AutoCAD vs. AutoCAD Lt

The items I can think of off the top of my head are 3d and LISP and 3rd party add-ons. LT has extremely limited abilities to automate routine processes, and 3d, while not very good in either version, is much worse in LT. Also you may find that there are vendors that have developed specific functions that would be of value to you, but require full-blown Autocad with its lisp and other less pronounced capabilities to work. If none of these items is particularly important to you, then you probably can save the money. HOWEVER there are definitely lisp/vba scripts out there that you can download for free or very little money that will help you even if you aren't really using much else in the liap type of functions.
Dneck wrote:

No. But take a look a things like slingshot from drcauto if you haven't already.
If you're satisfied with what you've got, you probably don't need to change it - although you could consider upgrading one workstation and seeing what benefit that affords to the practice as a whole.

LT doesn't support working with images. There are work-arounds, you may not like the result. Yes LT honors xrefs, but it does not support the xref commands available in the full version, like x-clip. Since you indicate that you are a landscaping architectural firm, I would recommend the full version. If you were a landscaping contractor I would say go with LT. You may want to split the difference and buy at least one seat of full version and LT for the rest.

just curious - what actually happens when you type _image?

The "Image Manager" window opens; it allows you to work with images that may already be in the drawing, but there's no "import" or "insert" option. ___

ah yes, now I remember - that's where drcauto comes in