> I understand the resistance to Windoz, I was a programmer it the late
> 1960s when IBM virtually invented FUD (Fear, Doubt & Uncertainty)
as a
> marketing tool. The gorilla may have moved to the state of
> Washington,
> but the game has changed little. I give my energy and money to
> whatever
> alternatives I can find, but I think I am choosing my battles with
> some
> care when I occasionally accept (except) a Windows based program that
> takes me somewhere I cannot go otherwise.
>
> TurboCAD, is one such product. Actually, from my experience, it is
> something of an alternative in itself. In the microcomputer era, Auto
> Desk staked the first clam to CAD supremacy with AutoCAD. When you
> dominate at area of commerce, you get to charge what the traffic will
> bear (sound familiar?), and AutoCAD used their position in just
> this way.
>
> Being first brings with it problems as well as advantages. The early
> micros were very limited, and AutoCAD had to live within those
bounds.
> As the power of the machines leaped ahead, you had a steady
> accretion of
> functions and tools, and, like a city with ancient beginnings, the
> central features remained largely unchanged while the environs
> sprawled. Anyone who remodels their product risks alienating the
> customers, who make it all possible, if they eliminate the old ways.
> Better just to add, and leave what?s there alone. The main
> features of
> London were probably laid down by some cow that stepped one direction
> rather than another in the long forgotten past.
>
> The venerability is that upstarts begin with a clean sheet and
> powerful
> machines--machines powerful enough to accommodate the user
generously.
> ?Intuitive?, ?easy?, ?natural? are the descriptions people begin to
> use. When choosing between a complicated, awkward program that I
> could
> not afford and a slick, powerful modestly priced application, I chose
> the ?future?. I felt very clever running circles around the
?standard?
> products at a fraction of the cost. I made this choice twice, and
> each
> time, after my investment of time and money, Auto Desk bought my
> shinny
> new program and killed it. I would check with my manufacturer and
> find
> that there was no longer support and there would never be an update.
>
> I know I am inconsistent; recommending tolerance, when needed, for
> Windows, but unwilling to compromise about CAD, but I?d rather used a
> straight edge and compass than spend a penny on AutoCAD.
>
> So what is my alternative? CAD is not an essential tool of my
> business;
> but the little engineering I do is greatly enabled by these wonderful
> programs. (There is an old saying among sailors: ?The smaller the
> boat,
> the bigger the sextant.?) I simply would not be able to do much of
> what
> I do without CAD doing the hard work, precisely. When you employ the
> third dimension, you have moved from drawing to modeling. Things
> can be
> built and fitted to the needed tolerance; components can be sliced
> across lines of force so that questions of strength are little more
> that
> area arithmetic. You can design a skyscraper and include the pins and
> tumbler of the lock on the front door all in the same model. As you
> can hear, there are times when I am puzzled that CAD is not
> regarded as
> entertainment software.
>
> I have been reluctant to add my voice to those recently commenting
> here
> on CAD programs as my experiences include only the current version of
> one program, a trial here and there of others and two dead orphans.
> Nevertheless, I though I might add something worth while if I
> passed on
> what I know and left comparisons to those with broader experience.
>
> A dozen years ago I decide to try TurboCAD. It was comparatively
> cheep,
> and seemed to have amazingly encompassing functionality. When I
> found,
> near the bottom of an ad, the promise that TurboCAD would never sell
> out, I knew what they were talking about.
>
> There were two levels of product, TurboCAD Pro that did 90% of what
> the
> ?Standard? programs did (probably 110% of what I needed!) and
TurboCAD
> Deluxe. Pro was cheep and Deluxe cost so little that I had trouble
> giving credit to its many capabilities. Cautiously, I purchased
> Deluxe
> and was delighted to find it was everything that was promised. The
> next upgrade found me confident enough to buy Pro.
>
> TurboCAD?s celebrating 21?s years in the market, has a world-wide
> installed base, and looks to be too big to be swallowed any of the
> bigger fish. No doubt TurboCAD has entered middle age, with athletic
> youngsters popping up to challenge. TurboCAD is not perfect;
> unexpected events have occurred while I was workinc, usually when
I am
> trying something new and make several sequential moves so dumb no
> programmer could have anticipated. TurboCAD will do periodic saves,
> automatically if you wish, and I usually leave a trail of earlier
work
> by saving each session or stage with a new file name. I have not seen
> any drawing or rendering on Rotary Engine that I could not duplicate
> with TurboCAD. Of course, it could be that I?d have spent three times
> as long just making a duplicate of something easily originated in
> Rino.
>
> Those wanting to have a look at TurboCAD can find Deluxe at
>
http://www.imsisoft.com/prodinfo.asp?t=1&mcid=431
>
>
> And Pro at
http://www.imsisoft.com/prodinfo.asp?t=1&mcid=370
>
>
> Oh, and TurboCAD is available for Macs.
>
> I found Deluxe available via PriceGrabber.com for $46.95 and Pro for
> $510.54. Free trials are downloadable, and there is a suite of
> complimentary products such as a CAD symbols package with 30 million
> items, tutorials and much more. The Reference Manual is 523 pages and
> is actually written in English.
>
> I know that TurboCAD Pro will take time to learn, but I have enough
> experience to know that ?easy? too often means ?limited?. If you only
> need a sketch program, there are surly more sensible choices.
>
> I?ll be very interested in comments from anyone with a better
informed
> judgment.
>
> Grant
>
> Grant, Turbo Cad Mac Pro V-2 is not like Turbo Cad for Windoz at
> all. When I first looked at it, I could not believe my eyes,
> because it is an exact replica of Ashlar's Graphite only better, in
> that excellent 3d capability including solid modeling and surfaces
> are included. And it is universal binary meaning that it runs
> native on Intel Macs.
> Graphite cost $1395.00. TurboCadMac ProV2 with student discount
> cost $99.00. That is not an annual fee. I own the program
> forever. I might also add that tech support on line is free and
> quick.
The rest of the story. There is a company called CSI that makes high
end cad packages. They can be checked out at
www.csi-concepts.com.
Apparently they were the original developers of Graphite which they
sold to Ashlar (or it could have been the other way around). Anyway,
a law suit ensued with both companies retaining rights to the
program which CSI then sold to Turbo Cad. The literature and
tutorials from Turbo Cad still reference CSI.
Bottom line if you are a Mac pilot something very good has
happened. Jerry
The current TurboCAD Pro (Ver. 12) includes extensive facilities for
solid
modeling, surfaces, conversion from one to the other, lofting,
meshes and
the like and has for many generations.
One minor addition to 12 is a great favorite of mine. The program now
responds to 3D Connexion navigation controls
(
http://www.3dconnexion.com/).
I use the compact and inexpensive SpaceTraveler. These controls
enable me
to rotate, pan and zoom 3D models with a compact, five-axis knob. I can
settle a confused imagination with just a quick bump of this
control; a pile
of lines jump into a solid. Truth is, my brain wants to "handle"
even fully
rendered objects. I used to keep at least three views open, now I
only open
multiple views to span great distances or scales.
Thank you, Jerry, for the information about Turbo CAD Mac Pro V-2. I had
just assumed it was a recompile of the Version 12 product. I had even
looked at Graphit... Now, it's my turn to feel left out, being without a
MAC. Good for you!
Grant
A few rendering of stuff done in Turbo CAD uploaded here
as jpgs would go a long way toward illustrating its capabilities.
BTW Grant, do you ever notice your message winds up on the
ends of the old messages on the same subject? :) How do you
think it got there? :)
Paul Lamar ...No rotor no motor.
--------------------------------------------------
The Tooth Fairy???
Joel
The Rotary Engine NewsLetter. Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site.
http://www.rotaryeng.net
Copyright 1998-2006 All world wide rights reserved.