MCADCafe
   >> MCAD User News and Reviews
Thread views: 85725 View all threadsNext thread*Threaded Mode

Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | (show all)

(Unregistered)
11/15/05 08:13 AM
3D MCAD: Thoughts from an old timer Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

3D MCAD: Thoughts from an old timer

Use this link to read the full article

Tom L
(Unregistered)
11/15/05 12:08 PM
'3D MCAD: Thoughts from an old timer' new Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

Finally! a voice of reason. God Bless Dave.

S Shaffer
(Unregistered)
11/16/05 05:02 AM
3D MCAD: Thoughts from an old timer new Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

I have been a user of IronCAD since it's eary days ( 1997 ) when it was "3D Eye TriSpectivies". It truly is the most flexible and easy to use 3D CAD package available.

caduser2
(Unregistered)
11/16/05 06:10 AM
My opinion on IronCad and the CAD market new Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

Dave, Your article is pretty good and display your common sense for choosing the "right tool" for the right job so to speak. I also used TriSpective ver. 2.0 and it was fun, but also difficult to sketch and create things precise for the most part back then, after all this years of developments and new releases I suspect the product is more robust, but back then the Drafting was almost useless and parts were disjoined or booleans didn't work like they should, plus sheetmetal didn't exist. I've used about any cad out there and I think in this competitive market for being in the lead companies like the one that owns IronCad need to offer they product cheaper to be in everybody's desks, at least if their names or brand are not easily known or recognized. My advice for them is to sell their product at discounted prices and get in the door of every small business, schools, etc. By the way I visited IronCad website after being told that you could easily download a working demo, but that was not the case. And what is happening to them has also happened to the old Cadkey, one of my first cad tools, poor marketing and not keeping up with market trends(Parametrics, come to mind), Assemblies, Sheetmetal, BOM, etc. My 2 cents, Eddy

Richard
(Unregistered)
11/16/05 05:17 PM
Thoughts From an Old Timer in Australia new Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

Dave, you hit the nail right on the head, but I do we have to have a program that takes away the skills of Design? I did not create any 3D drawings in version 12, but did 50% of a major defense project in 3D with "good old release 14". The process of 3D creation, and my limited timeline, made me think 2 steps ahead, made work a joy, and ultimately shaved many, many months off the project. I am an advocate of AutoCAD, even if it's 3D capabilities are somewhat primitave to other CAD programs around. I have tried others, but have found the learning curve longer than I would consider acceptable. Given one had the time and backing, these programs are great and worth the investment, but are not suitable for a lot of work I do. My revelation came early last year when I teamed up with an Engineer/Designer who had created or adopted countless LISP routines and was working solely with them and keyboard shortcuts. Result - as fast as other parametric programs, if not faster, as exacting in tolerancing and easy to learn and use (one only has to have a "designing" mind). On top of that, all AutoCAD seats could open the drawings, even the models. Clients liked what they saw, as they could be walked through the model, and with a simple LISP routine, 2D "parts" for detailing can be created. I have always had a satisfactory result from the Autodesk product I have used, and at the price I think it is great value. All one needs to achieve is to "think outside the square". My View Richard

Richie Williams
(Unregistered)
11/17/05 01:39 AM
Old Timeer new Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

Your ariticle hits home but I'm just an old timer with not much experience with MCAD or AEC as of yet. So by starting later I did not suffer through the evolution of software to what it is today. Whether bad or good today, it is the best we have to date. I will always depend on you who have the experience to push for the changes that I will use but don't know I need it as of yet. If that makes sense to you. I know your article made sense to me. Keep at it sir. Great job.

Adrian N
(Unregistered)
11/18/05 12:26 AM
From a reseller point of view new Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

Dave is spot on. As an independent reseller who can offer a variety of different CAD solutions, it is amazing how often it is that the purchasing team specify the product to be bought and then we have to fit what they want to do into it. IronCAD sells well to the independent thinker who is not worried by the lack of presence in the market place. With no marketing spend on the product and a price less than half that of the competitors, it is also difficult for potential end users to get resellers to spend the same amount of time on the sales cycle of product evaluations as they would with another product. Overall, a great product and maybe one of the best kept secrets in the 3D CAD market today.

Scott M.
(Unregistered)
11/18/05 12:38 AM
Machine Designer new Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

Amen Dave!!! I have daily access to AutoDesk Inventor 10 & SolidWorks 2005, but my preference for solid modeling is AutoDesk's Mechanical Desktop. I don't want seperate (linked part files). I'm not concerned with parametric features & I don't want constraints. What I want is to be able to be able to work within (1) drawing, without limitations. I've been working with AutoCad since '89, starting with Release 9 on DOS. The funny & misunderstood thing about AutoCAD, repeated to me over & over was that it couldn't do 3D, but I was creating 3D on R12 DOS!!! Mechanical Desktop allows the user to choose whether they want to work in (1) main drawing, like I do, or set it up so individual parts files are assembled in a separate assembly file. That's what I like, a choice! Inventor & SolidWorks don't give you that option.

Tom
(Unregistered)
11/21/05 10:44 PM
'3D MCAD: Thoughts from an old timer' new Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

Hi Scott, FYI- IronCAD works the way you want also. In fact, more dynamically. Just thought I let you know.

Scott M.
(Unregistered)
11/27/05 07:51 PM
'3D MCAD: Thoughts from an old timer' new Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

Tom, Thanks for the help. I'm going to look at possibly getting a seat of IronCAD. Thanks again, Scott

T Jones
(Unregistered)
12/04/05 08:09 PM
From the other side of the fence new Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

I started with Computervision (RIP) in 1979 as a demo jock, and was involved in the CAD industry until Dec 2002 at which time I moved away from engineering. I was totally disillusioned. The problem with the CAD vendors is that their first responsibility is to their shareholders and not to the customer. More gimmicks generate more sales, they all say they can do more than the competition and as a potential user you need XY and Z. As software has become more reliable, post sales support has improved, but your annual subscription is an easy way for the CAD vendors and VAR’s to generate a large income with little effort. I totally agree with Dave. Most CAD users don’t need the sophistication that CAD vendors now offer. So the question is, why don’t they provide a stripped down, basic, low cost version of their product? Simple, most of their sales would be for the simple product and they would not be able to generate income from training and telephone and internet support.

Dave
(Unregistered)
01/18/06 08:30 PM
Re: From the other side of the fence new [re: T Jones]Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

Thanks for the comments, everyone. I am totally convinced that millions of man (or woman- hours) are wasted every year with all the senseless sketching that is mandated by almost all other MCAD programs. I still have to use AutoCAD in 2D at times and remember well the time I thought all the "contruction" line-drawing days were over. Little did I know that they would stick around well into the 2000s and beyond. In companies that have "gone with the flow" of sketch-type MCAD, I hear again and again the age-old saying "I'll just redline the drawing and let drafting take care of the rest." With IronCAD, the designers, engineers, AND draftspeople look forward to making an assembly or changing an existing design in 3D. As long as the non-users make the buying decisions, I see no major change in sight. Therefore, I believe the best strategy is to get the big shots to demo the programs. Yes, this may be a pipe dream, but boy, would companies save a small fortune if this were to happen!




Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | (show all)
View all threadsNext thread*Threaded Mode
Jump to

 




Click here for Internet Business Systems © 2014 Internet Business Systems, Inc.
595 Millich Dr., Suite 210, Campbell, CA 95008
+1 (408) 850-9202 — Contact Us, or visit our other sites:
AECCafe - Architectural Design and EngineeringEDACafe - Electronic Design AutomationGISCafe - Geographical Information ServicesTechJobsCafe - Technical Jobs and ResumesShareCG  - Share Computer Graphic (CG) Animation, 3D Art and 3D Models
  Privacy Policy Advertise