[cad-linux] Re: Wine intellicad
- From: "Captain H. Bruce Hartgers" <thephnx@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: cad-linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 07:13:57 -0400
Some very interesting comments, definitely more than two cents worth; but!
A journey starts at the beginning not the end.
A suggested approach to "a good CAD program" begins with defining the term.
Having been there at the beginning ( I am 67, and graduated my first engineering
degree in the 1950's) and learned to design and draft with pen, pencil, paper
and
waxed linen (before mylar), participating (eagerly) in the evolution from
triangle's and T-squares, through Leroy Lettering Sets, Plastic templates and
drafting machines, I may have something to contribute.
I firmly believe the 'D' on CAD stands for drafting NOT design. Even the
younger
architects and engineers to whom I now consult, prefer to design on paper.
Although it may have something to do with our age, I don't think so. There is
just something about the connection between hand and mind that serves the
creative process better than keyboard, even tablet, and monitor. Note that I
rarely use the marketers preferred abbreviation CADD.
So although marketers like AutoDesk hype their 3-D (they have been doing it long
before it was a true reality) and other bells and whistles, the real task is 2-D
drafting.
So THAT is the beginning. Add to that the computer's capabilities for
eliminating repetitive tasks, creating reusable blocks and the extraordinary
precision of drawing in real measurements eliminating the constant errors of
working with scales where pencil points are inches thick, you have already
achieved the first major virtue the computer can give.
There is no denying the awesomeness(?) of using the computer to generate - and
rotate - a true three dimensional model of what you are designing; but to make
that a limiting parameter is a bit philistine. I say philistine with some
degree of comfort because of being there before even the computers were capable
of 3D except with primitives. I have therefore the confirmed conviction that
the 3D hype is as much the work of salesmen as of engineers.
Again, don't get me wrong 3D is extremely valuable, especially to those less
gifted who can not visualize their work properly - did Frank Lloyd Wright have
3D? -.
It is NOT, however, essential and need not prevent or burden the development of
a
Linux CAD program.
I suspect, some of you young computer drafting wizards will be shocked at these
words. But do not lose sight of the fact that the purpose is to create
construction documents. Drawings are a means to an end, the building,
machining,
making of physical things, not an end in themselves (although they might be were
they still done by hand and representing talent, rather than agility, you CAD
drafters MUST miss that).
The instance of three dimensional computer modeling really contributing to the
design process IS on the rise, particularly for complex machine parts, but it is
still a VERY small part of the CAD real world application or need.
In my experience the folk who emphasize 3D images are trying to razzle dazzle
their way round their shortcomings. I had trained a few of my more talented
drafters to generate 3D CAD drawings in the late eighties, and we all agreed
they
needed `hand work' before they were suitable for presentation, to get away from
that machine look. That has nothing to do with the state of the art but it does
have everything to do with the state of the mind.
It might be a benefit for the young comers up to learn to visualize before
having
the computer do it for them. Kind of like exercising your brain by doing math
in your head without the calculator once and a while (my trick was to tally the
grocery bill as fast - faster - than the cash register (of course it got more
difficult when they started using scanners!-))
In retrospect, my thoughts may be worth more than two cents but to many they may
seem in foreign coin!-)
A suggestion. Create a good 2D Linux program and export the finished drawings
to
a stand-alone bootleg copy of R-14 to generate the 3D.
Bootleg he says! Ah yes, we'll talk about copyright, intellectual property
rights, and ethics according to Gates, another time; the way it is, the way it
was, and the way it ought to be. Bootleg, he does say.-)
AJBIBB@xxxxxxx wrote:
> In a message dated 7/15/2002 10:35:07 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> mrjive@xxxxxxxxx writes:
>
> > hi everyone!
> >
> > it seems great to get cad applications work fine with wine or similar,
> > but to me it does make not sense in the long run...
> > it could be useful for time to time jobs, but how can you think to use
> > this seriously in your everyday work?
> >
> > and then, is it possible that no one can write a really good cad
> > application running on linux? or a good port?
> > i heard of a linux port of archicad, but only in japanese (at the moment
> > and cannot find the URL...)
> >
> > if our future destinated to be painful? ;-))
> >
> >
>
> My own opinion (probably not worth much more than two cents, but here it is
> anyway). As long as most computers come installed with MS windows what
> software company in its right mind is going to support another operating
> system? I don't think it is so much a matter of no one can port a cad
> program to linux, but rather no one thinks they can make money at it.
>
> Another real problem is the definition of "good cad program". I know full
> well that my definition of good; 2D drafting, user programming capability,
> the ability to read (and only read) acad 3d drawings is wholly unacceptable
> to many subscribers to this list. Autodesk has its way with the technical
> community because they are serving a fairly small user base and I believe
> that few (if any) companies are willing to make the investment necessary to
> grab a piece of this market for a reward that can only be a small piece of a
> small pie. I am afraid that there are even fewer Linux users looking for cad
> applications. With a relatively small user base I believe that to be
> successful it would be necessary that a CAD program include every feature
> that every potential user could possibly want. It makes no sense to market
> to a niche of what is already a niche market. If you accept my premise then
> your CAD program would need to be both very large and very complex - which of
> course translates to expensive.
>
> My own opinion is that if Linux users want a cad application we are going to
> need to do it ourselves. The problem of course is that we all have day jobs,
> families and other interests. I truly hope I am wrong, but I believe that
> our future is indeed destined to be painful. It dosen't mean we can't try
> though.
>
> Andy
Other related posts:
