Jump to content

What is meaning of "LT" in the phrase "AutoCad LT"?


Recommended Posts

TuKhuyen

Auto Cad LT is a cheaper version of AutoCad. So what is meaning of word "LT" (Abbreviation) in the phrase "Autocad LT"?

Please explain for me! Thank you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought of it as the "Lite" version of AutoCAD being that it was missing the 3D creation capabilities of it's big brother.

 

Myself, I think AutoCAD should discontinue LT but that's my opinion.

 

KC

Link to post
Share on other sites
TuKhuyen
I always thought of it as the "Lite" version of AutoCAD being that it was missing the 3D creation capabilities of it's big brother.

 

Myself, I think AutoCAD should discontinue LT but that's my opinion.

 

KC

 

Thank you. I watched some video clips you use autocad on youtube. Indeed, you are a professional about cad and other softwares. I am a new member of this forum therefore I have to learn from you and everyone very much.

Why do you think AutoCad should discontinue LT?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think "LT" means "LapTop". It's the little brother for 2D only, with less functions so that it requires less computing power.

At that time laptops were just very limited.

Link to post
Share on other sites
rkmcswain
I think "LT" means "LapTop". It's the little brother for 2D only, with less functions so that it requires less computing power.

At that time laptops were just very limited.

 

LT has always been built on AutoCAD, so the system specs are pretty much the same. If the specs for LT are slightly lower, it's only because of the anticipated use of 3D in AutoCAD.

 

So what is meaning of word "LT" (Abbreviation) in the phrase "Autocad LT"?

Essentially, Autodesk never said what LT stood for, but it's commonly accepted as short for "Lite".

 

See:

 

http://www.fourmilab.ch/autofile/www/section2_107_1.html#SECTION001071000000000000000

 

http://www.fourmilab.ch/autofile/www/chapter2_33.html#SECTION00330000000000000000

 

Also, there is more missing in LT than just 3D. This is couple of versions old, but the summary is still valid AFAIK: http://cadpanacea.com/node/96

Link to post
Share on other sites
Coosbaylumber
I always thought of it as the "Lite" version of AutoCAD being that it was missing the 3D creation capabilities of it's big brother.

 

KC

 

I got copies of two very old brochures here. One says Limited, and the other has Lite emblazoned. I think the Lite version took off.

 

 

Wm.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pablo Ferral

The Autodesk preffered line is 'Limited' (as bandied about at AU).

 

Essentially you have the full product on your machine but Autodesk have 'Limited' what can be done with it... e.g. The've turned off all the tools that create 3D objects, cut of access to the API's and left out tools such as the sheet set manager.

 

Because you have the full product you can still open drawing files that have been created in the full version - even if they contain 3D objects - but your editing ability is also 'Limited'.

 

'Lite' is the accepted meaning, but technically incorrect if you want to get pedantic about it ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think they should go to a 3 tier system...

 

LT - no 3D or lisp, arx, etc, but also add some 2D functionality like enhanced usage of raster images, transparent fills and finally make LT the standard in 2D CAD.

$500

 

Full - 3D solids, lisp, arx, etc. Pretty much the same as we have now but remove the rendering engine.

$2500

 

Pro - every thing

$4000

Link to post
Share on other sites
rkmcswain
I still think they should go to a 3 tier system...

 

LT - no 3D or lisp, arx, etc, but also add some 2D functionality like enhanced usage of raster images, transparent fills and finally make LT the standard in 2D CAD.

$500

 

Full - 3D solids, lisp, arx, etc. Pretty much the same as we have now but remove the rendering engine.

$2500

 

Pro - every thing

$4000

 

Looking at it from the Autodesk point of view... there is no reason to.

(A) People are already buying LT (with fewer features than you describe) for twice your proposed price.

(B) People are already buying full AutoCAD for ±$4000, so there is no market (as far as Autodesk is concerned) for your $2500 solution. Anyone who is potentially in that market now is buying the full version already, so why lose $1500 profit?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought it was Lite but some time later I got to know it was meant Laptop since Laptops at that time were limited with 3d capabilities.

 

There are also some other features that were missing like Editing of attributes etc..

 

Nowadays the difference is minimal apart from the 3D.

 

The price is definatly cheaper..I work in an office where we seldom use 3d so my boss never actually opted to buy a full licence..

 

We're stuck on 2006 LT now..... I hope I manage to convince him on upgrading....bummer!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because no one would buy it if they did go to this route? Well that's hard to prove. Well I like AutoCAD and I use it but I do think they have rested on their "laurels" with development. I like the full version but I have no use or need for rendering in CAD, I would bet several thousands would agree. What I do hear in my circles is a grumble of price for useful features. We can also argue that just because you decrease a price does not always mean a decrease in profits, if done the right way. I also disagree with your ""A and B". People are buying LT because they need a compatible solution for less. What option do they have? I mean the clones are OK but they are not AutoCAD! As for no market for the other that's absurd. If this were true then these other CAD makers would have no business. And sure there is the always obvious "if you don't want to pay you can go else where" answer. I guess we'll agree to disagree. I guess after 21 years of usage on my part I see some issues in areas.

 

Looking at it from the Autodesk point of view... there is no reason to.

(A) People are already buying LT (with fewer features than you describe) for twice your proposed price.

(B) People are already buying full AutoCAD for ±$4000, so there is no market (as far as Autodesk is concerned) for your $2500 solution. Anyone who is potentially in that market now is buying the full version already, so why lose $1500 profit?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you used it yet? Slow and cumbersome is what I came away with. But for them to look at developing a 3rd option for a DWG editor does show maybe the current LT and Pro structure to be a bit outdated??? Maybe??

 

Another low cost alternate for 2D drawings/sketches would be AutoCAD Freestyle. Suggested retail price of $149 but available for a limited time at $79.

 

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/pc/index?id=14985022&siteID=123112

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...