesk craftily published only a small portion of their file formats (DXF, DWG, now DWF) making simple file translations convoluted, difficult, time consuming and often inaccurate. There is an industry group that's tried to cajole AutoDesk into publishing their ENTIRE AutoCAD file format specs, with limited success.
There were and are far better CAD packages available, regardless of platform. On the Mac, Vectorworks and ArchiCAD are the leaders. I've used, trained and taught Vectorworks (once MiniCAD) for years.
Given AutoDesk's Mac history, I fail to be able to summon much enthusiasm for AutoCAD reappearing on the Mac, after a nearly 20 year absence. AutoDesk hasn't brought any of the applications they acquired (and superior to AutoCAD in their respective fields) to the Mac and why not? Yes, it is good for more developers to write software for the Mac, but AutoDesk has done no one any favors over the years. The only interesting software in their stable of titles has been in the form of acquisitions; shades of Microsoft!
One of the only reasons AutoDesk is coming back to the Mac is because of AutoCAD's steadily falling market share over the years. I believe it's somewhere in the high 40's percentage wise, all CAD packages, all platforms.
I had a copy of the first Mac AutoCAD (v12 or 14, I think. I have a copy that runs on Mac System 7) and it was dreadful. Word got around and it was avoided like the plague it was. I had the "opportunity" to use AutoCAD 2010 recently and they still don't get interface design. 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.
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.
If this "new" Mac AutoCAD is anything like their current Windows version, I expect a short life. Although there are enough switchers with seriously low expectations of software and interface quality, that it may trick enough users to gain a toe hold.
Also, I believe that SolidWorks announced that they're developing a Mac OS X version. Release date is unclear. Try Architosh for Mac CAD news. http://www.architosh.com
Seriously I hope so. AutoCad and 2D / quasi 3D, CAD is really under a lot of pressure from solid modeling programs and the like. I'd like to have a personal installation but if this gets well over a grand it would be hard to justify right now.
In any event the iPad/iPhone viewer would be fantastic. It would be nice to be able to stuff the entire catalog for a project in your pocket and have that info anywhere you might be.
Dave
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. AutoCAD is also a beast to learn, if I take the opinions of AutoCAD using colleagues seriously.
If you're looking for a solid Mac 2D/3D CAD application with a reasonable price and learning curve, check out Vectorworks Fundamentals. VW is a solid modeler and uses the Parasolid engine.
Autodesk is bringing AutoCAD, its industry standard design software, back to the Mac in October. ...
Most of us who don't have to use it for our jobs gave up on AutoCad in the early 90's although I do understand the position this software has in the industry.
All I'm going to say is that if the comments from the beta people are accurate, and this is a great piece of software that's speedy, doesn't rip off the end user, has a logically and thoughtfully laid out UI, and actually adheres to the OS guidelines of the computer it's running on ...
... that this will be the first product of that kind from AutoDesk.
To put it to rest. Yes it is. With enough time I agree that iPad can become used equally for creating and consuming info. For now I stand by my point and agree to disagree.
I have several friends who are engineers and one in particular who's been seriously considering buying an iPad, but this app could easily be the killer app that makes him pull the trigger. The ability to easily view and change his Autocad files at a jobsite would be irresistable.
Autodesk seems to be getting a lot more aggressive on the mac side than they were before. Didn't they release Smoke recently on OSX too?
Yes they did, and it is a wonderful option to have Smoke on something other than finicky Linux. We haven't installed it at our facility yet, but we will eventually.
That aside Autocad is an crazy application. I had a friend teach it to me, but I had no vision for it. As in I could not build anything in 3D and all the tools got me more confused then I've ever been. I'd say it's like Photoshop on MAJOR Steroids. That said architects and engineers swear by that thing and I am happy it's coming to the mac.
Just had to plug myself here as iPad is for viewing. There was a thread a while back when someone got pissed at me for saying iPad was mostly for consuming info. Here is some more proof.
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.
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.
"The pain inflicted by blatant UI flaws such as black background color and yellow and orange text is strangely transformed into the rewarding experience of feeling and looking like a hard-core professional... The Bloomberg Terminal interface looks terrible, but it allows traders and other users to pretend you need to be experienced and knowledgeable to use it."
Comments
Now if they could get the iPad with a much more sensitive screen to allow real drawing with pressure sensitivity built into the pen tip and desktop control a la Wacom Cintiq...
That aside Autocad is an crazy application. I had a friend teach it to me, but I had no vision for it. As in I could not build anything in 3D and all the tools got me more confused then I've ever been. I'd say it's like Photoshop on MAJOR Steroids. That said architects and engineers swear by that thing and I am happy it's coming to the mac.
Just had to plug myself here as iPad is for viewing. There was a thread a while back when someone got pissed at me for saying iPad was mostly for consuming info. Here is some more proof.
And again you are quite wrong. You are not seeing the picture. The iPad is very well suited for a lot of creative software, once they are programmed for this device, and infact a lot of productive and creative applications, which use the advantages of the iPad, already exist. In the case of 3D design Software you ought to have realized (since you mentioned that you got some teaching) it's all about working on a big screen or better multiple screens. You want to see the objects or scenes fron different ankles using muliple virtual cameras. And this of course does'n fit on an iPad. But this fact, does absolutely not imply, that the iPad is at a lack of usability for productive work. But what I can agree is to say, for a lot of consumption centered application the iPad is clearly better suited then a desktop or a laptop. But that's maybe my personal experience. And may as well be a liitle biased by my enthusiasm for this device.
2) I don't use CAD and have barely heard the term mentioned since my college days, but reading these comments reminds me of another product from my past: QuarkXpress. I get the impression that AutoCAD might be to CAD programs what QuarkXpress was to desktop publishing in the late 90's - the 800 lb. gorilla that everyone supported because they felt like they had to in order to compete but everyone also realized that it was getting long in the tooth and younger competition was nipping at its heels.
Just had to plug myself here as iPad is for viewing. There was a thread a while back when someone got pissed at me for saying iPad was mostly for consuming info. Here is some more proof.
That's really just a matter of timing. Desktop software makers have to rethink how people interact with software on a touchscreen instead of a keyboard and mouse. Apple's spent a long time on this and it's still incremental improvements... just look at iPhone as the early iPad. At first it didn't run apps, then it did, then copy and paste, then it had to learn how to multitask. This is all stuff that computers had done before, but Apple had to re-think it because it's a new form factor and they wanted a degree of quality in how it did these things.
Now software makers will have to do the same thing since it's not a direct port over type of situation, hence the delay in productivity applications. Few people knew for sure that it was even coming out earlier this year, then you have to wait and see if it's going to flop or not. Obviously it hasn't, and so now you've got the mystery of what OS 4 is going to do for it, and what can your software do with the processing power it has.
For people who want to port over iPhone apps, no big deal. For people who want to make apps that play video, surf the web, and do audio, no big deal. There's limited interaction you need to do. But with something like Photoshop or After Effects, well, there's just a lot more potential buttons in programs like that, and how you interact with those buttons, and how powerful those buttons can be has to be considered. Thus it leans excessively toward consumption apps for the time being. It's easier.
... but reading these comments reminds me of another product from my past: QuarkXpress. I get the impression that AutoCAD might be to CAD programs what QuarkXpress was to desktop publishing in the late 90's - the 800 lb. gorilla that everyone supported because they felt like they had to in order to compete but everyone also realized that it was getting long in the tooth and younger competition was nipping at its heels.
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.
In time, AutoCad dominated to such an extent that users were forced to use it for file compatibility alone. AutoDesk craftily published only a small portion of their file formats (DXF, DWG, now DWF) making simple file translations convoluted, difficult, time consuming and often inaccurate. There is an industry group that's tried to cajole AutoDesk into publishing their ENTIRE AutoCAD file format specs, with limited success.
There were and are far better CAD packages available, regardless of platform. On the Mac, Vectorworks and ArchiCAD are the leaders. I've used, trained and taught Vectorworks (once MiniCAD) for years.
Given AutoDesk's Mac history, I fail to be able to summon much enthusiasm for AutoCAD reappearing on the Mac, after a nearly 20 year absence. AutoDesk hasn't brought any of the applications they acquired (and superior to AutoCAD in their respective fields) to the Mac and why not? Yes, it is good for more developers to write software for the Mac, but AutoDesk has done no one any favors over the years. The only interesting software in their stable of titles has been in the form of acquisitions; shades of Microsoft!
One of the only reasons AutoDesk is coming back to the Mac is because of AutoCAD's steadily falling market share over the years. I believe it's somewhere in the high 40's percentage wise, all CAD packages, all platforms.
I had a copy of the first Mac AutoCAD (v12 or 14, I think. I have a copy that runs on Mac System 7) and it was dreadful. Word got around and it was avoided like the plague it was. I had the "opportunity" to use AutoCAD 2010 recently and they still don't get interface design. 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.
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.
If this "new" Mac AutoCAD is anything like their current Windows version, I expect a short life. Although there are enough switchers with seriously low expectations of software and interface quality, that it may trick enough users to gain a toe hold.
Also, I believe that SolidWorks announced that they're developing a Mac OS X version. Release date is unclear. Try Architosh for Mac CAD news. http://www.architosh.com
There seems to be some here testing and knowing more. How about these things?
... the day AutoCad left and though some may not have liked it, this is actually big news in my field!
This means for many that Mac is really back to stay and the iPad is going to be every engineer and architect's favorite tool.
I agree. I guess we can say AutoCad are nervous Microsoft are going to be around in the future and need a stable platform ... (couldn't resist)
In any event the iPad/iPhone viewer would be fantastic. It would be nice to be able to stuff the entire catalog for a project in your pocket and have that info anywhere you might be.
Dave
It's all finally coming together. Next, bring on the CFD and FEA heavyweights.
I hope so too. But I have a feeling that won't happen any time soon.
It's all finally coming together. Next, bring on the CFD and FEA heavyweights.
Excuse my ignorance, but what are these?
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.
In time, AutoCad dominated to such an extent that users were forced to use it for file compatibility alone. AutoDesk craftily published only a small portion of their file formats (DXF, DWG, now DWF) making simple file translations convoluted, difficult, time consuming and often inaccurate. There is an industry group that's tried to cajole AutoDesk into publishing their ENTIRE AutoCAD file format specs, with limited success.
There were and are far better CAD packages available, regardless of platform. On the Mac, Vectorworks and ArchiCAD are the leaders. I've used, trained and taught Vectorworks (once MiniCAD) for years.
Given AutoDesk's Mac history, I fail to be able to summon much enthusiasm for AutoCAD reappearing on the Mac, after a nearly 20 year absence. AutoDesk hasn't brought any of the applications they acquired (and superior to AutoCAD in their respective fields) to the Mac and why not? Yes, it is good for more developers to write software for the Mac, but AutoDesk has done no one any favors over the years. The only interesting software in their stable of titles has been in the form of acquisitions; shades of Microsoft!
One of the only reasons AutoDesk is coming back to the Mac is because of AutoCAD's steadily falling market share over the years. I believe it's somewhere in the high 40's percentage wise, all CAD packages, all platforms.
I had a copy of the first Mac AutoCAD (v12 or 14, I think. I have a copy that runs on Mac System 7) and it was dreadful. Word got around and it was avoided like the plague it was. I had the "opportunity" to use AutoCAD 2010 recently and they still don't get interface design. 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.
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.
If this "new" Mac AutoCAD is anything like their current Windows version, I expect a short life. Although there are enough switchers with seriously low expectations of software and interface quality, that it may trick enough users to gain a toe hold.
Also, I believe that SolidWorks announced that they're developing a Mac OS X version. Release date is unclear. Try Architosh for Mac CAD news. http://www.architosh.com
Thanks for the excellent post.
Seriously I hope so. AutoCad and 2D / quasi 3D, CAD is really under a lot of pressure from solid modeling programs and the like. I'd like to have a personal installation but if this gets well over a grand it would be hard to justify right now.
In any event the iPad/iPhone viewer would be fantastic. It would be nice to be able to stuff the entire catalog for a project in your pocket and have that info anywhere you might be.
Dave
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. AutoCAD is also a beast to learn, if I take the opinions of AutoCAD using colleagues seriously.
If you're looking for a solid Mac 2D/3D CAD application with a reasonable price and learning curve, check out Vectorworks Fundamentals. VW is a solid modeler and uses the Parasolid engine.
http://www.nemetschek.net/fundamentals/index.php
Autodesk is bringing AutoCAD, its industry standard design software, back to the Mac in October. ...
Most of us who don't have to use it for our jobs gave up on AutoCad in the early 90's although I do understand the position this software has in the industry.
All I'm going to say is that if the comments from the beta people are accurate, and this is a great piece of software that's speedy, doesn't rip off the end user, has a logically and thoughtfully laid out UI, and actually adheres to the OS guidelines of the computer it's running on ...
... that this will be the first product of that kind from AutoDesk.
And again you are quite wrong.
That's really just a matter of timing.
To put it to rest. Yes it is. With enough time I agree that iPad can become used equally for creating and consuming info. For now I stand by my point and agree to disagree.
Edit: Found another disagreer.
Excuse my ignorance, but what are these?
Computational Fluid Dynamics and Finite Element Analysis.
Autodesk seems to be getting a lot more aggressive on the mac side than they were before. Didn't they release Smoke recently on OSX too?
Yes they did, and it is a wonderful option to have Smoke on something other than finicky Linux. We haven't installed it at our facility yet, but we will eventually.
That aside Autocad is an crazy application. I had a friend teach it to me, but I had no vision for it. As in I could not build anything in 3D and all the tools got me more confused then I've ever been. I'd say it's like Photoshop on MAJOR Steroids. That said architects and engineers swear by that thing and I am happy it's coming to the mac.
Just had to plug myself here as iPad is for viewing. There was a thread a while back when someone got pissed at me for saying iPad was mostly for consuming info. Here is some more proof.
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.
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.
Not that this is Mac-related, but the situation you describe sounds a lot like the Bloomberg trader's terminal:
"The pain inflicted by blatant UI flaws such as black background color and yellow and orange text is strangely transformed into the rewarding experience of feeling and looking like a hard-core professional... The Bloomberg Terminal interface looks terrible, but it allows traders and other users to pretend you need to be experienced and knowledgeable to use it."