Ted, I had that Generic cadd II. It was great. It had more useful features that Autocad version 9 which was out at about the same time. I designed a radius staircase to be built in steel for a megabuck house I was framing. The owner just couldn't come up with one and we didn't want to wait anylonger. I designed it with a 10' inside radius and a 20' radius outside, was 6' wide at the bottom and 4' wide at the top. About a 12' rise. I used a 64 sided polygon on each radius and connected the angles with line segments then I could rotate and move the inner polygon around until I got my tread correct (about 9.5-10"
16" from the inside handrail), and the all the lines representing the stairs would "string". The customer had a steel fabrication plant, and was going to have his people build it. A couple of engineers from the plant came out to the site to find out how I had designed it. (I had printed it out at 1/4" = 1'-0" and overlayed it on the customers plans, they loved it). The engineers went back and couldn't duplicate it on Autocad. They came back out and asked if I had it on a disk. I brought it in on a disk and they had to find an old computer to read the disk, and then they couldn't get it to load on Autocad. They asked me what version of Autocad I had and I told them generic cad II. They laughed at me. They stopped laughing when the owner gave me a brand new computer with 386 chip, digitizer, and a liscenced copy of autocad 9 with the architectural package (essentially version 10). He said "go home and redesign it on autocad and keep the computer". I did. At that time that was about $3,000. The transition to autocad wasn't hard, but I had to basically redraw my design from wrote, because autocad didn't have the features I used on Generic cadd to do the design. As an aside, The stairs I designed was in the livingroom going to the balcony. The engineers from the plant wanted to design the radius stairs going down to the basement. They didn't realize that any part of the tread which is overlapped by another tread doesn't count as tread width. Some of the treads going down had effective widths of under 5". Bust your ass stairs. Paul