Why You Use AutoCAD?

There are so many CAD softwares better than AutoCAD in capability of 3D modeling such as Catia, Solidworks, Unigraphics, Pro Engineer, Autodesk Inventor, ICEM surf, etc.?

 

So why you use AutoCAD?

There are so many shoe manufacturer's if I said "N" who would you think of, there are so many burger bars on the high street - think green - and thats the wrong color but I bet you still got it.

I get what I'm given.

What is this "AutoCAD" that you speak of?

 

Where can I get this "Pro Engineer" that you speak of?

Does it do architectural and civil design?

I use AutoCad because it fits what I produce , and because I am not an engineer, nor Architect, nor Gamer, nor cartoonist.

Look through the Showcase Forum and you will find AutoCAD very capable in 3D not to mention the capabilities of the Vertical products, for certain applications those you mention are very good at what they do, but, they are not all proper comparisons.

 

SolidWorks, Pro-E (CREO) and (unmentioned by you) Inventor are in one group and Catia/ICEM SurfPro and Unigraphics (now Siemens NX) and (unmentioned by you) PTC Creo Elements/Pro are in another.

 

I use AutoCAD, because I'm paid to use AutoCAD and it does all I need to do.

"...better than AutoCAD in capability of 3D modeling..." of what? Surely for durable goods Inventor, Solidworks, and Creo are better than AutoCAD but for a digital terrain model (e.g., a TIN) used for watershed analysis and other civil engineering applications AutoCAD (and its complement Civil 3D) is far superior.

This reminds me a bit of a vegan and a regular person discussing the usefulness of meat.

I get it, it’s like what do you want to be, an emaciated clerk in a health food store or a warrior.

There are so many CAD softwares better than AutoCAD in capability of 3D modeling such as Catia, Solidworks, Unigraphics, Pro Engineer, Autodesk Inventor, ICEM surf, etc.?

 

So why you use AutoCAD?

I ask myself the same thing all the time.

 

AutoCAD isn't just a 3D modeling application. It's a 2D drafting program first, and people have been using it for years and years and just haven't taken the leap into a non-legacy CAD application yet.

im just used to it .... for 3d modeling its far behind. i know...

we use autocad, because in this softwere we can get fastest output, as we required in any type of engineering.

Because it is flexible

does the job.

DWG is a standard for working together

And it has a commandline (i very miss in every other cad or bim software)

Because it is flexible

On the contrary, I find it restrictive.

 

DWG is a standard for working together

Not in my industry.

 

And it has a commandline (i very miss in every other cad or bim software)

That's because AutoCAD is a legacy application and current CAD applications are intuitive enough not to need a command line with linear input functions. DOS is command line driven OS and is completely legacy in terms of functionality.

Because it is flexible

 

 

^^ This !

 

 

On the contrary, I find it restrictive.

 

C'mon, I know you're predisposed to Revit, but you can not honestly claim that AutoCAD does not allow the user more choices about how to do something (anything) Certainly Revit does some things better, but objectively, I know that you know Revit is less flexible than AutoCAD.

C'mon, I know you're predisposed to Revit, but you can not honestly claim that AutoCAD does not allow the user more choices about how to do something (anything)

How much Revit experience to you have again?

 

I most certainly can claim that AutoCAD does not allow the user more choices about how to do something (anything). Have most users on this forum forgotten that I was an AutoCAD nut for a good number of years?

 

Certainly Revit does some things better, but objectively, I know that you know Revit is less flexible than AutoCAD.

Well, this depends on how one approaches the scenario of one's needs. What you're doing is compartmentalizing a very narrow range of use. I can assure you, Revit can be ruled out in all CAD related circumstances other than the specific areas that Revit was intended to be used. AutoCAD can be directly compared to everything, but Revit/Inventor/SolidWorks/Pro-E/etc cannot be directly compared to everything. This does not necessarily mean AutoCAD is more flexible.

 

A sheet of paper and a pencil with an eraser is certainly more flexible than AutoCAD for 2D sketching and conceptualizing purposes. When you're simply jotting down ideas, sketching some general layout of a conceptual thought, nothing beats a piece of scratch paper and a pencil. But a sheet of paper is restrictive on many accounts once you move into a "specific" drawing-based domain when compared to AutoCAD. Same with AutoCAD... it cannot have more than one person access the file at the same time, you cannot build complex geometry to "flex" and "adjust" based off unbreakable values and formulas, you cannot attach any conceivable piece information to every single piece of objects or geometry and extract the output data in a usable form, you most certainly cannot tie any analytic data whatsoever to geometry, and bidirectional associativity in AutoCAD is a flat-out joke to the point of it being insulting that AutoCAD even advertises it.

 

If people of the "drafting world" would wake up and understand that the entire design and engineering world is moving towards information and data, which extends far past just geometry and drawings. People in the AEC industry need analytic's with their models, not just mere 2D construction drawings. Engineers need structural stress analysis and fluids/airflow analysis when designing an engine in Inventor, not just 3D geometry that gets sent to the CNC machine.

 

This is why I "claim" that AutoCAD is not flexible but restrictive. Extracting information-rich analytical data from AutoCAD simply cannot be done right out of the box. You cannot have a "team" of designers or engineers working in the same design environment collaboratively. There is no built-in project environment for team members to work collaboratively between long distance offices with built in administrative control.

 

If only a single user wants a program to create non-intuitive and non-parametric geometry, and have no real usable need for information-rich data and non-bidirectional associativity between views and analytical data, not pertaining to any specific industry... then the $5,000 AutoCAD is your golden tool.

 

Remember, I was once a very solid AutoCAD user for many years. I know both sides, therefore I feel that I have earned the right to have my personal opinions towards this particular platform, and they are well justified. You can agree or disagree all you want - doesn't bother me any. I still stand firm in my opinions for many other reasons that would take too much to type here. AutoCAD will be going away very soon in certain industries.

 

-Tannar

I think Revit is good (and written) for desinging Building. If you are in that business i fully understand that you prefer Revit. But AuotCAD is much more flexible when it comes to 2d and 3d complex shapes that not consist of floors, wall, etc. the command interface is extremely powerfull.

But AuotCAD is much more flexible when it comes to 2d and 3d complex shapes that not consist of floors, wall, etc. the command interface is extremely powerfull.

I'll openly admit that AutoCAD own's the 2D domain. There is zero argument there. But Revit's 3D modeling tools are superior to that of AutoCAD's. In fact, I don't even consider them comparable at all, since AutoCAD's 3D modeling capabilities are very static, where as Revit's free-form modeling engine is very dynamic. The 3D Conceptual Massing environment has nothing to do with floors, walls, etc (which are System Families, not free-form geometry so they cannot be compared).

"in_certain_industries"

 

LOL... kinda think you just gave the whole "flexible" argument away right there by alluding to just how many industries AutoCAD is used for.

"in_certain_industries"

 

LOL... kinda think you just gave the whole "flexible" argument away right there by alluding to just how many industries AutoCAD is used for.

Well, it's true. The original debate you challenged me on was AutoCAD being flexible or restrictive, which obviously is relative to one's needs. But it's not in any way a blanket statement for or against AutoCAD. It's all about "specifics" of design.

 

Look around your house. Wood is used to frame your walls, make your cabinets, the furniture in your living room, etc. Wood itself is general, but serves specific purposes as Walls, Casework and Furniture. AutoCAD itself is general, while parametric CAD software is specific. If an industry that you're in needs only general CAD drawings the AutoCAD can stay alive, but as soon as certain industries need more (e.g. AEC Industry) then AutoCAD is out in the cold. AutoCAD is flexible until it hits the wall, then you must turn to something else - usually a non-general CAD application. Revit doesn't advertise to be a general CAD application therefore it cannot be compared to AutoCAD as restrictive, in the same way you can't fault the wood used to frame your walls as restrictive to make your cabinets in your home. They are specific, and parametric CAD applications try and replicate the specifics of the real and natural world, instead of the general and conceptual mathematical world.