I really didn't look at any other programs. I'd had experience with
MacDraft, ClarisCAD, MacDraw, but only MacDraft survives and its only a
2D drafting program. Even if AutoCAD made another attempt at the Mac
market, I probably wouldn't waste my time considering it.
My process was simple, the VectorWorks looked best on the day I had to
make a decision.
-jc
On Mar 21, 2004, at 4:53 PM, creighton wrote:
> What process did you go through picking this program? Did you look at
> any
> others? ctb
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Callan" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 3:26 PM
> Subject: Re: [BP] Surprised again
>
>
>> I'm not sure that the program has fewer options. It seems to be
>> capable of anything I want to do and a whole lot that I don't want to
>> do...now. Without some way to filter its capabilities, I had a
>> difficult time learning the program and became hopelessly confused.
>> This was in an earlier version where the "Architect" features had not
>> been separated from the basic program. That version belonged to a
>> former employer, and I lost its use. I think it was a good thing.
>>
>> Placing windows, doors and so forth individually is not problem. I
>> prefer that method. The tool, "Move" is very useful for that.
>> Eyeballing works fine, and the "smart points" or whatever they are
>> called help too.
>>
>> I should note that I'm creating models to illustrate conditions and
>> explain the building. I haven't tried any construction documents yet.
>> But when I do create construction documents, I still try to illustrate
>> existing conditions and to define the problem and the acceptable
>> solutions. I don't think I've done much work that was so simple that
>> I
>> could tell the trades person to do as I direct without any thinking or
>> calculating on his/her part. Certainly, my best work was not done
>> that
>> way.
>>
>> I have no regrets. Except I wish I'd dived in sooner.
>>
>> -jc
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mar 21, 2004, at 1:49 PM, creighton wrote:
>>
>>> well I guess just like any program, the simpler it is to use the less
>>> options you have. I guess that's only if the simplification consists
>>> of the
>>> program doing things for you. Templates, objects and so on. As you
>>> suggest
>>> starting with the basic bones would be a good idea. One thing that
>>> worried
>>> me was a icon on the test version sent me that allowed automatic
>>> insertion
>>> of clouds.
>>> It reminds me of the trend of buildings to be designed around
>>> catalogs
>>> instead of the balance achieved pre 1850 when buildings were designed
>>> as an
>>> entirety. Look at any window catalog and you will see wildly
>>> unbalanced
>>> buildings.
>>> So I worry about a program telling me that I'm not on 16" centers
>>> or
>>> have improperly dimensioned lumber. It doesn't seem that's a problem
>>> with
>>> this program as you see it.ctb
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "John Callan" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 12:15 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [BP] Surprised again
>>>
>>>
>>>> So far the restrictions are self imposed. There are parts of the
>>>> program I have not yet mastered. I am aware of them, and go back
>>>> and
>>>> learn more about how they work when I decide I need them. Drawing
>>>> in
>>>> 3D from the start is a real good thing.
>>>>
>>>> I did not buy the "Architect" package. The basic package has the
>>>> basic
>>>> parts of buildings (walls, floors, roofs, windows, doors, light,
>>>> etc.),
>>>> as well as the basic tools for creating 3D and 2D shapes and
>>>> objects.
>>>> Learning within these limitations was a good thing. There's a real
>>>> clarity that comes from mastering the basics.
>>>>
>>>> I plan to purchase the Architecture package sometime soon. Now
>>>> that I
>>>> have a basic understanding of what the program does with the data I
>>>> input, a few short cuts for tedious things and a larger collection
>>>> of
>>>> plug-in objects and symbols would be nice. If I'd had them
>>>> earlier, I
>>>> think they would have been confusing.
>>>>
>>>> What kind of restrictions did you have in mind?
>>>>
>>>> -jc
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 21, 2004, at 10:55 AM, creighton wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> do you find vector works restricts you in any way? ctb
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "John Callan" <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 11:36 AM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [BP] Surprised again
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm using VectorWorks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have had very little experience with AutoCAD, and like most
>>>>>> "standard" programs, I found it had no other feature of any
>>>>>> import.
>>>>>> Since I tend not to work in standard ways, or on standard
>>>>>> buildings,
>>>>>> being the standard is not a compelling argument.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -jc
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2004, at 9:31 AM, creighton wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Very interesting , and timely. Are you using AutoCAD? I've Been
>>>>>>> toying
>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>> AutoCAD 14 for two years without really applying myself. I
>>>>>>> recently
>>>>>>> decided
>>>>>>> to get on it, but first review the other programs out there (
>>>>>>> vector
>>>>>>> works,
>>>>>>> softbuild, softplan) So far these seem to be ok for cookie cutter
>>>>>>> houses,
>>>>>>> but not for restoration work. Your experience, anyone else out
>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>> something to check out before I commit? Unfortunately I am stuck
>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>> windows.creighton
>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>> From: "John Callan" <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>>>> Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 11:19 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: [BP] Surprised again
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have been drawing two historic buildings in my CADD program.
>>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>> nature of the program is such that 3D is just how it works, or
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>> least
>>>>>>>> how I have learned it. As I was drawing the building today, in
>>>>>>>> order
>>>>>>>> to study it and know it better, in its original construction, I
>>>>>>>> realized that I was not only seeing things that have not been
>>>>>>>> seen
>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> long time, but things that may have never been seen before.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> CADD drawing does amazing things, like defy gravity and the laws
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> physics. Two things CAN occupy the same space at the same time.
>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>> drawing in a storage system that had been placed up against a
>>>>>>>> counter.
>>>>>>>> I never questioned it before, but when that sucker popped up in
>>>>>>>> 3D,
>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>> was a surprise to me. Must have been a surprise to the
>>>>>>>> inspector
>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>> the job too!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The 3D views help to confirm that what I think is going on
>>>>>>>> really
>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> going on. That's great for an insecure guy like me. Builds
>>>>>>>> confidence. I do think in 3D pretty much all the time and
>>>>>>>> pretty
>>>>>>>> effectively, but it is such a relief to have my minds eye view
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> world confirmed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cool.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -jc
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
>>>>>>>> uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
>>>>>>>> <http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
>>>>>>> uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
>>>>>>> <http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
>>>>>> uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
>>>>>> <http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
>>>>> uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
>>>>> <http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
>>>> uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
>>>> <http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
>>> uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
>>> <http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
>> uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
>> <http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>
>
> --
> To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
> uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
> <http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>
>
--
To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
<http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>
|
