MicroStation in MAC OS

Hi everyone,

Does anybody knows if MicroStation works in MAC OS?

Thanks

Bill Prassas

Parents
  • Bill,

     

    I run MicroStation in Bootcamp and also have both Fusion and Parallels. Fusion has display issues with Microstation line styles (1-7) . Parallels has come a long way and I now prefer it over Fusion but Bootcamp will give you the best performance. If I'm mainly going to working in MicroStation all day I will use Bootcamp with XP.   The iMac  actually make for an excellent PC.

    My recommendation are.

    1) First thing I do is dump the apple mouse and get a good 2 button corded mouse with scroll wheel.  I love Apples stuff but their mice don't work well with MicroStation.  Especially if you use a 2 button cord for snapping.

    2) If your working with large files or 3D rendering bootcamp is the way to go.  I prefer XP because it has a smaller footprint.

    3) For smaller files or quick reviewing I use Parallels.

    4) Set up a VM machine and install MS on it.  DON'T use the bootcamp patition from Parallels, if you do you take a huge hit on start-up times both in Parallels and Bootcamp.

    5) Select server may report 2 licenses being use.   Bentley is aware their software falsely reports the number of licenses being used on some VM's.

    Cheers,

    DavidG

     

  • David,

    I'm considering running Microstation on one of our Macs. All these comments on using Macs have been really helpful.

    Have you heard more from Bentley if they've solved the license reporting issue?

    I have no experience running Windows on a Mac so just wondering why you would have Bootcamp, Parallels and Fusion? Why not stick to one?

    Thanks,

    Mary

    Mary M

  • Mary,

    I don't use Fusion anymore.  MicroStation proved to work better with Parallels.

    Large files and 3d work better under Bootcamp.

    parallels offer the advantage of accessing other OSX apps.

    For me if I'll be working all day in MS I use bootcamp.   If I need a quick plot or edit I use bootcamp.   I also have a few other windows program I use mainly in parallels.

    Bentley has not notified me lately of any licensing issues

    Regards,

    DavidG

  • I think that with the way things are going for Apple, and the fact that Autodesk has now been OSX enabled for a while, Bentley ought to look into re-porting to the Mac, as well.

    My gut feeling is that there is some undisclosed agreement with Microsoft that is stopping it, which would be a shame. MS is the only program that I need Windows for and I found Parallels to be too damn slow even for just faffing around so now I am Bootcamping but it is frustrating to have to boot into Windows for just the one program :-}

Reply
  • I think that with the way things are going for Apple, and the fact that Autodesk has now been OSX enabled for a while, Bentley ought to look into re-porting to the Mac, as well.

    My gut feeling is that there is some undisclosed agreement with Microsoft that is stopping it, which would be a shame. MS is the only program that I need Windows for and I found Parallels to be too damn slow even for just faffing around so now I am Bootcamping but it is frustrating to have to boot into Windows for just the one program :-}

Children
  • Hi,

    There are a lot of tools in the Windows platform.  Bentley has taken advantage of some of these tools for a long time.  I know that they've been talking about rewriting some of them, but no schedule has been offered.  I don't see Microstation going to the Mac until Bentley is less dependent on the Microsoft/Windows built-in tools.

    --Robert

  • Hmm, I doubt that similar tools/functionality wouldn't be available in the OSX platform.

    Anyway, surely would be nice not to need Windows for only one program...

  • Unknown said:
    Autodesk has now been OSX enabled for a while

    AutoCAD was available for the original Macintosh computers for a few years, then AutoDesk dropped it. With that record, how would you forecast AutoDesk's ongoing support for the OSX platform?

    Unknown said:
    Bentley ought to look into re-porting to the Mac

    Companies develop products as a result of customer demand, not because a competitor has done something similar.

    Unknown said:
    My feeling is that there is some undisclosed agreement with Microsoft

    The conspiracy theory of software development! I don't think that's the case at all. What is true is that MicroStation V8 depends on many Windows features that are not available on other operating systems.

    Unknown said:
    I doubt that similar functionality wouldn't be available in the OSX platform

    If all operating systems were the same then wouldn't life be easier? Well, yes, but then there would be no difference between operating systems.

    There is functionality in Windows that doesn't exist in OSX and Linux. Equally, there is functionality in OSX and Linux that doesn't exist in Windows. That makes it hard for a large product like MicroStation to be portable easily between operating systems.

    Regards, Jon Summers
    LA Solutions

     
    Regards, Jon Summers
    LA Solutions

  • Jon, where there is a will...

    Obviously, if the customer base does not request it, they will not do it.

    All I am saying is that, as a Mac convert (yes call me foolish, I don't mind paying more for my beautiful hardware) I wish I could forego having to install Windows for just the one program.

    Cheers,

    Stefano

  • Unknown said:

    Hi,
    I do engineering, drafting, Mstn customization & vba programming, IT, and interaction with clients. My oversized desk is already too crowded and I definitely don't want a second computer on my desk. The one computer I have is running Microstation, email, our contact/project management software, and Microsoft Office constantly. It'd be hard to do that on a stand-alone operating system.

    Good idea, but I don't think it'd work for everyone.
    --Robert



    Running "Bentley OS" and Bentley products stand-alone was only suggested as a way to optimize performance for those who do practically nothing else, not for those who frequently need to do other things, as many do.   Also, the OS, though it may be somewhat stripped down should still be capable of running other applications.  Most Microsoft Office products (and many other Windows programs) have open source and/or commercial counterparts for Linux operating systems that can open and edit the files created by those Windows programs.  If Windows is installed on the computer, many Windows-based programs will run under Linux using open source or commercial Windows emulation. Some don't even need Windows to be installed an run in the emulator.  And as I previously mentioned, Linux OSs can run inside Windows if necessary which may (I'm guessing here) give access to some Windows functionality or assets.  Also, unless you are dealing with very large files (documents, spreadsheets, databases, etc.), emulation shouldn't generate quite as much of a performance hit as to do so with MicroStation in an emulator or with the "Bentley OS" running inside Windows.

    Unknown said:

    There is functionality in Windows that doesn't exist in OSX and Linux. Equally, there is functionality in OSX and Linux that doesn't exist in Windows. That makes it hard for a large product like MicroStation to be portable easily between operating systems.


    I know little to nothing about programming, but just because a particular functionality isn't in Linux or isn't in Windows, does that actually mean it can't be there? Couldn't a "Bentley OS" be "tweaked" to include whatever functionality that Bentley products might specifically need? That is one of the reasons for the suggestion - so that Bentley products don't have to depend on or wait for a commercial OS to provide needed or desired functionality, or wait for them to fix their bugs for that matter.  There's been more than one version of MicroStation that has malfunctioned or been limited on one level or another because of a bug or limitation in Windows.

    Unknown said:

    Companies develop products as a result of customer demand, not because a competitor has done something similar.


    While true, what about the acquisition of new customers?  To be able to be free of dependence on an external OS would have to generate a wider pool of new customers - especially in smaller operations where a company just couldn't afford to replace the Macs or other non-Windows machines, let alone software on top of that. For them, Bentley products are not a viable option. OS independence or "Bentley OS" could open up that market, small though it may be.  The Linux community, though small does seem to be growing.  It might be smart to jump ahead of the curve instead of waiting for someone else to be first and then have to play catch-up.  And by that, I don't mean trying to support Ubuntu, Linux Mint, or any of the other flavors.   Create a Bentley OS and have complete control over the environment in which the products will run - just don't make it so proprietary that only Bentley products will run in it.

    This might also be a good way to reduce the overhead of ProjectWise. The "Bentley OS" and ProjectWise could be integrated.

    Here's another thought:  Does anyone know of a Boot-loader/ Memory Manager that would allow two operating systems to boot up into separate memory spaces?  Something like that might be able to give complete access to both Windows and something else without having to reboot to use each OS and without having to run one inside the other.  Each "Desktop" could be swapped in and out of memory as needed, hopefully with the ability to utilize a clipboard and linking between the two and so on.

    Just food for thought.