Why my CADD is better than AuoCAD

This started in a thread in the annotation forum and someone suggested this topic, so as one who likes trowing rocks at bee hives, I took up the baton and am going to kick this off.

  • Can you reference the paperspace into another paperspace or a model?
  • Can you reference a file to itself?
  • Can you create multiple models in a single file?
  • Can you display linetypes on 3D polylines?
  • Can you create linetypes that represent real world objects and do not scale with Annotation scale?

Later, after others have added to this list, I will post AutoCAD features that I like that MicroStation does not offer...

Who's next?

Parents
  • Bingo! I just thought about this issue. This week, I was swamped with production work. But our AutoCAD license server kept turning itself off, and then, one of the guys from one of our other offices was platooned to our office for an AutoCAD project. So on three different days, he was on three different PC's. So on day 1, I had to run my special programs to configure Civil 3D to see our customizations. Had he been working in MicroStation, he would have simply launched from the standard icon.

    Day 2 he gets moved to a new PC. Repeat process. Day 3 new PC - but deadlines were at this point at critical mass - so he was forced to work with OTB software.


    Charles (Chuck) Rheault
    CADD Manager

    MDOT State Highway Administration

    • MicroStation user since IGDS, InRoads user since TDP.
    • AutoCAD, Land Desktop and Civil 3D, off and on since 1996
  • AutoCAD is an absolute beast. The "slowness" is an absolute production killer (I cringe when people use the word Production in this business, as we're not exactly standing at work stations in a factory pumping out X number of units per hour, but that's another topic). I can't count how many times I sat there 'til 9:00 PM watching that blue circle spinning. It can easily take 3 or 4 times as long to do something in AutoCAD as it does Microstation. Heck, even worse sometimes. And don't even get me started on the Crashing...

    Can't beat AutoCAD's key-ins though, huh?

    (-:

  • Just to note that many AutoCad keyin commands can be used in the MicroStation keyin dialog just by typing in DWG before the command.

    eg. DWG CIRCLE starts up the Place Circle tool in MicroStation

    docs.bentley.com/.../ustnhelp1075.html

    Regards
    Andrew Bell
    Technical Support
    Bentley Systems

Reply Children
  • "eg. DWG CIRCLE starts up the Place Circle tool in MicroStation"

    Exactly  :-|

    --------------------------------------

    "the keyin is P,PCIRR;50

    the first P is for primative (I think)  the , p for place, cir for circle , r for by radius , and ;50 is what value radius"

    Exactly  :-|

  • That goes all the way back to IGDS. P is indeed for Primitive. PLINE - place line, EDSING for edit single, some are even more cryptic. Most are 6 character or less. many can be accessed with /PLINE - that is, proceed them with / and no space. In the days of IGDS all of these had to come from a menu cell or a user command. Even function key menus were cells, as I recall. The only keyins were the XX= keyins or text typed in for placing or editing text. I have my old MicroStation V4 Productivity Book still - it has them all listed alphabetically.


    Charles (Chuck) Rheault
    CADD Manager

    MDOT State Highway Administration

    • MicroStation user since IGDS, InRoads user since TDP.
    • AutoCAD, Land Desktop and Civil 3D, off and on since 1996
  • Fingers on the keys, thumb on the space bar...can't beat it.

    ...except of course for the Carpal-Tunnel Syndrome, but hey...

    :-/

  • I've never had a problem with the idea that AutoCAD can be more efficient because of key ins.  However my main problem is why i have to remember the lineal sequence every time i say, rotate something and have decide whether it will copy or not.. to me, i dont mind typing the "ro".. but i do mind everything after that.. which i think Microstation solves it better with a dialog tool setting.  of course we will end up remembering whole sequences already.  but its definitely far less intuitive and doesn't make sense for me.  it makes me feel like I'm wasting my energy pressing those extra keys.  

    Further, it makes me wonder whether i can use that difference to judge if Microstation is a more intuitive tool or not, and whether for me a better design tool.  Same could be said of Rhino in terms of comparing intuitive tools.  So when i give a task to one of my fellow Autocad users, i have yet to see wonderfully designed splines come out of the software.  Of course I'm exaggerating but still.. its always been at the back of my mind, especially when someone asks me to use Autocad to design.

  • Rhino has an interesting way of combining the use of a command line and mouse based input. Mstn's keyin dialog could learn a few tricks here.

    1. Rhino's command line lists the options associated with each command. Mstn's Key-in Dialog also does this but in a much more convoluted and somewhat pointless way. It would be good to modify it to allow the user to scroll through a drop down or tab and select the desired option like Rhino.

    2. Rhino also allows you select the option keywords in the command line using the mouse. Small touch but cool.

    3. Have a look at this vid and I think you will agree that text command line input can be just as quick as icon based input. The command line input is in many ways much better than the numerical task based keys that Mstn has. It's Mnemonic at least, which has to be an advantage. And please note that dialogs with their presets are accessible via the command line.

    It's not a case of either/or, but combining things.

    4. Accudraw: the way it is currently implemented is a pain. ACAD and Rhino do not suffer from the multiple input entry points problems that Mstn seems to have here. The user constantly needs to check which 'dialog box' his key ins are going to. Is it the Key in / command line dialog box? or is it Accudraw or one of the dialog boxes? If you have Accudarw active a number will be a distance / angle input, but if you have 'home' as your input Mstn thinks that you are using the 'positional keyboard navigation' stuff. Really confusing.

    5. Accudraw also tries to be too smart by trying to guess when the user is finishes with inputting his command alias. It should just wait for a 'space' command as a return like ACAD. Super dumb as having 'A' and 'AB' or 'AAC' will cause Accudraw to freeze, throw up a drop down that now requires you tab to A if you need to get those single letter shortcuts and hit enter before you can actually use it. The user needs to keep all his shortcuts either two or three letters long to avoid this.

    Ideally, the main input should be through the Accudraw dialog, which would be expanded to include the key-in / command line like Rhino. If you start typing 'P' the command line would offer up a drop down if there is a pause, or you would either continue keying and the command line would parse/return based on the command table. The dialog box would accept aliases / shortcuts and regular commands like Rhino. Your command history would include inputs from both types of commands. Currently the keyin only tracks what was inputted in the Key-in box and not Accudraw.

    6. Rhino's selection option box is also handy. Pick on a point and if there are more than one element applicable, a drop down box pops up, listing layer / elment type info and allows the user to scroll through the options. Really handy.