Autocad "Lite"

[RobbieB]

I remember a couple years back seeing an inexpensive version of Autocad that was for hobbyists and stuff. I think it was like $100 or maybe 79.99 Does anyone know the name of this edition or if it's still available?

 

[Weird]

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=2498418

AutoCAD LT

Just guessing, but it's more like $500 - $750

 

[Bob Morrison]

In a previous post Weird wrote...

AutoCAD LT

Just guessing, but it's more like $500 - $750

Cost is $899 for a CD or $879 for download

http://tinyurl.com/g2bnb

 

[JG]

Might he be thinking of Generic Cadd? Right Price range.
Later became Visual Cadd.

 

[Bob Morrison]

In a previous post JG wrote...

Might he be thinking of Generic Cadd? Right Price range.
Later became Visual Cadd.

Full Disclosure: I'm VP of the Visualcadd Users Group.

IMHO, the best damn 2D drafting program on the market for the money. It's easy to learn, doesn't require huge amounts of system resources (I have a copy running on a Pentium II - 166 with 256K ram), and doesn't cost very much for the program. List price is $395 for download and $450 for CD

If you have a copy of Generic Cadd or Autocad LT you can buy an "upgrade" to VCadd for as little as $109.95

Go here for more info: http://www.tritools.com/default.htm

 

[RobbieB]

I remember part of the box design which had a rear bicycle wheel and gears and stuff. I know about autocad LT, I could have sworn it was by autodesk and it was a cheap edition for under $100 oh well.

 

[Al]

I remember part of the box design which had a rear bicycle wheel and gears and stuff. I know about autocad LT, I could have sworn it was by autodesk and it was a cheap edition for under $100 oh well.

This program?
http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=2753027

 

[Bob Morrison]

In a previous post JG wrote...

We started with Generic Cadd when it was on 5 1/4" disks. Switched to Visual Cadd from Corel when Generic wouldn't work in a Win98 environment (worked in Win95). Updated 2x following Vcadd to Imsi but hit a roadblock when we started exchanging files with architects who used later versions of acad and especially with those who used Architectural desktop. Liked some of the hatching features, and the quick-key commands. Didn't like the fact that rotating a drawing screwed up dimensioning. Ended up rotating borders if we realized the fit was an issue rather than trying to rotate the drawing, but that would screw up text orientation. Compatibility was the big issue because drawings, while usually readable didn't cross formats as well as I would have liked. With a little money for development, and in a world that wasn't so heavily dominated by Autodesk, Visual Cadd could have stayed in the running, but alas we were forced to change to the big gun, even though we didn't need all of that extra power at the expense of speed, or that higher price.

VCadd is now in capable hands -- Tritools Partners. All the partners are also users. DWG compatibility is much better, but Autodesk makes the DWG format a moving target so VCadd isn't the only cadd program with file compatibility issues. VCadd is now at version 5 and version 6 is being worked on. The program is now way better than the IMSI version (version
3).

The dimensions still don't rotate with the drawing, but we now have Reference Frames (X-refs) which make assembling a drawing easier. They can be used as a form of paperspace.

Probable the the thing I like the most about VCadd is that I can produce an usable drawing in half the time as most people who use Autocad. The program is that easy to use. And one other thing is I'm not giving huge amounts of money to a company (Autodesk) that doesn't care about its customers (but that is a topic for another day).

 

[JG]

Will the new release have 2007 compatibility? Also what happens with "object enablers" and what it takes to represent them on the drawing? We still have to deal with architects using architectural desktop. Some architects will also have 8 or more sheets in one drawing, but use paperspace to separate into sheets so that if you don't have paperspace available, you have a sheet that is overwhelmed with layers on top of layers in modelspace.

 

[Bob Morrison]

In a previous post JG wrote...

Will the new release have 2007 compatibility? Also what happens with "object enablers" and what it takes to represent them on the drawing? We still have to deal with architects using architectural desktop. Some architects will also have 8 or more sheets in one drawing, but use paperspace to separate into sheets so that if you don't have paperspace available, you have a sheet that is overwhelmed with layers on top of layers in modelspace.

VCadd typically saves the multiple drawings as separate files with Reference Frames (X-Refs) to the "Model" drawing. This is one of the items that will get some work in Version 6 as it still does not function as well as it should. Again, the DWG format is a moving target. VCadd uses the OPENDWG paradigm as the basis for file conversion, but as long as Autodesk keeps changing the format then no other cadd software will be fully compatible.

Architectural Desktop is a problem for all non-Autodesk cadd products and as far as I've been able to tell even older versions of Autocad won't properly open these files either. The format is not backward compatible, which in my mind is poor software design. Not to mention As far as I know the current version of Autocad won't even open some older versions of their own DWG format. Autodesk forces you to keep buying new versions at inflated prices. Not very consumer friendly. Sheesh! now you got me started (and I promised not to!).

 

[Mike Harrison]

I think we're stuck with autocad for the time being. My hope was for something that I read about a while ago, that the European union was going to legislate a universal cad file format that all cad software companies would have to comply with. I think that if that ever came about, we would have the best of everything in that files would be universal and cad companies could compete on the basis of who could write the most economical, efficient and easy to use software.

 

[sakoguy]

Autosketch is $129, you can buy it online from Autodesk. But it is a very cut down version of CAD.

 

[JG]

I fully understand. My problem stays, unfortunately, with the fact that I am stuck with dealing with architects (and engineers) who use Autocad. If I can't read their files I am stuck. If they can't incorporate my drawings in theirs, they get p.o.'d. They pay for the high end program blindly because 1) they already know it (taught in college) and 2) they can hire tech school grads who already know how to use it.

I have played with Intellicad, but found it to be comparatively buggy, but at least they could open 2004 files and the files when read by autocad were not screwed up with missing hatches etc. The major idiosyncracy on the version I tried (other than continuous lockups and crashes) was the inability to handle complex linetypes. Visual Cadd dwg files did not look right when viewed in Autocad, and vice versa. But you could get work done since it was stable.

 

[Michael Bulatovich]

I don't remember the bike wheel, but could it have been an Acad-clone like IntelliCAD? Versions of it have been free, and some went for as little as a hundred bucks.

 

[RobbieB]

I found it!

http://www.amazon.com/QuickCAD-8/dp...sr_1_5/104-8528859-3226369?ie=UTF8&s=software

Discontinued though :/

 

[Bob Morrison]

In a previous post JG wrote...

I have played with Intellicad, but found it to be comparatively buggy, but at least they could open 2004 files and the files when read by autocad were not screwed up with missing hatches etc. The major idiosyncracy on the version I tried (other than continuous lockups and crashes) was the inability to handle complex linetypes. Visual Cadd dwg files did not look right when viewed in Autocad, and vice versa. But you could get work done since it was stable.

The hatch and block translation problems of earlier versions of VCadd have been worked. It still won't do complex linetypes (and may never do so). The program is not for everyone, but for those who have pretty simple drafting needs it works very well.

BTW, I've not had any recent complaints (since V5 was introduced) from architects who get the DWG files I export from VCadd.

 

[CHARLES FLEMING]

That's when you need to learn how to use the layer manager. No I am not an architect, I'm a structural engineer.

Chuck

 

[Bob Morrison]

In a previous post CHARLES FLEMING wrote...

That's when you need to learn how to use the layer manager. No I am not an architect, I'm a structural engineer.

Chuck:

I agree. If the layers are properly named in the first place then it is not too difficult to get the proper layers displayed.

About 75% of the time I get DWG files that are a mess when it comes to layer names and objects on those layers.

There is no excuse for a 3 story building to only have 7 or 8 layers with furniture and walls on the same layer. That's just sloppy workmanship.

 

[JG]

Believe me, I know how to use the layer manager, but when architects dimension in paperspace (they use the same detail repeatedly but with different empahasis or xref multiple drawings out of different modules as in the case of a condo with the same module rotated, and re-used) the need for the software to be super compatible becomes inordinately difficult to overcome.

 

[Caveman]

We started with Generic Cadd when it was on 5 1/4" disks. Switched to Visual Cadd from Corel when Generic wouldn't work in a Win98 environment (worked in Win95). Updated 2x following Vcadd to Imsi but hit a roadblock when we started exchanging files with architects who used later versions of acad and especially with those who used Architectural desktop. Liked some of the hatching features, and the quick-key commands. Didn't like the fact that rotating a drawing screwed up dimensioning. Ended up rotating borders if we realized the fit was an issue rather than trying to rotate the drawing, but that would screw up text orientation. Compatibility was the big issue because drawings, while usually readable didn't cross formats as well as I would have liked. With a little money for development, and in a world that wasn't so heavily dominated by Autodesk, Visual Cadd could have stayed in the running, but alas we were forced to change to the big gun, even though we didn't need all of that extra power at the expense of speed, or that higher price.

There is a free dwg-compatible (R15) cad at http://www.a9tech.com but it is VERY basic, can still be used as a viewer or to do redlining.