Autocad -vs- Cadkey

Today i heard a statistic that upsets me to the fullest. Now the first part wasn’t that surprising and it was that AUTOCAD is the #1 rated computer drawing tool in the country. Now the second part was the one that frustarted me. It was that CADKEY (the most primitive and overall most EVIL programm ever created) was rated #2!!!
To me this is outragous and i dread the future. Now i am in highschool and will probably go to some division of enjineering for my career. When i heard that there is a good chance i will be working with CADKEY i almost dropped out of all of my enjineering pursuits altogether.
If anybody has any thoughts or oppinions on this matter, show them to us because it is for the best of all CADing kind!

cadkey is just so high because its very simple, so schools can use it to teach it to 9th graders, thats what my school did and then you can learn autocad in 11th or 12th, i learned it on my own however

EChhh to CADKEY!!! I use AutoCad, Solidworks and MDT5 once in a while and I prefer Autocad for simple drawings, Solidworks for making solids for presentations and MDT5 just to print stuff that AutoCAD won’t!! lol

AutoCAD is by far the easiest CAD software to cheat at!!! Thank goodness for explode!! hehehe!!

The actual drawing feature in Solidworks just stinks in my opinion, hence only being used for presentations or prototyping!

I have not used CADKEY in 2 years since I took the class in college, thank goodness!

I voted for AutoCad, but i also use Inventor (dont “use” it much but i’m good w/ it) and i use Solid Edge…

Well Guys this coming 2003 year we’re gonna be getting AutoDesk Inventor Series 6…
I tinkered with it at the camp…
It will change your view on autodesk.

i’m taking a cad class right now, and i can’t see how it is that hard to learn. In fact, i think that it is VERY easy. (Especially after taking a year of drafting)

Now, i might have some advantage because i’m good with computers, and know 3ds max (which is A LOT harder than cad to make 2d splines) but, cad is still easy.

Gimme my Unigraphics V18 and my Spaceball and I am a happy designer.

Andy B. (UG user since V7)

I think AutoCad is better. Other programs like inventor are easy, but they suck if there are several people on the project.

ProEngineer

-Joel

*Originally posted by Andy Baker *
**Gimme my Unigraphics V18 and my Spaceball and I am a happy designer.

Andy B. (UG user since V7) **

Spaceballs are wonderful things. Supposedly they have a driver for AutoCad, but I haven’t been desperate enough to get one for home (robotics) yet.

I’m fluent in UG and AutoCad, Semi-literate in Inventor and CATIA 4 and learning CATIA 5 soon (unfortunately, it doesn’t seem to be all that much better than CATIA 4, though it does look spiffier).

Working in too many CAD systems with not enough time in any one is confusing at times to say the least. Now just where did they put that BOOLEAN command? I KNOW it’s got to be here somewhere!

Now the second part was the one that frustarted me. It was that CADKEY (the most primitive and overall most EVIL programm ever created) was rated #2!!!

It doesn’t seem that primitive and not even that evil to me. It is probably one of the easiest programs I have ever used. It is just like drafting on the screen. The only thing that annoyed the me about it was the fact that the undo button never really seems to work.

All I know is Inventor cause that’s all I’ve used for the past 2 seasons. Now I’m in the Project Lead the Way class at our school, and it’s teaching inventor. I tried to use AutoCAD a few times… but it was too command based for me, I like to be able to click things and BAM it’s done. I bet Inventor will eventually climb to that #2 most used spot… companies just have to figure out that it’s really, really easy to use :smiley:

*Originally posted by Joel Glidden *
**ProEngineer

-Joel **

Oh yea, Pro-E is the way to go, I have the student version on my computer, but right now I’m taking an Auto-CAD class with Auto CAD 2004, Argg… 2-D.

*Originally posted by Aaron Lussier *
**Argg… 2-D. **

Aaron: AutoCAD isn’t really that good for 3-D graphics but it’s quick, easy, and mostly to the point for 2-D. At work (Comau Pico) I use AutoCAD R14 (We’re planning a switch to 2004 sometime). All 3-D Work is done with SolidWorks.

If you are using AutoCAD, you should be using it to make details and 3-way views of things. It’s not to often that you’ll really need 3-D models with A_CAD. Besides, converting a 3D to a 2D is a PAIN in A_CAD.

When I got my job, I had spent the last 6 months training the crap out of myself to learn AutoCAD 2002’s 3D Features. I’ve built a full-scale model (accurate to 1mm) of 470’s 2003 robot, as well as some other projects. I have not once needed to make anything in 3D with AutoCAD yet.

My advice to you: Learn Solidworks for 3D, AutoCAD for 2D (If you plan to get a job in the design business, Baker: Back me up?). You will become an asset to many companies if they don’t need to train you.

I’ve used AutoCAD, and find it kinda big all those buttons.

One of team 5’s engineers use Pro-E and another uses AutoCAD. Pro-E is like a stripped-down version of AC IMO.

I prefer Pro over AutoCAD

Where’s the Inventor love here…?:wink:

You don’t need all those buttons. I have ~40 buttons on my toolbar, and in a given day, I use probably 6 of them. Dimensioning and the occasional osnap button. The rest I use all command line.

On top of that, programmers can have field day creating routines for multiple use things. A guy that sits near me amazes me with how fast he gets things done because of all the scripts he has written.

Well there is Catia and Inventor in my schools computer lab…
Catia the more powerful one and inventor the easy one…
@Home i use SurfaceStudio 10.1.1 and i love it, perfect toolset along w/ spacious UI.

UG, IDEAS, ProE - these are the letters I love.

Although I always thought Inventer does a better job of “teaching” or “training” people for the bigger CAD systems than the AutoCAD arm of Autodesk.

BrianCAD, the CAD program I wrote in grad school based on the AutoDesk Kernal, blew. I don’t recommend it to anyone. Of course, I have the only copy on a zip disk.

Since somebody revived this long dead thread, I figure I’d upate my comments in alphabetical order:

AutoCad - I mostly stopped using it at v14 when I switched to Inventor. Having two different sorts of solids was confusing and unecessary. There are occasionally things I want to do in wireframe. I use AutocCad for that because it is such a pain to do wireframe in Inventor

CADAM - an old 2.5D system. May it rest in peace. I certainly don’t want to see it again. Even Catia 4 was better.

Catia 4 - Kludge to the max. It feels like they just added functions any old way as they figured out they were needed. I was never comfortable with it and am busy trying to forget I ever learned it. Just in case anybody should ever try and have me use it again. I think I’ve been scarred for life by it.

Catia 5 - 5 isn’t perfect by a long shot. But it is so much better put together than 4 that the contrast is like going from Death Valley to Hawaii.

Inventor - Very similar to Catia 5. You think in much the same way. I can use one at home and the other at work with no problems. I haven’t done any surfacing in Inventor while I have done a fair amount in the systems I use at work. So I can’t compare that real well. But my impression is that it is a little weak.
Not that FIRST teams typically need much in the way of NURBS surfaces.

NCAD - This proprietary 3D system, developed and used by Northrop, was years ahead of it’s time. It was developed by Northrop because a 3D system that could do NURBS didn’t exist at the time. Too bad it was only surface and wire frame. The user interface was driven by the designers, not the programmers and many of us who used it are still wishing the new programs would return to it. In spite of the FORTAN based graphics. Elements of this system are still in use for specialized functions (like lofting, generating the outside surface of the airplane) here at Northrop Grumman.

Pro-E - I’m still learning this system. The assemby functions are pretty easy to use compared to Catia, Inventor, and UG. I have a little trouble with the “prehighlighting” stuff. But that will clear up with practice. This will probably become the BeachBot’s standard because EVERYBODY can get a copy and we can all be on the same version. In years past it had a reputation for being weak on surfaces, which was why Northrop Grumman has never adopted it. I haven’t gotten that far yet.

Unigraphics - I was a big UG fan until I started using Catia 5 and we ugraded to UG18. Actually I think it was a downgrade, they really screwed up the sketcher. I liked the sketcher in 15 much better. Sorry Andy.

Every CAD system has it’s strengths and weaknesses. Some will be easier for one person than another. Which system is best for you depends largely on what you are trying to do with it. These days I recommend that students learn any solid modeler they can and become proficient at it. The first one is the hardest to learn, all the rest are easier after that. I think NASA JPL has the right philosophy. They hire designers. They don’t care what CAD systems they know, as long as they know at least one well. They figure it is better to just retrain an experienced designer for whatever CAD system that program happens to be using. It is the designers knowledge and experience they want.