Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet
Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals
-
Congratulations waross on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
autocad14 upgrading to inventor or solidworks 8
- Thread starter dho
- Start date
-
1
- #2
You are going to a totally different system with parametric modeling. If most of your work is 2D then upgrade to a later version of Auto Cad.
However once you have gone through the learning curve with a 3D parametric program, you will not go back.
My progression over the years was AutoCAD 14, AutoCAD 2002 to 2006, then Inventor 4, then Solidworks 2003 to 2009,then Alibre ,now Geomagic.
B.E.
You are judged not by what you know, but by what you can do.
However once you have gone through the learning curve with a 3D parametric program, you will not go back.
My progression over the years was AutoCAD 14, AutoCAD 2002 to 2006, then Inventor 4, then Solidworks 2003 to 2009,then Alibre ,now Geomagic.
B.E.
You are judged not by what you know, but by what you can do.
EngineeringEric
Structural
It is probably cheaper to just upgrade to Win7. and I am a huge fan of Win7.
$1000 to upgrade a 4+ year old machine vs who knows how much for Autodesk License.
$1000 to upgrade a 4+ year old machine vs who knows how much for Autodesk License.
You ask a question but give exactly zero information needed to answer the question (at least with the choices presented in your question). In fact, going ONLY on the information you have given, the best answer would be neither, stick with AutoCAD.
You might want to supply more information if your intention is to take that "basically 2D house" into the 21 century of 2D from 3D.
- Thread starter
- #5
thanks to all.
1) we make simple part, simple assembly drawings.
2) our vendors use 2D drawings.
3) so, 14 is good enough.
4) winXP is not longer supported by microsoft in coming year.
5) as heard, 14 is not 100% compatible with win7.
6) so, we have to upgrade autocad14.
7) autocad+inventor, ~$5,000 a seat.
8) but solidW has a big user base.
9) should we go solidworks?
1) we make simple part, simple assembly drawings.
2) our vendors use 2D drawings.
3) so, 14 is good enough.
4) winXP is not longer supported by microsoft in coming year.
5) as heard, 14 is not 100% compatible with win7.
6) so, we have to upgrade autocad14.
7) autocad+inventor, ~$5,000 a seat.
8) but solidW has a big user base.
9) should we go solidworks?
-
1
- #6
EngineeringEric
Structural
DHO, I am not sure where you heard about 14 not being 100% compatible with Win 7. I have been running both since 2014 came out and never had any problems, they have had a few updates (typical Autodesk ones) which helped keep CAD from crashing but that is an issue with all CADs. Not saying what to do, just trying to give you some correct information. I would verify with Autodesk if win7 and 2014 work and if they recommend 32bit/64bit.
- Thread starter
- #7
-
1
- #8
-
1
- #9
-
1
- #10
If you don’t need 3D, why not look at the free stuff out there. I know Dassault do free 2D called Draftsite and Siemens have a free 2D variant of Solid edge.
Not sure how good they are as I have not worked in 2D for a while but probably worth a look.
Not sure how good they are as I have not worked in 2D for a while but probably worth a look.
-
1
- #11
![[smile]](/data/assets/smilies/smile.gif "[smile] [smile]")
-
1
- #12
MikeHalloran
Mechanical
If you're not considering parametrics or even 3D, I don't see the point of buying Inventor, as opposed to bare AutoCAD 2014, or AutoCAD LT, or even Draftsight (for which I think there may be a small fee for commercial use; the license for the free version specifically says "Non-Commercial").
Solidworks is a wonderful tool for solid modeling, but I find its drawing editor counter-intuitive and irritating. It would be less irritating if you could turn off most of the automatic behaviors that try to anticipate your next move. It's like having an industrious but incompetent personal assistant who keeps running interference for you, and tripping you while doing it.
Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA
Solidworks is a wonderful tool for solid modeling, but I find its drawing editor counter-intuitive and irritating. It would be less irritating if you could turn off most of the automatic behaviors that try to anticipate your next move. It's like having an industrious but incompetent personal assistant who keeps running interference for you, and tripping you while doing it.
Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA
-
1
- #13
buy a newer version of autocad. autocad mechanical if you need it.
also, for simple drawings (not a couple mb ones) Draftsight is also sufficient. it will hurt you though that it doesn't have any mechanical features, which come in handy. and it won't tolerate extremely big drawings, blocks etc (measured in megabytes).
but it's free.
also, for simple drawings (not a couple mb ones) Draftsight is also sufficient. it will hurt you though that it doesn't have any mechanical features, which come in handy. and it won't tolerate extremely big drawings, blocks etc (measured in megabytes).
but it's free.
- Thread starter
- #14
No one will be able to give you a very informed opinion with the limited information you give, however I do think the you must go to 3D is overdone in many cases.
There is a learning curve you will need to buy new software and almost certainly new hardware and there is always the question of existing drawings.
Getting a VAR in to do a demo is a good idea and while you are at it time them doing a typical product against one of your guys doing it in 2D. That would give a good starting point to compare the two and then factor in cost and training.
There is a learning curve you will need to buy new software and almost certainly new hardware and there is always the question of existing drawings.
Getting a VAR in to do a demo is a good idea and while you are at it time them doing a typical product against one of your guys doing it in 2D. That would give a good starting point to compare the two and then factor in cost and training.
MikeHalloran
Mechanical
There is a separate issue that may be important.
If you are happy and productive with R14, you may be greatly annoyed by the way newer (2000-up) versions of AutoCAD get in your way. This is partly due to the way Windows does things, and partly due to a series of questionable UI improvements within the Windows series of AutoCADs.
In your circumstance, I'd try real hard to get R14 running in whatever compatibility box you can find under recent versions of Windows. Even with a layer or two of indirection, DOS programs should run like the wind on modern hardware.
Only if that doesn't work out would I buy something like AutoCAD LT.
($600 is a pretty good price for it.)
Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA
If you are happy and productive with R14, you may be greatly annoyed by the way newer (2000-up) versions of AutoCAD get in your way. This is partly due to the way Windows does things, and partly due to a series of questionable UI improvements within the Windows series of AutoCADs.
In your circumstance, I'd try real hard to get R14 running in whatever compatibility box you can find under recent versions of Windows. Even with a layer or two of indirection, DOS programs should run like the wind on modern hardware.
Only if that doesn't work out would I buy something like AutoCAD LT.
($600 is a pretty good price for it.)
Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA
I'll second that "questionable UI improvements" statement. I've been using the "new" interface for several years and still find myself with the "help" file open more often than not. At least in 2014 I get a help file more often than a discussion forum that has nothing to do with my question. R14 was a really good program and the UI was comfortable (I'd still be using it if I hadn't needed a new feature in CadWorxx 2005 that wasn't allowed to work with R14 per their contract with AutoDesk). Everything since has been awkward and often counter-intuitive. LT isn't any better in that regard, but at least it is less expensive.
David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering
Law is the common force organized to act as an obstacle of injustice Frédéric Bastiat
David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering
Law is the common force organized to act as an obstacle of injustice Frédéric Bastiat
- Status