Autodesk Civil 3d 2009 vs Carlson Civil Suite 2009

[dent]

I don't think so. Talk to your subscription manager. LDT subscriptions just didn't "turn into" C3D subscriptions. Even if there wasn't a cost involved (way early on, like 2004, Adsk were virtually giving away the upgrades), somebody had to approve the differences in the contract, because it's always been possible to stay on LDT and never upgrade to C3D.

 

 

Reseller or not, it is all a moot point now, There is no more LDD, just Civil3D.

But Sinc is telling you how it all REALLY happened. For the longest time we got LDD and a Civil companion then we got both, then we got Civil3D with a LDD companion, now it's JUST Civil3D.

I am the one who orders our software. I am fully aware of what I did or did not authorize or what I was ASKED to authorize.

And NOW it is no longer possible to stay on LDD, because it is gone. Thus the switch to Carlson.

[rkmcswain]

Reseller or not, it is all a moot point now, There is no more LDD, just Civil3D.

Of course Land Desktop (LDT) is still around. Many people are still using it, including us. True, you cannot purchase it from Autodesk any longer, but is certainly was not ripped out the hands of existing customers.

 

But Sinc is telling you how it all REALLY happened. For the longest time we got LDD and a Civil companion then we got both, then we got Civil3D with a LDD companion, now it's JUST Civil3D.

I am the one who orders our software. I am fully aware of what I did or did not authorize or what I was ASKED to authorize.

Both you and sinc know your particular situation better than anyone else. I just don't see how a subscription for LDT turned into one for C3D without some sort of approval on the purchasers behalf. Maybe Autodesk started upgrading people at no cost...? If so, a lot of people who had to pay for this privilege earlier got ripped off.... :wink:

 

Regarding the shipments of media... For example, we were on LDT subscription until 2005, and only received the LDT product. About that time, we "upgraded" to C3D (with no intention at all of using C3D). Future shipments contained the C3D media and the LDC (Land Desktop Companion) media. If we had not upgraded, we would not have started receiving the C3D and LDC packages, only LDT.

 

And NOW it is no longer possible to stay on LDD, because it is gone.

 

I know of many people still on LDT. Your statement is only true if you require that you stay on the same version as the latest AutoCAD. Not everyone does that. Trust me, there will be many people using LDT2008 or 2009, in five years from now.

[sinc]

So has Autodesk given a clear answer on what happens to people who had a C3D subscription and installed C3D 2010, but then dropped their subscription?

 

From what I know, if you drop your subscription, you are only allowed to use the last version you have installed. That locks you into the 2010 product, and you cannot activate 2009 products any longer. So what happens to people who never really started using C3D, were only playing with it, and are still trying to use Land Desktop, but have their license locked down to the 2010-version only?

 

This question came up on Autodesk's DG's, but I don't think it was ever answered.

[rkmcswain]

So has Autodesk given a clear answer on what happens to people who had a C3D subscription and installed C3D 2010, but then dropped their subscription?

 

From what I know, if you drop your subscription, you are only allowed to use the last version you have installed. That locks you into the 2010 product, and you cannot activate 2009 products any longer. So what happens to people who never really started using C3D, were only playing with it, and are still trying to use Land Desktop, but have their license locked down to the 2010-version only?

 

This question came up on Autodesk's DG's, but I don't think it was ever answered.

 

Your description sounds right. If you drop your subscription, you can only use the most current version. Obviously, Autodesk is not going door to door to verify this, but in your example above, I suspect Autodesk would not provide activation codes for LDC2009. Other than integrity, honesty, morals, etc., there is nothing physically to stop you from running older versions, assuming they were activated prior to dropping subscription...

 

I know of a customer in this exact situation, but I don't think they have tried to activate an older product since dropping the subscription.

[sinc]

When our subscription expired, we had never installed Land Desktop 2009. We use it so rarely these days that there was no point. We were on Civil 3D 2009.

 

Then one computer died, and I tried reinstalling Land Desktop 2008. It wouldn't work. That's when I discovered this provision of Autodesk's licensing agreement. So then I went around an uninstalled Land Desktop 2008 from everyone's machines, and installed Land Desktop 2009. It was rather annoying, as I had not even configured an environment for LDD 2009, but it kept us compliant with our license terms.

 

Of course, since I did that, I think I've only used Land Desktop once... In retrospect, it probably wasn't worth the effort - I should have just uninstalled Land Desktop from everyone's computers and forgotten about it.

 

Which reminds me... In all this talk of Civil 3D vs. Carlson, there's one thing that's certain - if you are still on Land Desktop, you're using the wrong software. Both C3D and Carlson are worlds better than Land Desktop.

[rkmcswain]

there's one thing that's certain - if you are still on Land Desktop, you're using the wrong software.

 

That is just not true for everyone. Not everyone is ready to move forward to C3D (like us), or wants to/needs to (like many others). We are getting there, but for the type of work we do, LDT + our 3rd party apps are doing fine...

 

 

Both C3D and Carlson are worlds better than Land Desktop.

That is generally true.. However, I can count on one hand the number of times that LDT (2006, 7, has crashed on me in the last 4 years. C3D, just in a week of training has crashed 3x more... so "worlds better" applies more to the feature set, than to the application in whole.

 

I sure we both agree that LDT is dead and unless you want to stick with it, you must move up to C3D, Carlson, Eagle Point, MS with Geopak, or something...

[sinc]

Yeah, C3D still has lots of problems. In earlier versions, it would crash if any setting was even slightly amiss. It's gotten a lot better about that, but it still has an obnoxious tendency to crash instead of giving you a useful error message.

 

It tends to crash less, though, as you get more used to it. The more you use it, the more you get used to the "quirks", and the more you avoid crashing. C3D 2010 has crashed on me very rarely so far. And C3D also fixed a lot of major problems that exist in Land Desktop. At this point, I would find it extremely difficult to ever use Land Desktop again, no matter how good the third-party tools.

[rkmcswain]

Yeah, C3D still has lots of problems. In earlier versions, it would crash if any setting was even slightly amiss. It's gotten a lot better about that

Oh, yea... 2010 is light years ahead of the earlier versions. The old ones like 2006 were virtually unusable.

 

It tends to crash less, though, as you get more used to it. The more you use it, the more you get used to the "quirks", and the more you avoid crashing. C3D 2010 has crashed on me very rarely so far.

 

The key is "save, and save often".. that way if it does crash, you can get back to where you were. OF course, shouldn't we all be saving often anyway...? :-)

 

At this point, I would find it extremely difficult to ever use Land Desktop again, no matter how good the third-party tools.

We still have a lot of VBA apps for LDT for which there is no equivalent in C3D.

[sinc]

We still have a lot of VBA apps for LDT for which there is no equivalent in C3D.

 

What are some of them?

[BIGAL]

I would like to know more about your VBA apps also I am looking for a few things for the guys and gals here. In the documentation there is example VBA apps for CIV3D these may help.

 

\program files\Autocad Civil 3d 2009\sample\civil 3D api\ ...

 

As we are in Aus we use 3rd party add ons that fills lots of the holes (ARD and Stringer)

[rkmcswain]

In the documentation there is example VBA apps for CIV3D these may help.

 

We are certainly not looking to rewrite these in VBA. As soon as C3D is out on 64-bit, we will make this move and at that point VBA becomes worthless.

[sakka252]

This is a little lengthy, but I think many people are suffering through a similar situation ... Should our surveying department use Civil 3D?

 

I am an engineer trying to work with our stubborn surveying department on surveying software. I know a little about surveying and even less about processing points, but I am very capable with Civil 3D just not with it's functionality for surveying.

 

We have a new guy dead set on using Carlson to process points, however it costs money. We are already on subscription with Civil 3D, and as I understand Civil 3D is highly capable surveying software. (Sinc, your company has gone to using Civil 3D correct?) I understand the new guys point that he knows Carlson, he knows it works, it operates in a way that makes sense to surveyors, etc. However, he really is unwilling to (and really not capable of) diving into Civil 3D to learn how it works and find the functionality. Since I don't really know the inner workings and everyday tasks of a surveyor I couldn't say which one is better or justify spending money when we supposedly have software that can get the job done.

 

I have played around with pulling points into Civil 3D using the survey database and it really seemed very easy (I have even setup all the styles and groups and working on figure prefix). I am just not skilled with processing points or the equipment database and what is necessary for both.

 

Ultimately should I give up this fight because Carlson is simply better than Civil 3D for surveying? Could we continue to pull the processed points into Civil 3D and draw the survey in Civil 3D?

 

Thanks.

[rkmcswain]

Ultimately should I give up this fight because Carlson is simply better than Civil 3D for surveying? Could we continue to pull the processed points into Civil 3D and draw the survey in Civil 3D?

 

Thanks.

 

A) Yes

B) What exactly do you mean by "pull the processed points into C3D"? Why doesn't your surveyor just give you a completed drawing that you xref in the background, and a finished ng surface, that you can import with LandXML. If you need the points in C3D, they can be part of the LandXML file also.

 

(I'm not trying to tell you how to do it, I'm simply asking because that is for the most part how we do it - we are a Carlson for Survey and LDT->C3D for engineering shop...)

[sakka252]

A)Thanks. Out of curiosity, can you give me some functionaly that only Carlson can do and Civil 3D cannot? Or is is just that Carlson user interface operates better for surveyors?

B)Let me clarify. I am actually talking about the drawing the survey not when it moves forward to civil design ... Since we are pretty bare bone these days, there are no surveying draftsmen remaining, engineers draw the survey (the new guys is too slow plus he is managing). If the points are processed by the new guy in Carlson then the engineers would pull the processed points into C3D to draft the survey.

 

I know there is linework functionality that could draw the majority of the survey by coding it correctly in the field ... My guys are not there yet ... baby steps. BTW do you or any other surveyors use linework coding to help draft your survey?

[sinc]

We are certainly not looking to rewrite these in VBA. As soon as C3D is out on 64-bit, we will make this move and at that point VBA becomes worthless.

 

What apps are they? I'm still quite curious as to what features would be powerful enough to make you want to stay on Land Desktop...

[sinc]

Ultimately should I give up this fight because Carlson is simply better than Civil 3D for surveying?

 

That is not a given. Unfortunately, there's no fast and easy way to determine which software is better for your purposes. The two pieces of software are different, and have different capabilities. Carlson is somewhat easier to learn. Carlson tends to be a bit more user-friendly - for example, when working on roadway alignments, it can automatically display the alignment and profile on-screen, arrayed in a very readable fashion, with little glyphs on each marking your cursor location on each. Civil 3D can also do things like this, but it takes a lot more work from the user, and it doesn't work as well as in Carlson Civil.

 

On many levels, the guys at Carlson also think more like Surveyors and Civil Engineers, whereas the guys at Autodesk think more like computer engineers. This thinking is reflected in the design of their respective softwares. One key point is the way Point Labels are handled. Carlson's points can automatically rearrange themselves so they don't overtype. This feature doesn't always work quite as planned, but it generally works pretty well. Meanwhile, Civil 3D doesn't even have it, and we waste a lot of time dragging point labels around.

 

Carlson is also more like the software we've been using for decades, which makes it easier for people to learn. But we've found that once we fought through the learning curve with Civil 3D, we can do things there that we can't do with Carlson. We can't do what we do with Civil 3D as it comes out of the box, but Civil 3D is far more customizable than Carlson. So we use the Sincpac-C3D in addition to Civil 3D, and we can whip out extremely high-quality products very quickly. If we compare plain out-of-the-box Civil 3D with Carlson, then yes, Carlson is better for Surveyors. But the tools in Civil 3D, combined with those in the Sincpac-C3D, let us do an extremely wide array of Survey tasks extremely quickly, and we can really zip through things that are difficult or time-consuming in Carlson. This has allowed us to be very responsive to clients. When something changes, we can often be ready almost immediately, no matter how significant the changes. This is one of the reasons why we are so busy right now, when other Survey companies in our area are on skeleton staffs, or even shutting their doors.

 

Then, there is also the nasty yearly upgrade roller coaster with Autodesk, the cost of the software, the cost of training, the cost of hardware to run it, the fact that Civil 3D is incompatible with itself every year, as well as incompatible with Map (which is built-in to the same product)... We had been strongly considering a move to Carlson because of problems like this. But we've simply reached the point where we are too productive with Civil 3D, and even Carlson would slow us down considerably.

 

So, with Civil 3D, you get incredible power and flexibility, surpassing even Carlson. But will you actually use that power and flexibility? We use it - as a Survey-only company, we often do tasks that we might otherwise hand off to our Engineers, and let them do it. If we were in such a situation, it might be easier for our Surveyors to use Carlson, and let the Engineers use Civil 3D. But in our case, we actually use most of the features in Civil 3D on a regular basis, and Civil 3D is working out to be the best choice for us.

 

At some point in the future, we will undoubtedly revisit things. We are intrigued by the possibilities of running Carlson on Intellicad or Bricscad. But as of now, we use too many features that those products are lacking, and do not find those to be viable options. We actually use the new features in core Autocad, such as Sheet Set Manager, MLeaders, Annotative Text, etc., and would not want to miss those features. But the other products are improving rapidly, and we will keep an eye on the progress.

 

Regardless of which software you use, DEFINITELY learn to do auto-linework. That's one of the greatest time-savers you can implement.

[sinc]

If the points are processed by the new guy in Carlson then the engineers would pull the processed points into C3D to draft the survey.

 

So what exactly do you mean by "processed points"? What exactly is being done in Carlson?

 

Typically, the field survey data is simply imported, and if the linework and point coding is correct, AND the field guy didn't make any errors, that part is done. In practice, there are typically some coding errors to clean up, but hopefully not many, and this part of the process should go rather quickly.

 

If that is all you would be using Carlson for, then it does sound like something of a waste of the software...

[rkmcswain]

What apps are they? I'm still quite curious as to what features would be powerful enough to make you want to stay on Land Desktop...

In-house built VBA applications.

[sakka252]

So what exactly do you mean by "processed points"? What exactly is being done in Carlson?

 

To be completely honest, I don't exactly know what I mean by "processed points." That is what the new guy says, "I need Carlson to process points!" I believe he is referring to the adjustments that you mentioned, but also boundary/traverse adjustments, to distribute the error amongst the points. Does that sound right?

[sakka252]

Regardless of which software you use, DEFINITELY learn to do auto-linework. That's one of the greatest time-savers you can implement.

 

Thank you for your response. I am doing everything I can to get auto-linework implemented. Can you recommend any good tutorials?