Re: RE 3D packages

Correction. Turbocad V9 Pro is $695.00 and worth every penny. Intellicad's modeling capabilities are extremely limited and the full version is priced at $450.00. I have no experience with Cadmax so couldn't comment. It would be much easier to recommend something if we Knew some details of what kind of parts you do.

Hi Paul.
Last time I looked, the below were all free. If you are just doing plan/flat layout stuff, I'd recommend QCAD. It has CAM support.
Richard
-- OPENSOURCE/FREE CAD/3D/GIS/ETC. SOLUTIONS/INFO: .Why Software Should Not Have Owners: .Brl CAD ftp.arl.mil/brlcad .Q CAD .4D Design .Cadvance .Varkon CAD .FreeCAD 3D ANIMATION & RENDERING: .Art Of Illusion .Wings .Persistence of Vision MISC: .Grass GIS .Repository .3d File Converter

Thank you for posting these other CAD packages... I've been running into a lot of problems lately with my Inventor/AutoCAD 2002 program. Specifically bugs that cause a drawing to be produced with incorrect data... i.e. trims or extends that don't quite make it to their target, snaps that go to empty space, occasional loss of OSNAPS entirely causing you to click a point that is just very close to where you intended, etc.
I've been itching to find an alternative package. However, when I made the decision to stay with the Autodesk sofware, the other choices seemed to have as many problems as AutoCAD. Here are some of my comments about the ones just listed.
These seem extremely well featured for the price... but all CAD packages look good from the marketing dept.'s view. There aren't even very detailed descriptions of their features. Neither of these programs seem to have a user forum where you can read about the problems users are having.
The version of IntelliCAD I purchase 1 1/2 years ago was so buggy as to be completely unusable for 3d CAD. Perhaps they are better now, but the fact they are willing to release such a buggy version is not a good testimony about the company's character... but then again you can get similar quality from a company selling $5,000 software.
Another example of very buggy software from what I've read in their user forums. Every demo version I ever tried from them was also so buggy as to be unusable for my work.
I will add one more 3d CAD package to the list. VectorWorks, around $800 if I recall correctly. Though again bugs, but no more than normal for a CAD package
Of course, I am sure there are plenty of users of all the listed CAD packages that can use the program relatively problem free. They may in fact be the majority of users... but if you are one of the unlucky ones then a CAD package can become useless.
Joe Dunfee

Hi
"Smiley" skrev i en meddelelse news: snipped-for-privacy@posting.google.com... But what do expect ; the calculations to bring you those points is based on working in 2D , then asking for calculations done 2D for 3D work , must work bad if you don't give it a thought about what happen in the program. My experience is, that you can make your own Osnap calculations where you want no mistakes , also I use my own angle Dimensioning tools for calculating angles in 3D, as I find it nonsense to move your UCS for every angle measure and rely on 2D calculations when you can just rewrite a few highschool math. into Lisp and pick angle after angle without changing your UCS just becaurse 3D fill more in the raw code or whatever the problem is for those who compile the code. I guess the reson for your trouble with Osnap is that so much 3D is handled as 2D, and if you will not establish a toolbox to calculate where a 3D line meet a 3D face, you will not be able to find this point, ---------- but Acad acturly offer these "Osnaps" if and when you realise you need to make a few tools yourself, on the other hand, how many programs allow you to expand the number of functions and even accept you to hold a command, untill a small application have calculated the Osnap point you ask. AutoCAD do by offering you to write small applications that you can trigger in the middle of most other build in functions, ---------- Osnap just yield a point, that point can be obtained in many way's and if you know a way to avoid just those you don't want or know the limitations in 2D Osnaps, you can add a Transparent Function that yield the point to any command that than hold untill the Osnap is calculated. P.C.

In the examples I gave, the errors were caused by AutoCAD flaking out. Not by any mis-use of the features. AutoCAD is able to do the functions I asked it to do... even the extend and trim for 3D objects laying on different planes.
I just read an article where there was speculation Silicone Valley may be facing competition from India in the near future... comparable to what happened to the US Automotive industry in the early 70's. They let quality slip, and a foreign country took market share from an entire industry. [See article here ]