Favorite AutoCAD Version

[Cad64]

Stykface is not the only one. I closed all the Toolbars a long time ago, so using the Ribbon seems like a step backwards to me. I'll use the Ribbon once Autodesk makes it a permanent part of the program that cannot be closed, but until then, I will continue doing everything from the command line and being the fastest drafter in the office.

[rkmcswain]

I still don't believe in the Ribbon. I don't use it and don't know if I will ever fully adopt it.

 

Stykface is not the only one. I closed all the Toolbars a long time ago, so using the Ribbon seems like a step backwards to me. I'll use the Ribbon once Autodesk makes it a permanent part of the program that cannot be closed, but until then, I will continue doing everything from the command line and being the fastest drafter in the office.

 

We use Civil 3D and started professional training on it about a year ago. At the time, we decided to train on it using the OOTB interface (i.e.: Ribbon on, menubar OFF).

As time as gone by, I can't speak for others but I find myself primarily using toolbars, along with much more use of the right-click menus, as almost everything in the Ribbon can be found there also.

 

The biggest positive about the Ribbon is the contextual tabs.

The biggest negative is it still feels like it takes more time to find commands, not to mention the actual switching of the tabs is dreadfully slow, even on a powerful machine. It took several releases to get the CUI interface really usable, so I anticipate the Ribbon will continue to get better.

 

For programs that I use less, like Word, Excel, etc., the Ribbon is a real killer because I can never find what I need.

[f700es]

The ribbon seems to take up just a bit more space than I am used to. In r2008 I only used two rows of toolbars at the top of the screen and I used the Dashboard. When we moved to versions with the ribbon it just seem to cut down on drawing space. That was at old job with a 24" lcd as my cad screen. New job has a 28" lcd and it (ribbon) does not seem to be as big a problem but I am still not a fan. I found it easier to move around in the new Office versions than I did in CAD. I guess I was just not as used to the old Office versions like I was to in CAD.

Edited November 23, 2010 by f700es
typo

[tzframpton]

For programs that I use less, like Word, Excel, etc., the Ribbon is a real killer because I can never find what I need.

So true!!!

[ReMark]

"For programs that I use less, like Word, Excel, etc., the Ribbon is a real killer because I can never find what I need."

 

Agreed.

 

That's why I haven't upgraded from the 2003 version!

[tzframpton]

I'm hoping the market complains enough for these companies to offer something else to the users. I'm not saying for them to go back to Toolbars and Menus, but the Ribbon interface in these programs just aren't cutting it IMHO. Only in certain robust programs that have a lot of tools available. If a simple program wants to adopt a Ribbon interface, then I can understand completely because it doesn't have the level of complexity that Word, Excel, or even AutoCAD has.

[CAD89]

Well I use the following versions of ACAD: 2000, 2004, 2006, 2008, Land Desktop 2009 and AcadMap 6, from all these versions I have installed in my computer the following: 2000, 2006, 2008 and Land Desktop 2009, the rest are installed at work. My personal favorite is ACAD 2006 because the Help file and the tutorials for Lisp are very well structured. At my workplace I use mostly ACAD 2000!

[Jack_O'neill]

I use 2010 and 2007 architectural for most of my work. of the two, i really like 2010 best. I dont' use the ribbon tho. clicked on autocad classic, then did as usual and built my own toolbars and pallets. 2010 is faster than 2007, and has some cool new features. I've used 9, 10, 11, the windows extension for 11 (which sucked big time), 12 dos and win, 13 (horrible experience, i still have nightmares), 14, 2000, mechanical desktop 5, 2002, 2006, 2007 and 2010.

 

Of all of those, Mechanical Desktop was by far the most fun. I couldn't wait to get to work when I was using that. If i could have just sat there and made drawings, that would have been as good as it got. Alas, company ownership changed, and with it, office politics became more than I could stand. Eventually it was leave or have a stroke. Got lucky and went to a company that made regular use of it's capabilities, so was in heaven again till 9-11 came along and brought that company (aircraft) to bankruptcy.

 

If I ever get enough ahead to afford it, I plan to add Inventor to the arsenal, just can't justify it right now. I hear it's almost as much fun tho.

 

Oh, yeah, I am attempting to teach myself Revit. It's fun to use but the learning curve is somewhat steep (at least for me).

[acad_2k]

I started with R12 DOS and used every version thru 2007, that's when I quit my day job. I purchased 2000i when it first came out and have been using it since. I have several machines loaded with Windows 2000 for back-ups.

 

AutoCad 2000 does everything I need it to. No complaints,. I remember that R12 came loaded with a wire-frame of the space shuttle. I thought to myself at the time, if this program was used to design the space shuttle, it should be more than I would ever need to design a house.

[ReMark]

AutoCAD was not used to design the space shuttle. That early 3D drawing was included to demonstrate the program's 3D capability.

 

AutoCAD version 1 was released in December 1982. The first operational flight of a space shuttle (Columbia) was November 1982. NASA rolled out the first prototype of the space shuttle (Enterprise) in September 1976 (six years prior to the release of AutoCAD ver 1).

[acad_2k]

I figured as much, but it was just what I thought at the time. I'm wondering however, what did they use to design the space shuttle?

[rkmcswain]

NASA rolled out the first prototype of the space shuttle (Enterprise) in September 1976

 

A bit over 41 years ago now.

[ReMark]

I'm not entirely sure what program was used but it couldn't have been AutoCAD. They were built by North American Rockwell (later known as Rockwell International then Boeing) so I guess it would have been a proprietary system. I'm more familiar with the software they used for actually "flying"/controlling the space shuttle orbiter which was HAL/S.

Edited October 17, 2017 by ReMark

[nukecad]

I figured as much, but it was just what I thought at the time. I'm wondering however, what did they use to design the space shuttle?

Pencil and paper probably.

 

How do you think we used to do it before these 'new fangled' computer things came along? (Yes I am that old).

 

And if you think the shuttle would be too complicated then remember steam locomotives, WW2 bombers, passenger aircraft, ships, submarines, and don't forget the Saturn 5 rockets that got us on the way to the moon - all designed and detailed with pencil and paper.

 

(The Apollo 11 guidance computer had about 64Kb memory, you couldn't run much CAD on that).

 

When I started work in 1976, we had CNC machines (reading punched tapes) on the shop floor, but there was not a single computer in the design/drawing office.

I didn't get my hands on CAD until 1984. (CIS Medusa running on a Prime mainframe).

Edited October 17, 2017 by nukecad

[acad_2k]

Pencil and paper probably.

 

How do you think we used to do it before these 'new fangled' computer things came along? (Yes I am that old).

 

And if you think the shuttle would be too complicated then remember steam locomotives, WW2 bombers, passenger aircraft, ships, submarines, and don't forget the Saturn 5 rockets that got us on the way to the moon - all designed and detailed with pencil and paper.

 

(The Apollo 11 guidance computer had about 64Kb memory, you couldn't run much CAD on that).

 

When I started work in 1976, we had CNC machines (reading punched tapes) on the shop floor, but there was not a single computer in the design/drawing office.

I didn't get my hands on CAD until 1984. (CIS Medusa running on a Prime mainframe).

 

I'm well aware of pencil and paper, as well as scales, triangles, parallel rules, borco, electric erasers, drafting tape, etc., etc., . I still have all of that stuff.

 

I can't say when computers were first used but they have been around for some time. They may not have been available to all industries, but I would think that an undertaking such as designing a space shuttle would have warranted the exorbitant costs of a computer aided drafting system of the time. Maybe CAD systems made the space shuttle possible?

[ReMark]

I'm going to have to agree with Nukecad. It was all done by humans with paper, pencil and slide rules. However, the space shuttle itself did have five onboard computers for guidance and control. BTW...a WWII bomber required about 8,000 drawings. I read this in an excerpt from the book "Making the Modern World, Materials and Dematerialization" by Vaclav Smil. The Boeing 747 required 75,000 drawings!

 

I have yet to find a direct reference to the use of CAD in the design of the space shuttle.

Edited October 18, 2017 by ReMark

[BIGAL]

Did everyone know that the batteries never go flat in a slide rule

 

Something about a chinese guy and something to do with sliding beads.

[ReMark]

I still have two slide rules. Not that I use them any more or even remember how. I'd need a refresher course! LOL

[tzframpton]

I think it's a play on words, depending on definition. We often use the word "design" to represent drafting in AutoCAD. To me, AutoCAD doesn't design, it draws. So AutoCAD can't design anything, it can only be used to draw. Humans ultimately "design".

[tzframpton]

BTW...a WWII bomber required about 8,000 drawings. I read this in an excerpt from the book "Making the Modern World, Materials and Dematerialization" by Vaclav Smil. The Boeing 747 required 75,000 drawings![/i]

I believe it. My grandfather who's still alive today (now in his late 80's) was an aerospace engineer for over 45 years. He has great stories, especially the ones where him and his team found errors in some of the first mainframe CAD systems developed, more specifically in wing design.

 

-TZ