|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
dennisroy
Joined: 12 Jun 2006
Posts: 8
|
 Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 12:54 pm Post subject: Future of PowerCADD |
    |
|
As long time users of PowerCadd (several million square feet of constructed projects), we are growing increasingly concerned over the future of PowerCADD as a competitive 2D drawing platform on the Mac. Although we have been getting regular updates to PCAD 8 from Engineered Software, it appears that the general buzz about PCAD is dying down on various forums. Their website also seems untouched for several months.
I would appreciate other users insights into the future of PowerCADD software.
Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Paul H
Joined: 15 Jan 2008
Posts: 2
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 4:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This concern is widespread. We are too! At a time when transparency and openness are literally built into the architecture we create and has become a calling both politically and culturally . . . where is Engineered Software. The lack of communication from ES has put a hold on our plans to upgrade.
It's great software, we love using it, but we're not going to bet the future on a company that's opaque, and non-communicative.
ES where are you? It's time to show up before the bus leaves without you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Severin Carlsen
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 105
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 5:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Perhaps the software is as good as it gets. What exactly are people looking for in a future upgrade for a 2 dimensional drafting program. What tools aren't there that are really needed. Are we looking for someone to improve the performance of a plane or hammer that is already suitable for its purpose?
I think that Microsoft word reached perfection sometime around version 5a. And then it just got more complex doing small war dances and selecting things I didn't want selected, formating automatically when I didn't want it to do that. I would not want to see Powercadd follow the development pattern of Word.
Peter |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
phansford
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 832
Location: SW Ohio
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 4:39 am Post subject: Re: Future of PowerCADD |
|
|
A couple things come to mind.....
| dennisroy wrote: | | it appears that the general buzz about PCAD is dying down on various forums |
This is the forum dedicated to PowerCadd. I am not really interesting in forums that are not, but if you would provide links, it would support your comment. Thanks
The future of PowerCadd (and by virtue of association Wildtools) has been discussed in some detail in this forum already......
PC and BIM
Wild Tools Development -- situation update?
and most recently....
architosh on 2D CAD in a 3D BIM world...
So ....... are you just a troll?
| Peter Severin Carlsen wrote: | Perhaps the software is as good as it gets. What exactly are people looking for in a future upgrade for a 2 dimensional drafting program. What tools aren't there that are really needed. Are we looking for someone to improve the performance of a plane or hammer that is already suitable for its purpose?
I think that Microsoft word reached perfection sometime around version 5a. And then it just got more complex doing small war dances and selecting things I didn't want selected, formating automatically when I didn't want it to do that. I would not want to see Powercadd follow the development pattern of Word.
Peter |
I think a lot of us agreed with Peter's comments - as a 2D program - PC is about as perfect as it gets. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fred johnson
Joined: 04 May 2004
Posts: 85
Location: CT
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 12:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I think a certain amount of "upgrades" are going to be necessary just to keep up with Apple's OS changes, that and translations from the world of .dwg. Having said that, there also is, and always has been an evolving process where existing tools are made quicker and more responsive and tool ideas are implemented. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
phansford
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 832
Location: SW Ohio
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| fred johnson wrote: | | I think a certain amount of "upgrades" are going to be necessary just to keep up with Apple's OS changes, that and translations from the world of .dwg. Having said that, there also is, and always has been an evolving process where existing tools are made quicker and more responsive and tool ideas are implemented. |
While I agree - I would call that tweaking the operation or even maintenance. I don't think we will see sweeping changes or upgrades in PC from this point forward like we have seen in the past. And the future of dwg is in serious question with BIM. It is my understanding that Revit will not read/open an AutoCAD file. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
erikmar
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 62
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"While I agree - I would call that tweaking the operation or even maintenance. I don't think we will see sweeping changes or upgrades in PC from this point forward like we have seen in the past."
Should that come to pass with the next version, it would signal the end of the line for PC. IMHO, PC still has a long way to go in achieving parity with even the (correctly noted) obsolete AutoCAD, namely in referencing / XREF's. Should ES elect to build in robust referencing capabilities for the next version, then maybe we can start to talk about it representing the pinnacle of 2D software, etc. Until then, it's still pretty inadequate for project types such as multifamily housing.
In addition to that "sweeping" change, there are still plenty of areas that aren't quite up to par - hatch management is one that immediately comes to mind. Interoperability with the various 3D modelers out there is another. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pbacot
Joined: 15 Apr 2004
Posts: 959
Location: Northern California
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 5:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
umm reference drawings...
Speaking of.. Here's a "program" that had them in 1962. Note some other elegant features developers could learn from.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOZqRJzE8xg
Meanwhile SU developed "components" and now "dynamic components"
_________________
Peter B |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
phansford
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 832
Location: SW Ohio
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| erikmar wrote: | | IMHO, PC still has a long way to go in achieving parity with even the (correctly noted) obsolete AutoCAD, namely in referencing / XREF's. Should ES elect to build in robust referencing capabilities for the next version, then maybe we can start to talk about it representing the pinnacle of 2D software, etc. |
XREF's have been an issue for many for some time and been part of ACAD of many years. If it really was a driving factor to your productivity, why wouldn't you have moved to another program. It really is that simple.
I don't think anyone is saying PC is the pinnacle of 2D - but it is very powerful and does suit the needs of its many users. Maybe your work and practice has outgrown what PC can offer you?
| erikmar wrote: | | Interoperability with the various 3D modelers out there is another. |
I have absolutely no problem importing DWG files into Sketchup. It seems you use Form Z - which I have not used, so I can't comment on how it interfaces with other programs.
I am surprised a firm doing the level of work that you do hasn't migrated to a BIM style program.
Also - Check out what PRD Software is doing .
Xrefing and interoperability with 3D will not be the death of PC and Wildtools. Read the other threads I linked....... Without getting over redundant... three words...
BIM
Corporate Structure |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
F700ES
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 141
Location: North Carolina
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Cool video, thanks for posting.
| pbacot wrote: | umm reference drawings...
Speaking of.. Here's a "program" that had them in 1962. Note some other elegant features developers could learn from.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOZqRJzE8xg
Meanwhile SU developed "components" and now "dynamic components" |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
patrickm
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 399
Location: santa barbara, ca
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 8:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the video link, Peter -- that is amazing.
Regarding PowerCADD, I am pretty happy with it. As long as it continues to be compatible with future OS upgrades, I can continue to be productive with it. Right now, I have no issues with PC and therefore don't have a need to ask questions in forums.
I don't know what I don't know, so I don't know what features could be added to it to make me more productive.
I would like 3d capabilities, so I'll wait to see what happens with in2space. Although I like SketchUp, I'd prefer to do everything (easily) in one application.
regards,
patrick |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
phansford
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 832
Location: SW Ohio
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| patrickm wrote: | Regarding PowerCADD, I am pretty happy with it. As long as it continues to be compatible with future OS upgrades, I can continue to be productive with it. Right now, I have no issues with PC and therefore don't have a need to ask questions in forums.
I don't know what I don't know, so I don't know what features could be added to it to make me more productive.
I would like 3d capabilities, so I'll wait to see what happens with in2space. Although I like SketchUp, I'd prefer to do everything (easily) in one application.
regards,
patrick |
+1 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
How Goes It
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 393
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 11:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| phansford wrote: | | I am surprised a firm doing the level of work that you do hasn't migrated to a BIM style program. |
I'm not. I don't believe BIM is as widespread, as some would have you believe.
A friend of mine is one of the larger subcontractors in his field, in the greater Los Angeles area. He does a lot of government work. I've seen the plans he bids and does. Hard for me to believe that a lot of this is BIM, because a lot of the plans are lacking. And I thought BIM was all about making a better set of plans. Lot of the plans look like the same old stuff.
-------
Steve |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
phansford
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 832
Location: SW Ohio
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| How Goes It wrote: | | phansford wrote: | | I am surprised a firm doing the level of work that you do hasn't migrated to a BIM style program. |
I'm not. I don't believe BIM is as widespread, as some would have you believe.
A friend of mine is one of the larger subcontractors in his field, in the greater Los Angeles area. He does a lot of government work. I've seen the plans he bids and does. Hard for me to believe that a lot of this is BIM, because a lot of the plans are lacking. And I thought BIM was all about making a better set of plans. Lot of the plans look like the same old stuff.
-------
Steve |
It not "the plans" - BIM is about the model. The GC will get the "Design Intent" Model and use it for coordination. (As I understand). It is my understanding that Turner did the new Yankee Stadium and required their subs to use BIM - otherwise they were not permitted to bid on the project.
BIM is being used on large projects.... I would think it hasn't trickled down to the smaller projects yet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
How Goes It
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 393
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 1:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| phansford wrote: | It not "the plans" - BIM is about the model. The GC will get the "Design Intent" Model and use it for coordination. (As I understand). It is my understanding that Turner did the new Yankee Stadium and required their subs to use BIM - otherwise they were not permitted to bid on the project.
BIM is being used on large projects.... I would think it hasn't trickled down to the smaller projects yet. |
So BIM is not about producing better plans (contract docs). But rather, just to facilitate better coordination. Hmmmm --- Interesting. One would have thought that the final result would have been a better plan.
Hold onto your 2D software guys ----- BIM ain't about plans.
Or is that coordination you speak of, primarily or strictly for the purpose of helping the Critical Path schedulers?
So what would you consider a large project in your vicinity for instance? Because those Yankee Stadium size projects aren't popping up all around L.A. if you know what I mean. Those size projects are limited. Which would mean BIM is limited to fewer projects -- right? Maybe not as much market share as one would think - huh?
-------
Steve |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
blogger
del.icio.us
digg
slashdot
