One of the features of ACAD is that there are always 3 or 4 different ways to execute the same command. There are also commands to suit different disciplines ie. mechanical, civil etc.

I used 2D ACAD for about 15 years & still use it occasionally but I feel that I have only scratched the surface of the commands available.

I use AutoCAD 2004 at work for floor plans and electrical drawings plus the occasional engineering drawing. If I had to guess, I'd say I only use 5-10% of the available 2D commands and very few of the advanced stuff.

I use VectorWorks because that's what most everyone in my industry uses and we get along better when we don't have to compress and decompress layers and colors and line widths to interchange with the .dwg format.

What's odd is that even though VectorWorks makes a special version of the application just for lighting and rigging, almost everyone I know buys the full version because that gives them access to the 3-5% of the rest of the program they really need.

We all do 3-D and rendering, and all the fittings, bolts, nuts, etc. is all in the other 5% of the Non-Lighting part, so we all spend a huge amount of money for that 5% and hardly touch the rest of it. The program does all kinds of automated stuff that I'm sure AutoCad also does - like make completely framed walls for stud construction just by indicating the size of the room and the ceiling height. But of course we don't use that, or the landscaping, or the site planning, or the HVAC or plumbing or...

So, I bet if we were to add up all the functions, even the power users of the Lighting portion of VectorWorks would still only be using about 3-5% of the entire program.

And... off the topic a little, what we've noticed happening with the engineers we work with - who do use AutoCad, is that every release seems to have more features, and take up more memory, and run sloooooowwwwwwwwwer. Same for VectorWorks.

It's gotten so that I can't render (smaller) drawings I made three years ago, even though I now have a six-times faster machine, eight times more VRAM, and 4 times more RAM.

We've asked for a smaller, lighter, faster, version... "NO"... is all I have heard so far.

What have AutoCad users done about this? Multi-Machine processing?

I've used Vectorworks since it was MiniCAD on the Mac back in the mid-80's. I do both electronic and mechanical design, so that variety probably induced me to learn a few more features than I might otherwise, but still I know only a tiny fraction of the program's capabilities. Most importantly, I only know the barest essentials of 3D, and can't seem to find the time to learn more. Of course being well into the senior category probably doesn't help...

It would be very useful if Autocad commands are simplified instead of giving many commands to execute a single activity. It will save valuable time. I learnt autocad but I hate it because of its complicated and time consuming.May be it is ideal for professional draftspersons not for Engineers. Typing commands too should be included to simplify.

Hmm, Well i have been using Autocad for approximately 22 years and as far back as i can remember a command line for typing the commands is what has always set Autocad aside from other cad software. This discussion shouldn't get off topic. Not sure that you have been using Autocad...

cwarner

GA to you for that excellent post.

I have run several Engineering shops of many disciplines over the years that I was in business. Including several AuoCad shops. I never dug into these very far as I had many other electrical, IT, Electronic responsibilities, all of which had different software requirements and keeping up with one was hard enough.

Back to your response, you hit the nail on the head, none of us, unless we are self confessed experts in a particular narrow field will ever learn a major percentage of the available software features.

And, of course, the designer community is well aware that only X% of their features will get used by any one individual. I am sure that they will have meetings with their Marketing collagues who will pester them for the best set of "killer" features that they can devise and the designers will turn around and say we casnnot do that as it will become unuseable and eventually unsellable!

Good Post GA

thanks

Sleepy

Good day! You are right. I used Auto cad in 1991 for the first time to document a process of our data processing center with 40+ computers. I remember to have used only LINE, BLOCK and RECTANGLE commands. Then it was Auto cad 11.0 on DOS.

Now after retirement, I am writing a book comprising of spreadsheet for design of mechanical aspects of a transmission line. I use Auto cad 2012 for sketches and believe me I use possibly not even 1%. No doubt the program is great but it evolved to its present level because of the purchases made and indirectly now it costs lesser in the sense that any user can find his needs in it and learning curve is favourable to long time users.

All Cad software that is made today has pretty much the same purpose. Some are 2D only and some are built more for 3D use but some such as Autocad and a few others are built to do everything... I concur with "Ronseto" and "Nigh" in that I use only about 15-20% of the available commands at any given time. It all depends on your industry use of the software. I work for a structural engineering company and we engineer commercial buildings(factories and the like) and Large sign structures etc... the need for drafting anything in 3d is very limited. However, there are times when making a 3d drawing are necessary for illustrating a thought. For me to complete a full working set of plans for a structure I will typically use about 20 different commands...

As another user posted about a command line needing to be available, every command in autocad is available to type in the command line and Autocad has always had a command line. I have used it since Release 10 about 22 years ago.

My prior employment 10 years ago was in the automotive industry and I heavily utilized 3d in Autocad. So not only did I use those previous 20+ standard commands that I always use I also would utilize about 20 more for 3d use. So It all depends on what industry your in and what your needs are. With that being said any cadd software users out there that will only be creating 2d drawings can most definitely save thousands of dollars buying the 2d version of your particular cad software. Most have a 2d and 3d version these days. Hope this helps.

Thomas Gammon

I started using AutoCAD in 1996 when I got involved with designing machines. I self-taught myself. Spent long hours in front of screen and graduated from R12 to currently, version 2007. I am expert in using mouse for initiating commands from the screen. Didn't have time to learn all keyboard commands except a few important, forced ones. I became expert with mouse commands and drew very big systems later on in say, 4 years. I still practice it but not like earlier times but my Engineers are awed at my speed when I explain them something using AutoCAD.

Like you, I too am not an expert in AutoCAD but I can tell you it is a marvelous, easy to use software that allows you to give dimensions to your vision. I know I might be using only a fraction of the software (I can't quantify because I don't know how big it is) but the fact is, I really enjoy it and it serves my purpose perfectly.

I have brought in other drawing software in the company for the current crop of Engineers but I am happy and comfortable with AutoCAD.

Cheers!!!

ronseto

"Looking through the CAD bible, I can't imagine anyone being able to use 100% of it's commands."

Someone being able to use them all.....there are probably a couple dozen Lynn Allen (guru) types in the world that whould have a reason to know how to use them all.....but no trade, discipline or situation would ever come close to requiring them all....not to mention the redundant functions that achieve the same result.

I consider AutoCAD to be "free-form" which allows the architectural, civil, and mechanical disciplines to design/draft with the data that is specific to there world.

This "free-form" structure is less constraining than a lean purpose built system but it makes for a STEEP learning curve. As bad as I hate to admit it, and as much as I disliked it at the time, learning manual drafting, then 2D AutoCAD, then a purpose built system is the best route to take.

It's kind of like learning math long hand, then calculator, then excel. You have a better understanding of what you're doing and why. I use NX and specialized airfoil analysis tools but they are based on the fundamental principles that I learned in AutoCAD.

Good evening/morning, dear AutoCad user,

I used to use AutoCad from release 2.4 up to now, AutoCad 2009 (C711.0).I was obliged to. If not, no job. I used Acad with MSdos, Win, Windows and in conjunction with INTERGRAPH (which is the best, but disappeared) and other cad's like DRAFTSIGHT (not so bad) and ZWCAD (a bit less under, but free), and so on... Nevertheless, Acad is the best due to the multitude of applications connected to it (like the wonderful MECAFLUX, to calculate all around Bernoulli, Reynolds and Froude -Specialists will appreciate) or ELECTRO,a descendance of Acad, specialized in electrotechnics, adding a module to calculate everything under 33 kV, including nodes (specialists will...).All is finished in CAD, Acad is nowadays a world, like Internet, or CR4...(LOL) which can be connected through files GERBER or EXCELLON, directly to a CNC vertical or horizontal (specialists...). You are able to machine the proto. you are designing, even only drafting, in the mean time. Acad is faraway over the lot, years of light above(years, years, years above!).

THIS IS the reason why there are thousand of controls, commands, survey and watching orders, measurings capabilities (according to connected application).

I am designing a sailing boat. It is much more complicate than designing a work site, a refinery, or an automotive (which has to be sold to the public). I have even designed a carried 220 kV substation on a train wagon (220000V/400V with only one transformer of 60 MVA), but now, I made my schemes with the drafting tools of Excel (MS Excel 2003, be-uarkk!) and only 'the proper drawing' with Acad. Because only Acad may evoluate my 'boat 3Dimensions-object' on the screen suffisantly quickly to be able to change some straight or curved line, or a group of objects, and so on...But with an horrific waste of time at each screen renew!(My sailing drawing necessites up to 8 MB, which is a big boat and represents 15000 objects - I've said objects, not lines or curves) For instance, a drawing of a complete refinery, including tanks, necessites only 30 MB (to 300) (Including instruments, piping tanks, local and global control buildings) A boat is complicate because all is included in a boat and also have to resist to salted water...

So, in-fine, AutoCad is good for small and medium enterprises (not evident for big companies) and good to generate and to trace a network of these small societies because of this genius idea of interchanging the format *.dwg and dxf (but glou-glou the format *.dwb - AutoDesk: Why?) which is completely closed on itself, to the point where it's sometimes impossible to open and Acad 97 with Acad 2007 (Hello AutoDesk, do you read me?) Many things have to be said about Acad, but it remains the best (behind ex-MicroStation Intergraph) I will die within 10 to 20 years, after 42 years behind a drafting table or an Autocad screen (sometimes 3 in the same time!) and sometimes I hate AutoCad for its slow(-wittedness..?) to manipulate complicate 3D objects, but what a product...!So, AutoDesk, please, still a small effort! To be the first do not significate this is a good product: There are some works to do to see the finish line! But, for a common drafter, manipulating only lines and texts, it is largely sufficient.

Everybody, hello! BRZK

Well guys, hello, and how do you all do? Hope all and everybody is well, even the ACAD users. I am still waiting to hear the "l" word, that is to say light. Yes, there is an ACAD package called ACAD light, which is supposed to be a, well, after-diet package for those who do not really need all the power of the full blown package. Surely, IMHO there isn't one person/engineer/architect who will use ALL the software's commands-one doesn't need it. As mentioned above, this sw tries to bring together as many disciplines as possible and give them a good package. So that they will all herd up behind AutoDesk and keep buying their goods ... Which are quite expensive. Therefore, all those who can afford the price will go on using ACAD because it is a quite good tool-like a pencil and a drawing board. And also because like behind every great guy there is a great gal, behind every sw is a "great" computer-science team. And this is what, mainly, makes the difference.

I am horrified by the implications of this post. You are retired, and, you can afford to pay (or have paid) for Autocad.

DoubleCAD still do a free version. The user interface is designed to be compatible with with Autocad users.

http://www.doublecad.com/Products/DoubleCADXTv3/tabid/1100/Default.aspx

I am forced to use Autocad for some company stuff, but, use TurboCAD for anything I can get away with at work (and everything I do for myself). That's probably just because I'm used to the TurboCAD user interface. But DoubleCAD seems like a no brainer for anyone who's used to Autocad and wants CAD for personal use.

I'm not trying to imply anything. I love Autocad and regardless of it's complexities, I'm not about to switch. I'm still on the learning curve with Autocad and realize I will never learn all there is to learn. The company I worked for before retiring has about 35,000 employees, 10% of which are involved in design and drafting and they used CATIA and Autocad.

I have used TurboCAD since Windows 98, and find DoubleCAD a very powerful tool. I'm not sure TurboCAD is still available in a free version- the paid version I used to use came with a very extensive parts library that I liked a lot. I still use both of these occasionally, but prefer non-Windows based systems these days. The only "professional" grade CAD package available in native Linux format (of which I am aware) is Draftsight2 from Dassault Systèmes. Most of the Linux-based CAD packages I favor are lighter than light, but serve well for specific purposes. I like having different packages for different purposes, rather than a single "one size fits all". The main advantages are that the developers can concentrate on doing one thing very well, and each package has a smaller footprint (i.e., less memory usage, lower demand on the processor). Most everyone I deal with can read my *.dxf formated drawings (although I occasionally find someone using a newer version of AutoCAD producing *.dxf drawings I can not always read).

I have wanted to piddle with 3D, but just never seem to get around to it.

The only 3D CAD I have used which seems to be relatively intuitive is Rhinoceros:

http://www.rhino3d.com/

If I remember correctly the trial version allows you to save 50 times before you need to buy. In the past I have created drawings done a screen capture then not saved.

I hope the people who make it don't object to this work around too much (clearly I'm not a serious 3D CAD user).

Randall-

For experimental exploration ("playing around") in 3D, there are some OpneSource options you may want to have a look at.

For renderings, animations, etc. there is always Blender, but this is a very sophisticated, complicated program with a steep, steep learning curve. Popular in artistic circles, a bit over-kill for most engineering applications.

BrlCAD, professional, US-military developed solid modeling program- again, very sophisticated, excellent ray tracing (originally developed for vulnerability testing of military vehicles). Steep learning curve, but easier to handle than Blender.

FreeCAD, OpenSCAD- simple 3D modelers more in line with engineering goals. FreeCAD is most likely more similar or intuitive for someone with some experience with CAD.

Salome, a platform with excellent 3D modelling, originally developed as a pre/post processor for CAE applications (FEA, CFD).

Quote: You are retired, and, you can afford to pay (or have paid) for Autocad.

What makes you think I paid for it?

Good luck getting any Autodesk support for your pirated and cracked software. Is your original question leading up to more sophisticated questions you can't get help for?

Dear Northern Steve,

I am sure you've right. What you say is true, but, actually, some things are always possible for whom who knows how to do...Anyway, after 24 years of Acad, I finished by having some tricks, some 'not exactly pirated' versions, or some standard version with 'plus something...'. During 'Autocad Glorious Years' (1980 / 1990), in Paris, it was very easy for me and my colleagues to write some procedures in Acad language (AutoLisp, much more efficient than Basic, or some times later on, Prolog) to add some functions or specialised ('customized') some functions to our needs (Civil-work, Electrotechnics, Electronics, Instrumentation, Steel carpentry, Access exchanges of infos, and so on...) We have written, designed and tried several solutions and even, several versions of Acad in the same time, in the same offices. In our design studies offices, in Paris, we have'nt had (not exactly) some help from Autodesk (at the beginning, I'm sure of this). So, we were obliged to do by ourselves to achieve that. This is why I say:= AutoCad is the best CAD system of the world. Because if you know how to do, you can do everything with it! I had used TurboCad for the pieces of furniture of my flat, in Orleans, 3 years ago. Drawings were pretty with an easy3D and easy colorization of the 'drawn-per-wire' ('false-3D'). It was very funny to use it (after two monthes to learn it!), but, what a painful task to use it with Excel and Access, to manage my bill of furniture! TCad is well, but only for drawings (Comput.Aided Drawings - Not Design, which include the use of a spreadsheet and a database Management -) and to finish with TCad, without the use of any language to machine something! What is this Cad (coming from MacIntosh world) ??

All other Cad's actually used derived or use some *.dwg drawing formats, because the Acad drawing format became a ' said-standard-by-use' to all other ones (what a pity, for AutoDesk,to leave *.dxb format, for Inet interchanges! And what a pity, You, Cad Fonders to NOT have made a World Standardized Format! (In any way, better than this painful *.dwg format to manage!).

That's all folks, for today ! Have a good time, BRZK..

Note: The Log Book of AutoCad is painful, hard to carry, have too thick pages, and was almost impossible to machine-copy. But, when you use it to go to sleep, what an efficient bible !!! Full of tricks very useful (The problem is: Where to buy it when you don't know what to do ? (a saturday evening !).

Nope! I get all the help I need from on-line CAD forums. As I said before, I'm happy with ACAD. It does everything I need to do. In my OT, I was trying to get some idea of how much of the program user's were using.

Hello Mr Ronseto,

It is IMPOSSIBLE to answer to your actual question. As I've said, in precedent message to Steve of North, i used to program some granted or not granted Acad mnemonic extensions. During that time I used to employ 100 % of the whole mnemonics. some times I used to 20 to 30 mnemonics (above, may be 250 of Acad current version) Now for my boat (See message to you Acad user), I used to employ 50 to 80 mnemonics ( over a total of 550), BUT, I use Acad, actually, only to draw some 3D objects. When I will design my PCB's for the 8 computers which will drive my boat, I will use another 20 to 30 mnemonics.

If U have only one use for AutoCad, it is possible to use only 20 mnemonics over 550 (may be 700 about now). If U have two uses for Acad, or they are of the same type and U continue to use 20 mnemoncs or they have'nt the same type and U can use up to 100 mnemonics. U know, even yourself can not say: " I use AutoCad up to 5 percent" It is impossible to say something. If I will use Acad to drive a milling machine, in order, for instance, to countersink my PCB's directly into a copper tape, I will use 200 mnemonics more, except if the milling machine is fitted with its proper Computer Aided Milling...

Have a good day, Mr Ronseto, BRZK