specter@disk.UUCP (Byron Max Guernsey) (12/02/90)
I am currently attempting to convince a friend with ample fund that he needs to purchase an amiga 2000 or 3000. (he already has a 25 mghtz 386 ibm and a huge plotter...plos on big cardboard things). He uses his IBM for autocad. He thinks the amiga is only for games. I argued that the amiga is better suited for CADing because it is graphics orientated. He argued back that his IBM has a card (he bought for 90$) that gives him like 1024X800 resolution How can I convince him that amiga could be used just as well for cad? Is there an amiga program as good as or better than auto-cad? Can someone tell me some features of an amiga cad that the ibm doesn't have? Or some advantages? He won't buy an amiga now cause he says ninetendo does the same job. (big insult) I argued about the 50 mghtz speed of the 3001 for the amiga 2000 and how the amigas mghtz are a bit faster than ibm (I think..) but he argued back that for $1000 he can buy a 486 card with a coprocessor to give about 50 mghtz on the ibm. Anybody out there use amiga for cad? Byron Guernsey
cameron@kirk.nmg.bu.oz (Cameron Stevenson) (12/04/90)
From article <4613@disk.UUCP>, by specter@disk.UUCP (Byron Max Guernsey): > I am currently attempting to convince a friend with ample fund that he needs > to purchase an amiga 2000 or 3000. (he already has a 25 mghtz 386 ibm and a > huge plotter...plos on big cardboard things). He uses his IBM for autocad. [........] > .......... Anybody out there use amiga for cad? > > Byron Guernsey Well Bryon, I am going to stick my neck out a little here..... I don't believe there is a CAD package for the Amiga that comes near AutoCAD (and I don't even LIKE AutoCAD). I have used a number of packages on a number of hardware platforms, and run a business consulting in CAD systems. I would dearly love to see two more application areas addressed on the Amiga, namely RDBMS, and CAD. Alas these areas are the ones that seem to take the most number of man-years to develop (hence, I guess the reluctance to develop them) To be fair to software devlopers, there are a few lingering problems with the Amiga that need to resolved before it would make a successful platform for these applications. As is continuously debated in this newsgroup, better screen display/resolution is needed. The acceptable minimum nowadays is about 1000x800x32 on a 15" screen. Obviously (as with most things in life) the more the better.... The other problem is that the hardware/OS is not considered stable enough for these serious type applications. This is not to say that it is flakey, just people I have spoken to don't THINK it is stable enough. I have looked at some of the CAD packages that are considered good on the Amiga, and the overriding impression I get is that they are up to the standard of PC based CAD packages of 3-5 years ago. They are certainly usable, but the current crop of PC based packages offer so much more. Now I throw down the gauntlet and challenge someone to develop a REALLY good CAD package for the Amiga. The hardware is certainly fast enough, the OS is stable enough, and the display issues will be resolved. Come on guys, how good are you? Here are some of the features that should be included: 1. full 3D, with the ability to define 2D specific view information (most real world objects are 3D, but require 2D drawing representations of the object to be built. The CAD system should be able to maintain the linkage between this 3D/2D data.) 2. user modifiable interface (for that matter, user modifiable everything. Perhaps a full C development environment built in, which gives access to the supplied graphics primitives and user interface, but also allows extensions to these for applications development - after all, I will want to use my CAD package for totally different purposes than other people.) 3. links to non-graphic data (maybe a relational database, maybe the whole system is object-oriented. Either way, graphics alone are not enough to fully describe objects.) 4. translators to get data into/out of other systems. At the very least DXF and IGES. I recently posted a request for information about whether a development system was avaliable that might be a good springboard for such a system, and have got minimal response. I think there is a glaring void in available Amiga applications in the CAD and RDBMS areas, and potentially an eager ready market. Come on, how about doing something about it?? Any thoughts? Cameron Stephenson ph +61 75 951220 Bond University Gold Coast Australia
JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu (JKT) (12/04/90)
I've been TRYING to get the company I work for (Bentley Systems, an
Intergraph affiliate) to port MicroStation to Amiga. Unfortunately,
it's not anti-Amiga bigotry that prevents them from doing the port,
but finances. CAD software is incredibly complex, and porting
MicroStation over to Ami would require that someone give Bentley
Systems a couple hundred thousand dollar kick in the wallet. :-(
They estimate the conversion from PC to Mac will cost over half a
million, so it is not reasonable to think the Ami port would
be much cheaper.
Suffice it to say that if MicroStation WERE ever ported to Ami,
the Amiga CAD market would be wrapped up right there and then. ;-)
This program actually makes the PC look good, and it takes a lot
for me to say that!
Kurt
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|| Kurt Tappe (215) 363-9485 || Amigas, Macs, IBM's, C-64's, NeXTs, ||
|| 184 W. Valley Hill Rd. || Apple ]['s.... I use 'em all. ||
|| Malvern, PA 19355-2214 || (and in that order too! ;-) ||
|| jkt100@psuvm.psu.edu --------------------------------------||
|| jkt100@psuvm.bitnet jkt100%psuvm.bitnet@psuvax1 QLink: KurtTappe ||
-----------------------------------------------------------------------lcline@sequent.com (Larry Cline) (12/05/90)
In article <2657@kirk.nmg.bu.oz> cameron@kirk.nmg.bu.oz (Cameron Stevenson) writes: >From article <4613@disk.UUCP>, by specter@disk.UUCP (Byron Max Guernsey): >> I am currently attempting to convince a friend with ample fund that he needs >> to purchase an amiga 2000 or 3000. (he already has a 25 mghtz 386 ibm and a >> huge plotter...plos on big cardboard things). He uses his IBM for autocad. >[........] >> .......... Anybody out there use amiga for cad? >> >> Byron Guernsey > Of the CAD systems (and I am talking about the one's I've used on the Amiga here) I have used, I feel that XCAD is probably the most powerful. I have not had a chance to use DynaCAD. >Well Bryon, I am going to stick my neck out a little here..... > >I don't believe there is a CAD package for the Amiga that comes near AutoCAD >(and I don't even LIKE AutoCAD). I have used a number of packages on a number >of hardware platforms, and run a business consulting in CAD systems. I would >dearly love to see two more application areas addressed on the Amiga, namely >RDBMS, and CAD. Alas these areas are the ones that seem to take the most >number of man-years to develop (hence, I guess the reluctance to develop them) > I agree on this point, and it is a shame. I have seen XCAD pull up the shuttle drawing from XCAD and display it much more rapidly than most AutoCAD systems I have worked with (and that was on a 68000). BTW, I also consult on CAD and CAD Illustration. It seems I spend most of my time on AutoCAD. >To be fair to software devlopers, there are a few lingering problems with the >Amiga that need to resolved before it would make a successful platform for >these applications. As is continuously debated in this newsgroup, better >screen display/resolution is needed. The acceptable minimum nowadays is about >1000x800x32 on a 15" screen. Obviously (as with most things in life) the more >the better.... > Agree totally. >The other problem is that the hardware/OS is not considered stable enough for >these serious type applications. This is not to say that it is flakey, just >people I have spoken to don't THINK it is stable enough. > This is generally what I have found also. Also, if it does not work with DXF files then it won't even be considered. While I don't hear that many requests that it to full 3D, it would be nice. >I have looked at some of the CAD packages that are considered good on the >Amiga, and the overriding impression I get is that they are up to the standard >of PC based CAD packages of 3-5 years ago. They are certainly usable, but the >current crop of PC based packages offer so much more. > >Now I throw down the >gauntlet and challenge someone to develop a REALLY good CAD package for the >Amiga. The hardware is certainly fast enough, the OS is stable enough, and >the display issues will be resolved. Come on guys, how good are you? Here >are some of the features that should be included: > >1. full 3D, with the ability to define 2D specific view information (most real >world objects are 3D, but require 2D drawing representations of the object to >be built. The CAD system should be able to maintain the linkage between this >3D/2D data.) > >2. user modifiable interface (for that matter, user modifiable everything. >Perhaps a full C development environment built in, which gives access to the >supplied graphics primitives and user interface, but also allows extensions >to these for applications development - after all, I will want to use my CAD >package for totally different purposes than other people.) > Similar to the function of AutoLisp? >3. links to non-graphic data (maybe a relational database, maybe the whole >system is object-oriented. Either way, graphics alone are not enough to fully >describe objects.) > Saw an interestic system for Sun called 'Parametrics' (I think?) >4. translators to get data into/out of other systems. At the very least DXF and >IGES. > Actually I would like to see this done as a 'Universal Translator' which would be a separate program, but it should be done with the cooperation of all the companies involved in order to assure quality. >I recently posted a request for information about whether a development system >was avaliable that might be a good springboard for such a system, and have >got minimal response. I think there is a glaring void in available Amiga >applications in the CAD and RDBMS areas, and potentially an eager ready market. >Come on, how about doing something about it?? Any thoughts? > >Cameron Stephenson ph +61 75 951220 >Bond University >Gold Coast Australia Part of the problem I have seen is the perceptions of the developers. They seem to forget that there are 3 types of CAD. There is Design (PCB and stuff like that), object creation for the plethora of 3D animators, and Drafting. On other systems the Drafting came first and the rest evolved from that. It seems on the Amiga, they are trying to do it 'bass ackwards'. Of course, this is an effect of marketing. The Drafting part of CAD is perceived as a minor market on the Amiga unless you can use it to design objects for your animations. Most of the CAD systems on the Amiga I have seen and used are too slow or too hard to use (as far as the interface goes) or just too primitive. But a lot of them have had interesting features. The ability of DynamicCAD to plot MilSpec Leroy Fonts was great for me. It made it look like I had hand- lettered the drawings. The speed of XCAD is nice, particularly when zooming or panning. It smokes most of the AutoCAD systems I have used. Unfortunately, when I tried to create the same drawings on XCAD that I created on AutoCAD, it either was a lot more difficult because of functional deficiencies or differences. For example, when I tried to fillet two non-parallel lines, instead of extending the lines so that it could fillet them to the given radius, IT MOVED THEM! They were already where I wanted them. I just wanted them connected. The Aegis products were both too slow and too primitive, but did have some features from paint type programs that I liked. IntroCAD is just not up to my requirements (as is just about anything that says 'Intro'). Unfortunately I haven't seen UltraCAD. Well, if any developers want me to help them add real-world functionality to the Mechanical CAD packages I would be willing. So let's here it. Larry -- Larry Cline lcline@sequent.sequent.com lcline@crg8.sequent.com ".sig! Contractors don't need no stinkin' .sig!!!"
cameron@kirk.nmg.bu.oz (Cameron Stevenson) (12/05/90)
From article <90338.000430JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu>, by JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu (JKT): > I've been TRYING to get the company I work for (Bentley Systems, an > Intergraph affiliate) to port MicroStation to Amiga. Unfortunately, > it's not anti-Amiga bigotry that prevents them from doing the port, > but finances. CAD software is incredibly complex, and porting > MicroStation over to Ami would require that someone give Bentley > Systems a couple hundred thousand dollar kick in the wallet. :-( > They estimate the conversion from PC to Mac will cost over half a > million, so it is not reasonable to think the Ami port would > be much cheaper. > > Suffice it to say that if MicroStation WERE ever ported to Ami, > the Amiga CAD market would be wrapped up right there and then. ;-) > This program actually makes the PC look good, and it takes a lot > for me to say that! > > Kurt > -- All I can say is: "Kurt, keep trying, man!" I agree totally with him about MicroStation. It really does fly as a CAD package (we use it on ALL the platforms it is available for), and does indeed make the PC look good (especially the new V4.0). It has all the features I was talking about for a CAD package for the Amiga, and I am sure it would bottle up the Amiga CAD market if it was ported (especially considering the way Bentley have carried out their previous ports - very thorough adaptation of the hardware's OS and operating principles, while maintaining command compatibility across all platforms. Incidentally, I am sure this is why it cost so much to port to the Mac: a lot of research and programming effort went into ensuring that the product would conform to the unique way Mac's and their users operate. I don't THINK it would be as expensive to port to the Amiga. At worst case, porting the UNIX/X version shouldn't be all that hard:-)) With all the talk about the A3000, the A300UX, CBM advertising, and CBM buying good commercial software, perhaps here is an ideal opportunity for them (are you listening CBM guys??). MicroStation is a very strong CAD package (has 2nd position in market share for PC based CAD packages I believe), the Amiga is a good, fast platform, there is a gaping hole in the Amiga's avaliable applications, and Bentley Systems may be tempted to do a port with the right sort of incentive (they have at least one senior programmer apart from Kurt who knows the Amiga well). Today's dream............. Cameron Stephenson ph +61 75 951220 Bond University Gold Coast Australia
mark@calvin..westford.ccur.com (Mark Thompson) (12/05/90)
In article <2657@kirk.nmg.bu.oz> cameron@kirk.nmg.bu.oz (Cameron Stevenson) writes: >I don't believe there is a CAD package for the Amiga that comes near AutoCAD >(and I don't even LIKE AutoCAD). I have used a number of packages on a number >of hardware platforms, and run a business consulting in CAD systems. I would >dearly love to see two more application areas addressed on the Amiga, namely >RDBMS, and CAD. I think there is a glaring void in available Amiga >applications in the CAD and RDBMS areas, and potentially an eager ready >market. I too would love to see such a package. Has anyone seen or used DynaCAD, that $1000 CAD package that purports to be as good as workstation based 2D/3D CAD systems (or at least as good as a PC clone). +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Mark Thompson | | mark@westford.ccur.com | | ...!{decvax,uunet}!masscomp!mark Designing high performance graphics | | (508)392-2480 engines today for a better tomorrow. | +------------------------------------------------------------------------- +
dewolfe@ug.cs.dal.ca (Anarchy for Peace) (12/07/90)
In article <2657@kirk.nmg.bu.oz> cameron@kirk.nmg.bu.oz (Cameron Stevenson) writes: >From article <4613@disk.UUCP>, by specter@disk.UUCP (Byron Max Guernsey): >> I am currently attempting to convince a friend with ample fund that he needs >> to purchase an amiga 2000 or 3000. (he already has a 25 mghtz 386 ibm and a >> huge plotter...plos on big cardboard things). He uses his IBM for autocad. >[........] >> .......... Anybody out there use amiga for cad? >> >> Byron Guernsey > >Well Bryon, I am going to stick my neck out a little here..... > >I don't believe there is a CAD package for the Amiga that comes near AutoCAD >(and I don't even LIKE AutoCAD). I have used a number of packages on a number >of hardware platforms, and run a business consulting in CAD systems. I would >dearly love to see two more application areas addressed on the Amiga, namely >RDBMS, and CAD. Alas these areas are the ones that seem to take the most >number of man-years to develop (hence, I guess the reluctance to develop them) I'm not going to comment on the RDBMS thing, since I haven't used any of the alailable packages, but X-CAD is IMHO definately up to snuff with AutoCad I have used both (I am an 4th year Engineering student) and consider myself alble to comment. I used AutoCad in a housing design environment (Kent Homes, a manufacturer) and have used X-Cad fot my Design Project last year > >To be fair to software devlopers, there are a few lingering problems with the >Amiga that need to resolved before it would make a successful platform for >these applications. As is continuously debated in this newsgroup, better >screen display/resolution is needed. The acceptable minimum nowadays is about >1000x800x32 on a 15" screen. Obviously (as with most things in life) the more >the better.... Personally, I don't see the need for a 32 bit colour screen in Cad. I always found 4 bits (16 colour) to be enough. As for resolution, an overscan screen at 724 x 482 is a significant improvement over 640 400. Also, remember that the 2024 (1008x800 I think) monitor is available (although it is only 4 color) Also, expect the CAD publishers to be the first to support the 2410 card when it comes out. > >The other problem is that the hardware/OS is not considered stable enough for >these serious type applications. This is not to say that it is flakey, just >people I have spoken to don't THINK it is stable enough. This is mostly a matter of rumour. If it crashes, it can usually (not always) be tracked back to the application program. Neither Xcad or IntroCad have ever crashed on me, even under OS 2.0 I have seen more crashes with a Mac than I have with my Amiga. Mac Os, now there's unstable system software. (no flames please, just making an observation) > >I have looked at some of the CAD packages that are considered good on the >Amiga, and the overriding impression I get is that they are up to the standard >of PC based CAD packages of 3-5 years ago. They are certainly usable, but the >current crop of PC based packages offer so much more. > >Now I throw down the >gauntlet and challenge someone to develop a REALLY good CAD package for the >Amiga. The hardware is certainly fast enough, the OS is stable enough, and >the display issues will be resolved. Come on guys, how good are you? Here >are some of the features that should be included: > >1. full 3D, with the ability to define 2D specific view information (most real >world objects are 3D, but require 2D drawing representations of the object to >be built. The CAD system should be able to maintain the linkage between this >3D/2D data.) X-Cad 3D has this... > >2. user modifiable interface (for that matter, user modifiable everything. >Perhaps a full C development environment built in, which gives access to the >supplied graphics primitives and user interface, but also allows extensions >to these for applications development - after all, I will want to use my CAD >package for totally different purposes than other people.) > It's in there (in fact it has almost no interface to star with, you build it yourself)... >3. links to non-graphic data (maybe a relational database, maybe the whole >system is object-oriented. Either way, graphics alone are not enough to fully >describe objects.) That's something I'm not sure of, but I think it's there. Anybody out there know for sure (haven't got time digging around for the specs) > >4. translators to get data into/out of other systems. At the very least DXF and >IGES. X-Cad will read/write AutoCad files... > >I recently posted a request for information about whether a development system >was avaliable that might be a good springboard for such a system, and have >got minimal response. I think there is a glaring void in available Amiga >applications in the CAD and RDBMS areas, and potentially an eager ready market. >Come on, how about doing something about it?? Any thoughts? > >Cameron Stephenson ph +61 75 951220 >Bond University >Gold Coast Australia Colin DeWolfe dewolfe@ug.cs.dal.ca dewolfe@iris1.ucis.dal.ca
UH2@psuvm.psu.edu (Lee Sailer) (12/07/90)
I am in no way up to speed on CAD. However, I did talk to a couple of
guys from DynaCAD at the World of Commodore Amiga in Toronto last
week. They ran DynaCAD through its paces for me on an A3000. They kept
saying that it blows everything else away---sure, this is marketroid babble--
and it was my "gut reaction" that they sincerely believed it.
Also, a Commodore employee who claims to know CAD says there is no
easier to learn, easier to use package than DynaCAD. This could be important
in certain low use niches.
leecameron@kirk.nmg.bu.oz (Cameron Stevenson) (12/10/90)
Just a few small points: From article <1990Dec6.170222.3600@cs.dal.ca>, by dewolfe@ug.cs.dal.ca (Anarchy for Peace): > In article <2657@kirk.nmg.bu.oz> cameron@kirk.nmg.bu.oz (Cameron Stevenson) writes: >>screen display/resolution is needed. The acceptable minimum nowadays is about >>1000x800x32 on a 15" screen. Obviously (as with most things in life) the more >>the better.... > > Personally, I don't see the need for a 32 bit colour screen in Cad. I always You're correct; I can't see the need for 32 bit colour either. That was 32 colours ie. 1000x800 resolution x 32 colours as a minimum configuration. For colour-shaded images obviously more colours are needed. >>1. full 3D, with the ability to define 2D specific view information (most real >>world objects are 3D, but require 2D drawing representations of the object to >>be built. The CAD system should be able to maintain the linkage between this >>3D/2D data.) > > X-Cad 3D has this... I'm not going to correct you on this one. I'll just say that I didn't see the capability when I looked at X-Cad, and would be surprised if it was there. To re-iterate: drawing views of an object (because of the nature of drawings) should be different to 2D views of the 3D model. A good example (that I have quoted before) is of a door. In 3D you usually want to see it closed, with door handle, etc; in plan it will be shown open with a swing; in elevation it will be shown closed again, in section the door is usually not shown at all. The CAD system (as I said before) should be able to maintain the linkage between these views, so that if you manipulate the object in one view it will be changed in all other views. Now I am willing to be educated (and impressed), but I don't think X-Cad can do this... (over to you) > Colin DeWolfe > dewolfe@ug.cs.dal.ca > dewolfe@iris1.ucis.dal.ca Cameron Stephenson
dewolfe@ug.cs.dal.ca (Colin DeWolfe) (12/14/90)
In article <2664@kirk.nmg.bu.oz> cameron@kirk.nmg.bu.oz (Cameron Stevenson) writes: >Just a few small points: > > >>>1. full 3D, with the ability to define 2D specific view information (most real >>>world objects are 3D, but require 2D drawing representations of the object to >>>be built. The CAD system should be able to maintain the linkage between this >>>3D/2D data.) >> >> X-Cad 3D has this... > >I'm not going to correct you on this one. I'll just say that I didn't see the >capability when I looked at X-Cad, and would be surprised if it was there. To >re-iterate: drawing views of an object (because of the nature of drawings) >should be different to 2D views of the 3D model. A good example (that I have >quoted before) is of a door. In 3D you usually want to see it closed, with >door handle, etc; in plan it will be shown open with a swing; in elevation it >will be shown closed again, in section the door is usually not shown at all. >The CAD system (as I said before) should be able to maintain the linkage >between these views, so that if you manipulate the object in one view it will >be changed in all other views. >Now I am willing to be educated (and impressed), but I don't think X-Cad can >do this... (over to you) > Okay, now that that is understood, I'll look into it and let you know. I'll phone them from the dealership I work for. As it stands, I have X-CAD 2-d and was going by what the ad said. I'll find out for sure. > >Cameron Stephenson -- Colin DeWolfe dewolfe@ug.cs.dal.ca dewolfe@iris1.ucus.dal.ca