Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
Posted by
Ian Wright
on 2001-07-27 11:25:17 UTC
Hi,
Autocad 14 and 2000 does do solid modelling in 3D but not in quite the same
'video game' sort of way as other packages. Rhino Cad is another option
which uses basically Autocad commands and also does 3D solids.
Ian
--
Ian W. Wright
Sheffield UK
www.iw63.freeserve.co.uk
Autocad 14 and 2000 does do solid modelling in 3D but not in quite the same
'video game' sort of way as other packages. Rhino Cad is another option
which uses basically Autocad commands and also does 3D solids.
Ian
--
Ian W. Wright
Sheffield UK
www.iw63.freeserve.co.uk
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marcus & Eva" <implmex@...>
To: <CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 27 July 2001 15:37
Subject: Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
> Hi Tom:
>
> >Autocad is the industry standard and would probably give your lad more
> >options for future employment<
>
> True, true.
> But what an awful, counterintuitive, unfriendly program to have to
learn!!!
> For my money, the way of the future is solid modelling.
> That means either Pro E or Solidworks. (There are others, but these two
have
> dominant market share and are likely to be the de-facto standards of the
> future)
>
> The advantages of solid modelling for any kind of design are many, and
most
> serious designers are going this route in order to tap into those
benefits.
>
> An additional benefit of solid modellers, is that the skill set learned
with
> one program is far more transferable to another modelling package than the
> skills learned with a conventional drafting package.
>
> With solids, the model construction strategy is the bulk of the skill, and
> this is useful to know for any other solid modeller.
>
> With a program like Autocad, the commands and how to manipulate them
> efficiently is a far bigger part of what you learn, so a change of CAD
> package puts you much farther back (to square one) than it does if you
know
> how to model in solids.
>
> Not only that; a solid model gives you immediate access to a physical
model
> via stereolithography, whereas a CAD drawing gives you nothing in that
> regard, and stereolith is a godsend for those who need a physical model
but
> don't have the skills to make one.
>
> Last I checked, Solidworks is not much more expensive than Autocad; and
you
> have to consider that you are investing in your son's EDUCATION!!!
>
> Why hobble him with a dinosaur, when the cutting edge is available.
>
> Comments anyone??
>
> Cheers
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
>
> Addresses:
> FAQ: http://www.ktmarketing.com/faq.html
> FILES: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO/files/
>
> Post messages: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com
> Subscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Unsubscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> List owner: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-owner@yahoogroups.com, wanliker@...
> Moderator: jmelson@... timg@... [Moderator]
> URL to this page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO
> bill,
> List Manager
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
Discussion Thread
Tom Eldredge
2001-07-26 17:36:34 UTC
Comparison of Cadd
Carol & Jerry Jankura
2001-07-26 18:25:52 UTC
RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
Smoke
2001-07-26 19:05:44 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
Chris L
2001-07-26 20:12:12 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
Ian Wright
2001-07-27 02:18:18 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
Fitch R. Williams
2001-07-27 06:54:00 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
Marcus & Eva
2001-07-27 07:34:03 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
Smoke
2001-07-27 07:38:31 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
Smoke
2001-07-27 07:58:24 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
Hugh Currin
2001-07-27 09:55:21 UTC
Re: Comparison of Cadd
Randy Gordon-Gilmore
2001-07-27 11:00:56 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
Smoke
2001-07-27 11:14:19 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
Ian Wright
2001-07-27 11:25:17 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
Craig Chamberlin
2001-07-27 11:48:39 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
blueveil@e...
2001-07-27 16:21:54 UTC
Re: Comparison of Cadd
Art Eckstein
2001-07-27 17:45:30 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
John Craddock
2001-07-27 17:57:58 UTC
RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
Randy Gordon-Gilmore
2001-07-27 18:21:57 UTC
RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
Randy Gordon-Gilmore
2001-07-27 18:28:34 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
John and Cindy Carey
2001-07-27 18:45:26 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
machines@n...
2001-07-27 20:15:27 UTC
Re: Comparison of Cadd
Smoke
2001-07-27 20:22:24 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
Randy Gordon-Gilmore
2001-07-27 22:36:54 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
Randy Gordon-Gilmore
2001-07-27 22:38:50 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Comparison of Cadd
Smoke
2001-07-28 10:11:36 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
machines@n...
2001-07-28 14:35:04 UTC
Re: Comparison of Cadd - Solid edge Origin
Randy Gordon-Gilmore
2001-07-28 15:57:37 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
Scott A. Stephens
2001-07-29 14:47:29 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Comparison of Cadd
blueveil@e...
2001-07-30 10:05:39 UTC
Re: Comparison of Cadd (again)
Keith Rumley
2001-07-30 13:55:57 UTC
Re: Comparison of Cadd