Autocad For Mac/apple! Why Not?

[archimniac]

Guys!

 

I know most of you must have been to architosh website and heard of this issue before. I am just thinking that WE who are in CGarchitect should consider writing a petition to AUTODESK and make our voices heard too! (JEFF, food for thoughts?

WHO KNOWS?! AUTODESK might take us more seriously since there has been no news from the Architosh in regards to AUTODESK replying back to them!

 

Personally, i feel it would be an ENORMOUS breakthrough if AUTODESK is being introduced into the APPLE world. Wouldn't anyone of you dream of working with autocad in an OS platform? More importantly for LAPTOP USERS, wouldn't you prefer owning a travel friendly,stylish, high performance laptop yet still being able to work with AUTOCAD?

 

Imagine!

[Jeff Mottle]

Who knows maybe Microsoft will start making a white computer too. I knew that Architosh has that petition going, but if they have not heard back, I doubt they would pay too much attention to the 99% PC users here.

[mbowers]

Traditionally Mac users have been forced to use FormZ. I used to own a Mac, but i too work in the Architecture Realm and have been forced to use PC's and the Autodesk platform. FormZ is a wonderful drafting and modelling tool. Maybe this could give some of you an insight into a potential platform.

[IC]

I've just researched switching to the mac because I wanted something that looks better than the PC since it'd be in a more public room.

 

Instead I'm just staying with the PC because of:

 

a) The reason mentioned here(and it's far from just AutoCad)

b) The cost of a half decent mac

c) I'd be the only one in my network of friends/colleagues who used a mac so I'd be left out of a huge amount of shared info.

 

Autodesk have proved over the years that they may be many things but they're not stupid. If there's no (huge amounts of) money in it for them, you can forget it.

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

wasn't there an mac version of autocad years ago? ..or was that just microstation?

[jackb602]

There was a Mac version of AutoCad, around R12 maybe. I remember seeing it in architecture school about 10 years ago. I eagerly signed the Architosh petition a couple of years ago, and since then I've decided I really don't need/want AutoCad on the Mac. At the moment, I run it on Virtual PC which is actually OK (not great) for drafting. But in the long run (or maybe not-so-long) I plan to switch to another more powerful CAD app, possibly VectorWorks. I've used AutoCad for at least ten years, and it's clear to me that it dominates the market primarily because of inertia. One of the most common arguments for using it are "everybody else uses it." I'll keep my copy around for compatibility, but I know there are much more advanced/efficient drafting tools out there.

 

Jack

[mbr]

Personally, I don't like OS X. Maybe I didn't spend enough time with it, but from the few weeks I used it I found it awkward and man, those funky, scaling icons are just ridiculous!

 

As far as I can see, the only advantage they have are the looks. The cost is just outrageous! Dell has just introduced a 24" Flat for $1200, with great specs. That's just a steal, and they have sales every other day (you could geta P4 3, 1 gig ram, 160 gig drive, Geforce 6800 AND the 24", shipping included, for $1600 yesterday!! I almost dove for it, but I really need another dual processor).

 

Dell's new XPS laptop is decent looking, too. I'd buy a Mac if it ran 3D Studio and Acad, but I doubt it will anytime soon. So I just hope someone starts making decent looking PCs.

 

It's getting a tad better, at least.

[tcupp]

As a student I wouldn't even have considered buying a PC if AutoCad and Viz were available on the MAC. But because of it I have probably became a lifetime PC user and will (sadly) never make the switch back. It really is too bad.

[archimniac]

HEY MBR,

 

you should read the thread/forum at hardware...topis "high-end laptops" You would read some interesting story about dell. Personally, i think you should consider the toshiba gamer laptop. Checkout the Satellite Series.

http://www.toshibadirect.com/td/b2c/clin.to?rcid=-26367&coid=-26368&ccid=1291021&sel=0

 

I think it might change your mind about dell.

 

As for the price of owning a mac, i think its worth it. That's provided if autocad and max is introduced to mac. Think about it, the stablility the mac offers, very few pc laptops can match up to it. Even those pc laptops does do match up, it comes with the price thats called: WEIGHT! Compare a gamer pc laptop to a mac, i m sure it would change your thoughts on it. Thats my personal thought.

 

Frankly, i too would hope pc laptops could match up to macs.

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

Personally, I don't like OS X. Maybe I didn't spend enough time with it, but from the few weeks I used it I found it awkward and man, those funky, scaling icons are just ridiculous!

 

As far as I can see, the only advantage they have are the looks. The cost is just outrageous! Dell has just introduced a 24" Flat for $1200, with great specs. That's just a steal, and they have sales every other day (you could get a P4 3, 1 gig ram, 160 gig drive, Geforce 6800 AND the 24", shipping included, for $1600 yesterday!! I almost dove for it, but I really need another dual processor).

 

Dell's new XPS laptop is decent looking, too. I'd buy a Mac if it ran 3D Studio and Acad, but I doubt it will anytime soon. So I just hope someone starts making decent looking PCs.

 

It's getting a tad better, at least.

 

i agree with the interface to some extent.

 

mac has always had a better actual look to their interface. the fonts have always rendered on screen with perfect anti-aliasing, and are very easy to read. mac, from he start, always takes a great deal of care with the way their operating systems look.

 

...but this may be part of the problem i have with macs also. an operating system like that takes a great deal of power from the cpu to display and run. it takes a great deal of power from the graphics card to display and run. i am perfectly aware of mac benchmarks or speed in photoshop and such, but remember, adobe is writing photoshop on mac to take advantage of special features that the mac processors have. adobe doesn't really do this with windows because of the selections of processors.

 

work, i got a little off subject. my complaint is that even with all of the speed that the G5's have, the mac still feels like a slow operating system to work with. windows are slow to respond, menus slow to drop down, ect.. ect.. sometimes when working in my 3d apps, i tend to drag menus, scroll, and do other things really fast because they are so familiar. when i am on the mac, i can notice the slow down in the menus, and it frustrates me. maybe i am not giving it enough chance, but it is something i have longed noticed about mac, and i can't help to think that it has to be a little bit due to macs graphic, and bling bling heavy interface.

 

now i know that with macs new interface they used adobe pdf technology for displaying parts of the interface with vector lines opposed to the traditional pixel/image based format that most operating system use. in theory this should speed things up, but operating system bitmap files are extremely small in file size, and load really fast. and when you are using vector lines, and scaling them as you mouse across the screen, this cause the cpu and graphics card to work harder than what it actually needs to.

 

i would rather save that extra power for my 3d apps and rendering.

 

so much in fact that i work in windows xp, but i unloaded the winxp interface, in favor of the traditional windows 2000 and before look. this tax's my hardware less, and save the power for where i really need it.

 

no bling bling for me.

 

most of these extra features don't help the user navigate faster, or make it easier to navigate around..... they just slow things down.

 

...and besides, windows has never been known for good colors in their logo or interface presets. which brings me back to mac. the have great style, and decent colors on in their logo and interface design. which is great, because i value highly the look of things, as well as their function.

 

i appreciate what mac is trying to do, but i think it is at a serious cost to the user. ...and i don't mean money.

 

i really didn't want to make this a mac vs pc thread, but my post may be promoting that conversation. please, if you respond, respond with a quality reply, and not that windows sucks. (not directed at you MBR, but at anyone replying to my post.

 

i will bring this back to topic related now.

 

in another thread awhile ago i commented another on another one of my dissapointments with the osx. osx is essentially a linux based operating system. ...but in its own special flavor. before it was released, apple touted that linux users could easily port their apps back and forth between osx and linux. this would create interest in the computer nerds, and apple would have a area of users that it dearly needs. this has happened to some extent, but has been really disappointing to me.

 

where are the major players in this?

 

..why isn't adobe [porting their products to linux?

 

...why isn't 3dmax being developed for mac, since it could easily be ported to linux, creating a large enough user base to balance, and make a profit from this sector.

 

...why isn't autocad doing the same for reasons listed above.

 

now granted, i wanted the above to happen, because i would jump at the chance to switch to a linux system if the apps i use were available on that system. ..and then the mac users would be happy, the linux users would be happy, and the windows users could go on being windows users.

 

oh, and MBR, i think you can shange a setting so the icons don't change sizes when you mouse over them.

[William Alexander]

Re: Autocad For Mac/apple! Why Not?.....

 

XSI seems to be backing off, maybe maybe not, on being a cross platform app and the scirpting and code are very comapitable from what I understand with OSX/Unix based systems. Why, the dual opp sytem is very difficult to make consistant and reliable. As in it costs development $$$$$ for something that may not be a sure thing- working, selling and the risk of it turning away existing user base.

 

Why would autocad try again at the apple market? AutoDesk knows what it would take, after all Combustion etal is cross platform. They have a niche' that has always been thier focus and AutoDesk grew from CAD/3D. The other major market VFX/Graphics is being once agian overtaken by Apple, user preference/momentum and just a general hate of anything PC/Microsoft. or just basically because Apple has focused on thier greatest and die hard user base.

 

It's all very 'good business' imho.

 

edit>>> CHG... Apple is playing hardball, no more shake for the PC ;(((( they want the VFX market and Unix / Linux is how they will do it (connectivity), the chink in the PC/microsoft armor it would appear.

 

WDA

[Hazdaz]

AutoCAD is never going to the Mac. AutoCAD itself is a 1/2 dead program, there is no way AutoDesk is going to put forth the realitively large effort of making a Mac compatible version when the market on the Mac is so small.

[4DM]

Vectorworks + C4D on a G5 Mac here.

 

No worries, except translating clients' AutoCAD 2005 files( because I'm too mean to upgrade from VW10 to VW11 !)

 

I'm sorry, mbr, you didn't enjoy your OSX experience.

 

Although I love almost all things Mac, I also hated the magnifying icons in the Dock. Within seconds they were gone...Apple Menu>Dock>Turn Magnification Off.

 

Perhaps this feature was intended for the partially sighted ? - there are a whole load of disability features on board OSX for people with hearing, seeing, and physical disabilities using mice and keyboards. ( Universal Access System Prefs).

[ShaunDon]

AutoCAD itself is a 1/2 dead program, there is no way AutoDesk is going to put forth the realitively large effort of making a Mac compatible version when the market on the Mac is so small.

 

Hold on a second, I think that statement requires a little justification -- AutoCAD is half dead? I've seen no indication in the past couple years that any more of my clients are using AutoCAD alternatives, by and large the majority of them still work with CAD. All the computer drafting courses I see at colleges teach AutoCAD. It is the defacto standard. This isn't to say I don't know companies that use other software, but nothing else comes up nearly as consistently as Autodesk's flagship software...

 

And as for porting to the Mac -- I wish they would, but I know they never will. Mac workstations are simply more expensive, and drafting departments will never have the kind of money to spend on them over cheaper PCs. Your graphic design department may get those shiny, hip new machines, but that's only because Apple still is the machine for graphic design in the minds of many.

 

I'm tired of arguing for or against either side. I prefer Windows because I've grown up running a computer with a keyboard. I won't pretend that makes me or my operating system better than anyone elses. But simply put, Autodesks market will never move to the Mac platform, so there's no impetus for them to port any of their software to the Mac.

 

Shaun

[angelo]

I'm not really crazy about one interface or OS over the other, what I want is STABILITY. For instance, I loaded Symantec Antivirus & Ghost on my XP laptop the other day, and one broke the other! Products from the same company breaking each other!

 

I bought Ghost because I'm sick of getting the 20 or so programs all working perfectly on a machine only to have something go haywire in the registry and it not be repairable.

 

We have upwards of 30 applications loaded on a Mac OS X machine at home, and we literally have a crash about once every four to six months.

 

I have to reboot my fancy-everything-up-to-date Dell multiple times a day, because Autodesk's products actually leak RAM. Stability is what it's about for me. A system that works so I can concentrate on designing would be nice.

 

Angelo

[mmangold]

I don't know if every body remembers why Auutodesk dropped mac & unix. Yeah Autocad could run on both but, what they told everyone was having so many different types of AutoCAD held the product back. Everyone can see the benifits of one OS by how quick they come out with there releases. I am not saying it is a good thing to have a new release every year. But they do make some big changes in the software. Autocad is not in anyway the best program out there but what it does have to offer is easy customizing to make the program work for you.(Menu's, lisp, vba etc.) I have been using Autocad since version 2.1 and I have always tried different programs. (archicad, Datacad, Microstation etc) But I seem to always go back to Autocad. I have used Mac, Unix, Linux and Windows. Yeah Windows is not the best but what does 85% of the world use. Windows. If you go to an AutoCAd seminar you always see them pushing Revit. If you ask them they always say Revit is the future. But they will never tell you what is going to happen to AutoCAD. I think in the future they will merge the two products and you have to buy one of the Desktop products.

[BrianKitts]

maybe we should just reverse archicad's thinking on the petition...... and petition all the mac users to go PC!

 

As for the comment about Autocad being half dead, um yes, I sure the 85% of all architecture firms who use it as a standard for cad would agree with you on that one...... after all, the reason its dead is why most programs allow you to export to a dwg file, because no one uses autocad right???

[bricklyne]

maybe we should just reverse archicad's thinking on the petition...... and petition all the mac users to go PC!

 

As for the comment about Autocad being half dead, um yes, I sure the 85% of all architecture firms who use it as a standard for cad would agree with you on that one...... after all, the reason its dead is why most programs allow you to export to a dwg file, because no one uses autocad right???

 

 

 

I think when people say AutoCAD is dead or half-dead anyway, they tend to refer so, not so much in a demographic sense ( i.e. in terms of how many people use the program) but rather in terms of innovation and evolution of the program`s versatility and functions. Save for 2 or 3 major enhancements ( and mostly to do with the plot manager and Plotting interface features) a lot of the major "improvements" we have seen between AutoCAD R13 ( or even R12 for that matter) and AutoCAD 2005, have been mostly cosmetic (new buttons, layouts, roll-outs, menus, interface) and internal ( stabilizing the program algorithm to reduce the frequency with which it crashes on you; as opposed to advances that would otherwise actually enhance and optimize a drafter's or user's capacity. In other words, AutoCAD has just about reached the "Microsoft Word" syndrome, stage; at which point it is no longer possible to improve on the program but the parent company nonetheless feels compelled to dish out updates and new releases every 6 months regardless. I mean, how much has changed between AutoCAD 2002 and AutoCAD2005? Really?

 

Just because most people or a lot of people use the program is not a testament to its versatility or intuitiveness, and is more of an allusion to the fact that most technical schools and industries in general, are weaned on orthographic representation ( plan, side, front) of objects for manufacturing purposes, and as such AutoCAD is the weapon of choice in terms of not only executing blueprints but also conveniently training designers. In other words, because AutoDesk has for so long dominated the market, ( mostly through marketing and business practises as opposed to actually having a superior product), most AutoCAD users don't really have much of a viable and WIDELY-used alternative, do they? This despite the fact that some of the lesser known alternatives that do exist, are actually superior to AutoCAD in terms of the versatility and usability.

 

Besides which, most of the product design and Industrial fields (Automotive, Nautical, Mechanical and to a lesser extent Aeronautical) that traditionally relied heavily on AutoCAD for their design purposes are now slowly migrating towards parametric single-virtual-model design solutions ( Alias Studiotools, CATIA, Solidworks, Rhino, etc), quite simply because the limitations of flatland design (2D-CAD) are beginning to become apparent in an competitive business environment, where resources (read coordination) have to be completely accounted for and optimized.

 

And Autodesk know this as well; I mean, why else do you think they are pushing Revit so heavily as the design solution of the future for architects?

[Hazdaz]

BRICKLYNE - you basically posted what I was gonna post concerning my previous comment that "AutoCAD is 1/2 dead"... a comment that I totaly stick by.

 

AutoDESK is in the troubling... yet VERY envied position of having a huge chunk of the general CAD market, YET its core software is sooo very limited in terms of technology and advancement that the only way to improve on it, is to basically break completely away from it. AutoCAD now is at its root nothing more than a glorified electronic drafting board. It had advanced CAD tremondously, yet when it comes down to it, it uses the same/similiar mentality that was being used 30+ years ago when pencil and vellum where used.

 

We have advanced enough in computer power to completely shift past that old paradgm to a completely different way of drawing and designing.

 

AutoDESK sees that, that is why it came out with Inventor years ago trying to push the whole mechanical world into an actual modern mechanical package (one that is based on parametric solids and intelligent models, not simple lines and circles, like AutoCAD).

 

And in the architectural world it has both ADT and Revit to eventually create a similiar CAD model... one that used intelligence to model a building (and know about things like electrical and mechanical services) and not just simple lines.