Why no AutoCAD for Linux??
ta...@guess.com
under the impression though that Autodesk will never support Linux. Is
this true? It seems there would be a market for it since the popularity
of Linux is growing. Why won`t Autodesk support a Linux version?
Marshall Caudle
On Thu, 01 Aug 2002 21:18:51 GMT, "ta...@guess.com" <ta...@guess.com>
wrote:
Semper Fi
Marshall E. Caudle
Glen Appleby
Caudle <id...@vnet.net> wrote:
>Plain and simple. Because Autodesk's in bed with MS.
Ewwww! That's nasty! That is almost as bad a mental image as
the one that I was left with after seeing the faked picture of
Janet "Johnnie" Reno in a merry widow.
Oh, great. Now I have to try to go to sleep again tonight and,
as I start to drift off, this image will pop into my mind,
causing me to sit bolt upright.
Glen (pleasent dreams) Appleby
--
"Who we are and who we become depends, in part, on whom we love."
-- "A General Theory Of Love" Thanks, Mom
______________________________________________________________
Glen Appleby gl...@armory.com <HTTP://www.armory.com/~glena/>
P.C.
<ta...@guess.com> skrev i en meddelelse news:3D49A820...@guess.com...
AutoCAD=Microsoft =AutoCAD on Linux ; why shuldn't AutoCAD run on Linux Mac
work fine with Linux .
Didn't Microsoft lose that trial ?
P.C.
gruhn
Linux is geared towards people who don't want to pay for their software.
Autodesk is big enough that they get to write some of the rules and one of
the rules is that it doesn't make any sense to waste money supporting a
backwater, dead in the water, OS.
> Why won`t Autodesk support a Linux version?
They are in business. At a guess... they didn't see any money in it.
Jack
wrote:
>On Thu, 01 Aug 2002 21:43:46 GMT, in comp.cad.autocad,Marshall
>Caudle <id...@vnet.net> wrote:
>
>>Plain and simple. Because Autodesk's in bed with MS.
>
>Ewwww! That's nasty! That is almost as bad a mental image as
>the one that I was left with after seeing the faked picture of
>Janet "Johnnie" Reno in a merry widow.
The trurh can be very nasty. Get used to it.
Perhaps in the future, with a little luck, the SEC will require more
detail from publically traded companies. Most likely, your worst
fears about bed partners will then be revealed.
Sleep tight.
Jack
Tom Berger
>
> There used to be an AutoCAD for, I presume, Solaris.
And for some other Unixes (HP, SGI ...) too, and for MacOS, and for NT
on the Alpha Processor ...
There is much more hope that some day you will see IntelliCAD for Linux,
but the chances aren't really very good.
Tom Berger
--
ArchTools: Architektur-Werkzeuge für AutoCAD (TM)
ArchDIM - architekturgerechte Bemaßung und Höhenkoten
ArchAREA - Flächenermittlung und Raumbuch nach DIN 277
Info und Demo unter http://www.archtools.de
Phrostie
Autodesk is not going to support linux until it starts to loose sales
because of it. if you really want to run cad on linux then i would
recomend going to a competitor that is. they range from all levels
Qcad, Cycas, Varicad (3D solids) to Pro/E. in the mean time there is
always Wine.
--
Oh, I have slipped the surly bonds of DOS,
and danced the skies on Linux silvered wings.
http://pfrostie.freeservers.com/cad-tastrafy/
http://www.freelists.org/list/cad-linux
Terry W. Dotson
> Plain and simple. Because Autodesk's in bed with MS.
As in the apparent dropping of Actrix when MS bought Visio which in turn
dropped IntelliCAD.
It would be a MASSIVE undertaking to port a product the size of AutoCAD
to *any* other OS. That, along with the fact there is very little money
to be made, its understandable why it hasn't (and won't) happen.
Terry
ta...@guess.com
TomD
> > of Linux is growing. Why won`t Autodesk support a Linux version?
> P.C.
What do Microsoft's legal troubles have to do with Adesk supporting Linux?
Adesk will support Linux the minute it would be profitable for them to do so
and not a second sooner. Of course, being that they didn't find keeping the
Mac OS profitable, I doubt they will bother with Linux anytime soon.
(I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with Adesk's decisions.)
ta...@guess.com
> <SNIPPED>
> > > of Linux is growing. Why won`t Autodesk support a Linux version?
> > Didn't Microsoft lose that trial ?
> > P.C.
>
> What do Microsoft's legal troubles have to do with Adesk supporting Linux?
> Adesk will support Linux the minute it would be profitable for them to do so
> and not a second sooner.
This is so depressing. How can there be any demand for a Linux version when all
their users have to use Windows? In other words, there is no demand for a Linux
version because all AutoCAD users are running Windows because AutoCAD doesnt
support Linux. :-(
This biz isn`t fun anymore. It`s all microsofts world now. I think I am going
to do a career change.
Caveman
But the IntelliCAD source is available to Open Dwg Consortium developers.
Compilations to Linux, Unix, Beos and MacOs is not a massive undertaking.
Hope some to be seen in the near future. Using Wine is OK, but it's not the
same as the "real" thing.
gruhn
> Compilations to Linux, Unix, Beos and MacOs is not a massive undertaking.
Really?
Marshall Caudle
I'm just surmising from many years of watching politicians and
business executives play their silly little games. One has to read
between the lines to get at the truth and then the truth is only what
someone makes it.
Since MS has never really entered the CAD market and Bill is certainly
no dummy - if he could make money with a CAD program to rival Autodesk
he certainly would and I have a lot of respect for MS's ability to
produce software for the masses - they are very good at it. Whether
they write it or "buy" it - they make it available. Since Autodesk
several years ago dropped support for any OS other than MS - I surmise
that there must be a behind the scenes "gentlemen/ladies" agreement
somewhere in the woodpile.
Since I don't use Linnux I really don't know what it will do, but a
CAD system to rival Autodesk without a big learning curve would
certainly appear to be an attractive option regardless of whose
operating system it used. If Autodesk keeps "ticking off" enough
customers the market for one will increase and maybe one will develop.
Semper Fi
Marshall E. Caudle
P.C.
"Marshall Caudle" <id...@vnet.net> skrev i en meddelelse
news:tbrlku8q51hqes6nu...@4ax.com...
> Terry:
> Since MS has never really entered the CAD market and Bill is certainly
> no dummy - if he could make money with a CAD program to rival Autodesk
> he certainly would and I have a lot of respect for MS's ability to
> produce software for the masses - they are very good at it. Whether
> they write it or "buy" it - they make it available. Since Autodesk
> several years ago dropped support for any OS other than MS - I surmise
> that there must be a behind the scenes "gentlemen/ladies" agreement
> somewhere in the woodpile.
Please let me express it in AutoLisp:
(Equal '(Ms.) '(AutoCAD))
T
P,C.
P.C.
<ta...@guess.com> skrev i en meddelelse news:3D49A820...@guess.com...
You can run AutoCAD on Linux with a special Linux shell that been develobed for
years and now by a few are called "brilliant".
You don't run AutoCAD on Linux, but stare a "Dos emuluator" this maneage the
system function calls ontop the Linux kernal but opposite the first attempts to
create a shell for Win app's , this emuluator shuld run AutoCAD better than
AutoCAD are run on a bare Win Os.
What realy count are the basic system layout, if the files createt with the app.
can be exportet and loaded on other systems, -------- but please exchouse that
Im'e no Linux expert ; for me this discussion is not about B.G. or what I think
about M.s. For me it's a question about if the app. I work within work or not,
and I don't care a s... about what some people think about either real persons
or real companies. From my point of view , much of this is dull cult, that is
no buisness of mine, I don't care and just want the CAD to work . Linux seen
from my point of view are the perfect Os. to learn how Os' work and the perfect
way to educate programmers that maneage a wide perspective of Os' --------- but
Im'e allways aware about more "religious issues" , of whom I find quite a lot,
and of lot's are plain misunderstandings spiced with quite a bit myth's that
simply can't be true.
Now why do some people get angry, when I state that one good thing about HTML.
is, that you can't find specific "words" in a graphics. That if you want to
support Eschelon ,then you must fight HTML ? ------ They do ;))
Anyway the information about Linux and how you maneage a Win application ontop a
Linux Os. with a Dos emuluator , say more about the remains of Dos in Win. But
it also tell that Ms. was forced to publish the source code ; still M.s. did pay
the expences develobing this, and when you buy a copy of AutoCAD , you get
source code lib's that point directly into the functions delivered with your Os.
So to state that M.s. who own Autodesk ( or is it the other way around ) ,don't
give away source code are simply not true , but you can't just mess up an Os.
that took 40 thousand programmers to streamline ; this is how I se this.
You are all welcom to change my views. But please check why I even deal with CAD
programs, you se Im'e only interestet in the results. Maby Linux will maneage
huge drawings better, then I proberly would use Linux.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/skuespilhus/
P.C.
P.C.
John Doucette
just an exercise in over spending. I learned AutoCad on university
equipment and have used AutoCad on employers machinery for years. At home I
have used Generic Cadd and Visual Cadd and by doing so have saved thousands
of dollars that I have been able to use to maintain my pickup, buy
restaurant meals, and drink hundreds of micro brews. I have never felt that
AutoCad could do anything better than the cheaper products that I have owned
and I have always thought that buying AutoCad was a suckers game.
It would seem to make infinitely more sense to try to approach the makers of
some of the cheaper products for a linux cad program than to go to AutoDesk.
Martin Shoemaker
would love to run a different program, but the ones I've looked at
either (1) don't handle fonts the same way, (2) have a problem with
xrefs, (3) are slow, (4) are either not customizable or customization
would require too steep a learning curve, (5) can't handle ADT and/or
LDD objects. If I didn't have to work with other people's backgrounds
and title blocks it would be different.
Martin
Tom Berger
> But the IntelliCAD source is available to Open Dwg Consortium developers.
> Compilations to Linux, Unix, Beos and MacOs is not a massive undertaking.
[ ] you know anything about programming computers
[x] you are an optimist
T:-)m Berger
Matthew Taylor
"gruhn" <gr...@hwb.com> wrote in message
news:Ohk29.861$iz3....@news.uswest.net...
It relies too much on Windows specific libraries & functions & would
therefore require a huge amount of rewriting to work on other OSs.
Programs that are both Win / Linux / Unix, tend to either / or be ones that
ignore many of the Windows conventions, or e those that originated on Unix &
were ported to Win. Eg. Maya.
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
"Marshall Caudle" <id...@vnet.net> wrote in message
news:tbrlku8q51hqes6nu...@4ax.com...
> Terry:
>
> I'm just surmising from many years of watching politicians and
> business executives play their silly little games. One has to read
> between the lines to get at the truth and then the truth is only what
> someone makes it.
>
> Since MS has never really entered the CAD market and Bill is certainly
> no dummy - if he could make money with a CAD program to rival Autodesk
> he certainly would and I have a lot of respect for MS's ability to
> produce software for the masses - they are very good at it. Whether
> they write it or "buy" it - they make it available. Since Autodesk
> several years ago dropped support for any OS other than MS - I surmise
> that there must be a behind the scenes "gentlemen/ladies" agreement
> somewhere in the woodpile.
>
In my experience, MS would make a cad product, that didn't realy rival any
of the other stuff on the market, but would then proceed to take over the
market by bundling this product with something else that they were selling.
The program would not integrate with any other roducts, & it would have more
bells & whistles that you didn't have a need for.
Matthew
(who is currently using Lotus Wordpro to do all his typing on & can't
understand why Word ever ended up dominating the market.)
Matthew Taylor
"Martin Shoemaker" <hm...@cableaz.com> wrote in message
news:A6W29.3834$f71.3...@newsfeed.slurp.net...
> The problem for me is that the architects I work with use AutoCAD. I
> would love to run a different program, but the ones I've looked at
> either
> (5) can't handle ADT and/or
> LDD objects. If I didn't have to work with other people's backgrounds
> and title blocks it would be different.
>
Can anything else?
Microstation V8 does all the other features that you have described but
comes unstuck with this. (No real cost saving compared to AutoCad though.)
Matthew
Martin Shoemaker
In my case I want to make these objects part of a background that's on
a single layer, and I don't really care if a proxy converts to a block
or to a bunch of line segments. Should be simple to do, but everyone
seems to think that "round trip" is all that's necessary. It's not if
you plot in-house.
Martin
e
> of the other stuff on the market, but would then proceed to take over the
> market by bundling this product with something else that they were selling.
> The program would not integrate with any other roducts, & it would have more
> bells & whistles that you didn't have a need for.
almost got it right..with this correction:
MS would BUY a cad product , that didn't realy rival any of the other
stuff on
the market, but would then proceed to take over the market by
bundling this
hijackware with something else that they were selling. The program
would not
integrate with many other products(that again they didn't write), &
JotM
(see google groups:
From: ric...@neabbs.UUCP (RICHARD RONTELTAP)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix
Subject: AutoCAD on XENIX
Message-ID: <108...@neabbs.UUCP>
Date: 27 Feb 89 15:23:49 GMT
Organization: NEABBS multi-line BBS +31-20-717666 (13x), Amsterdam, Holland
Lines: 52
[ AutoCAD on XENIX ]
I just read that in Bulletin Board Press service. The beauty of it is,
it appears to run faster on XENIX than DOS. Probably has something to do
with 32 bit code and larger memory.
Anyway here is the article. This 'reprint' is without permission (the
eletronic magazine is free though), so I hope this won't spoil my
chance to get into that beatiful place up in the sky later on :-)
---------------------------
AUTOCAD PORTED TO SCO XENIX
---------------------------
(BPS) -- The Santa Cruz Operation Inc. (SCO) and Autodesk Inc. said that
AutoCAD, a PC-based CAD package from Autodesk, soon will be available for
PC-
based workstations running the SCO XENIX 386 Operating System.
"The port of AutoCAD to the SCO XENIX 386 environment has resulted in an
extremely fast implementation of AutoCAD," said Robert Wenig, manager of
Autodesk's AutoCAD porting group.
"This dramatic increase in speed means that AutoCAD users can create larger,
more complex drawings in a given amount of time. It's like getting the kind
of performance increase you'd expect from a major hardware upgrade by simply
upgrading your software."
Doug Michels, SCO's vice president and co-founder, said, "By migrating to
SCO
XENIX, current DOS-based AutoCAD users can dramatically increase the
performance of their systems, as well as enjoy full access to both XENIX and
DOS-based business applications, running concurrently on the same PC
workstation.
"SCO XENIX also provides LAN connectivity to integrate a CAD operation
smoothly into both small and large organizations.
"In addition, current SCO XENIX users can now add AutoCAD to Autodesk's
Autosolid and other third party CAD packages already available for SCO XENIX
386 to build full feature CAD systems on PC platforms."
AutoCAD Release 10 for SCO's XENIX Operating System will be priced at U.S.
$3,000.
Contact: Autodesk Inc., 2320 Marinship Way, Sausalito, CA 94965; 415/332-
2344.
Source: BBS PRESS SERVICE, INC: 913-478-9239 (modem)
)
SCO Unix was quite a good alternative at that time, but still the initiative
was halted. Why try again? Just for the sake of offering an alternative?
JotM.
David Hostetler
> Linux is geared towards people who don't want to pay for their software.
legit copy of Corel DRAW for Linux, or StarOffice 6.0, or Main Actor,
or... well you get the idea. I use Linux because it does things for me
that Microsoft OS's don't. In particular it allows me to use a secure,
stable OS. And I don't have to reboot the system every time I want to
stop and restart a service that has been modified. We use a variety of
Unixes, and Unix type OS's such as Linux, AIX, Solaris etc... to do
our job. To assert that the organization that I work with doesn't want
to spend money is nuts. They go through money like there is no
tomorrow. And there are plenty of big players that offer us the
products and software we need. IBM, Sun, Veritas etc find Linux to be
a profitable marketplace, so what is wrong with AutoDesk that they
can't make a profit on a non Microsoft platform?
> Autodesk is big enough that they get to write some of the rules and one of
> the rules is that it doesn't make any sense to waste money supporting a
> backwater, dead in the water, OS.
Backwater, dead in the water OS? Uh. Think again, especially due to
Microsoft's overly ambitious license terms. As we refresh NT-4 boxes
we are eliminating Microsoft from the desktop one machine at a time.
And the replacement OS? Linux! We are far from alone. We are saving
our companies and clients tons of money in total cost of ownership
(even Microsoft admits a higher TCO for Windows), and can guarantee
higher uptime for our Linux networks.
With the increased need for security and stability the question really
ought to be why would Autodesk waste time and money supporting a
backwater, dead in the water OS such as Windows? Microsoft appears to
be doing everything they can to drive customers away. If it were up to
Bill Gates he would have everyone be required to give him an annual
tribute (tax) just because he exists.
I HAVE to deal with AutoCAD because we have a couple of engineers that
don't know how to work with better programs that work on non Microsoft
systems, if it weren't for these poor souls we wouldn't have anything
to do with it... And it is because of their lack of support for non MS
systems.
TomD
news:6ad93cab.0208...@posting.google.com...
<SNIPPED>
> I HAVE to deal with AutoCAD because we have a couple of engineers that
> don't know how to work with better programs that work on non Microsoft
> systems, if it weren't for these poor souls we wouldn't have anything
> to do with it... And it is because of their lack of support for non MS
> systems.
I'd love to hear more about these 'better' CAD programs for non MS systems.
Seriously.
As for the rest of your rant, I'll just skip all that. For the most part
it's a pointless discussion. ;)
Tim
boxes with Windows, 1 station at a time (of 115). And we're not alone. 90%
of the rest of the world has already done it. Albeit, MS has no grip on
Servers (especially Web-Servers), but as for as workstations go, people who
want to work use Windows, people who want to play use Linux. The other 97%
of Linux users are plain and simply Microsoft haters, as our friendly postor
here appears to be. I like Microsoft no more than I like AutoDesk, but I'm
not going to use crappy software on a crappy OS because of it! IBM and Sun
are using Linux in lieu of maintaining their own OS's. So are you implying
I can't buy an IBM loaded with Windows? That's right, to stay alive, they
sell boxes loaded with Windows. But I wouldn't say that Linux is geared
towards people who don't want to pay for their software. It's source is
open but U have to be able to compile it b4 it becomes free :-) And even
then, look what U get for your troubles ... Linux!
P.S. What the HECK does Corel draw have to do with AutoCAD on Linux? Why
is some guy who hates AutoCAD monitoring this group? Why am I replying to a
CAD layman? If you're not the one using AutoCAD then I guess that pretty
much sums up the value of your input into an AutoCAD newsgroup discussing
AutoCAD on Linux!!!! Can't U find a good Linux newsgroup? Not enough users
to support a newsgroup??? Maybe next year, you know, when Linux makes it
big. or wait. That was last year. No, the year before. Anyway, When it
makes it big, then You'll show Bill Gates!!! You hang in there! Someday!!!
He he. I luv blowing off steam every now and then!!!
"David Hostetler" <dbh...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:6ad93cab.0208...@posting.google.com...
JotM
news:6ad93cab.0208...@posting.google.com...
>
> I HAVE to deal with AutoCAD because we have a couple of engineers that
> don't know how to work with better programs that work on non Microsoft
> systems, if it weren't for these poor souls we wouldn't have anything
> to do with it... And it is because of their lack of support for non MS
> systems.
David,
As you are apparently not one of the engineers, you might refrain yourself
from judging AutoCAD on it's merits as a 2D CAD application (or 2.5D as some
people would say).
20 years of development left us with an application that is highly
customisable with respect to the results (through AutoLISP and Visual LISP)
and some customising of the UI like other Windows apps.
There have been other applications all over that period, but for some reason
AutoCAD was never pushed out of the marketplace. That should tell something
about the impact and the apparent quality of the application. If there had
been even one seriously better competitive application, it would have "won"
by now.
(detail: if there is one seriously rising star at the firnament, it is Solid
Works, which is available only for the Windows platform)
As I mentioned in another posting, Autodesk used to support multiple OS's
during the 80's and early 90's (see the transcript of a Usenet message from
1989 below). It did not bring them the profits they were seeking, so they
dropped them.
Should they really start supporting multiple OS's again just so you would
have an alternative for the sake of the alternative? Or should the
application be at it's best for your engineers on one OS?
JotM.
Design Engineer
From: j...@well.UUCP (James Carrington)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: AutoCAD under X?
Message-ID: <13...@well.UUCP>
Date: 15 Aug 89 01:00:23 GMT
References: <4...@calmasd.Prime.COM> <4...@westc.UUCP>
<3...@crltrx.crl.dec.com>
Reply-To: j...@Autodesk.com (James Carrington)
Organization: Autodesk Inc.
Lines: 13
In article <3...@crltrx.crl.dec.com> j...@max.crl.dec.com (Jim Gettys) writes:
|According to the list I have internally, it claims AutoCAD is available now
|on DEC hardware; I was playing with it at Siggraph on a PMAX earlier this
week.
|But, as usual, you should really check with the horse's mouth...
| - Jim
AutoCAD for the DECStation 3100 will be available in the 4th Quarter of '89,
under DECWindows X. Next year, the other workstations we support (Sun,
Apollo, VAX, SCO Unix) should also have X as an option to the "native"
window system.
James Carrington
Systems Programmer
Autodesk Inc.
John Doucette
"JotM" <jap.jum.rem...@12move.nl> wrote in message
news:ajd3uk$j25$1...@news.surfnet.nl...
> <ta...@guess.com> wrote in message news:3D49A820...@guess.com...
> > I would like to know if it is possible to run AutoCAD on Linux. I am
> > under the impression though that Autodesk will never support Linux. Is
> > this true? It seems there would be a market for it since the popularity
> > of Linux is growing. Why won`t Autodesk support a Linux version?
> >
> Probably not a market for it. They tried before you know?!
Maybe the question should be - when will there be a good CAD program for
Linux. Autodesk will never make any program that isn't grossly overpriced
and that doesn't need a stack of expensive add ons to do what one thought
one was buying Autocad for in the first place. These are not selling
points to Linux users.
Ain Vagula
>
> Maybe the question should be - when will there be a good CAD program for
> Linux.
For some people 'good' means 'exactly like autocad'. It is waste of time
to explain them that never.
ain
Jim Patrick
>As I mentioned in another posting, Autodesk used to support multiple OS's
>during the 80's and early 90's (see the transcript of a Usenet message from
>1989 below). It did not bring them the profits they were seeking, so they
>dropped them.
The analysis is incorrect. In the early 90s Autodesk make a decision
to support the Windows OS. The first release on this premise (r12 in
1992) failed to do that, and the next (r13 in 1994) barely ran on it;
the stable version ended up at 13-c-4-a. Both r12 and r13 supported
DOS and UNIX versions.
It was that experience that prompted an alliance with Microsoft giving
AutoCAD programmers access to the Windows core. The result of this
was r14 (1997) that was smaller, faster, more stable and more capable
than previous. This version did not support DOS or UNIX.
>Should they really start supporting multiple OS's again just so you would
>have an alternative for the sake of the alternative? Or should the
>application be at it's best for your engineers on one OS?
As long as Autodesk is a strategic partner (that's a legal term) with
Microsoft they cannot and will not make AutoCAD versions for competing
operating systems. It has nothing to do with "at its best".
"What is the true significance of Windows? It empowers.
Windows empowers the tens of millions of owners of industry-
standard individual computers with the ease of use, inter-
application data transfer, and device independence which
have long been available only to those who spent far more
money to buy and time to master a high-performance
engineering workstation. Windows empowers application
software vendors like Autodesk by allowing us, at last, to
deliver an intuitive graphical user interface, on-line
assistance, and all the other benefits of the workstation
environment not, as in the past, to a tiny fraction of our
customers, but to all of them--and by doing so to raise
their expectations once again and ever higher.
--John Walker, Autodesk CEO, March 10th, 1992
Of course Autodesk learned that only access to source-code could make
this all come possible. But the words "Linux", "Gnome", or "KDE"
could be substituted for the word "Windows" in that speech, and it
would be just as valid today as Walker was in 1992.
http://www.fourmilab.ch/autofile/www/autoframe.html
Other than legally binding agreements preventing a Linux port, the
other factor is that although AutoCAD is the *perceived* flagship of
Autodesk; in reality it's a decreasing fraction (about 30% of net,
decreasing 10% per year) of their revenue. To be fair, another 30% of
revenue rides on-top of the AutoCAD core --MDT, LDD, ADT, Map etc. But
these products could easily use other 'core engines', and Autodesk is
no longer looking at AutoCAD for its future.
Overseas sales is an *increasing* proportion (sales increasing, dollar
increasing against other currency, revenue stable at 64%) of Autodesk
revenue. Couple that with the fact MSWindows is less entrenched in
overseas markets, where Linux has a greater user base than in the USA;
and there's a potentially decent market for a 'CAD on Linux' product.
The drawback to a port is that Linux isn't a single product or
platform, but there are a dozen variations on the market. A suggested
fix is to package the [tested and stable] OS with the CAD application,
and PTC's Pro/Engineer(tm) thinks it's a serious proposition.
But the claim that an AutoCAD port to Linux will never be profitable,
or that 'Windows is the best solution' doesn't hold a drop of water.
Ain Vagula
>
> "What is the true significance of Windows? It empowers.
> Windows empowers the tens of millions of owners of industry-
> standard individual computers with the ease of use, inter-
> application data transfer, and device independence which
> have long been available only to those who spent far more
> money to buy and time to master a high-performance
> engineering workstation. Windows empowers application
> software vendors like Autodesk by allowing us, at last, to
> deliver an intuitive graphical user interface, on-line
> assistance, and all the other benefits of the workstation
> environment not, as in the past, to a tiny fraction of our
> customers, but to all of them--and by doing so to raise
> their expectations once again and ever higher.
> --John Walker, Autodesk CEO, March 10th, 1992
>
There is something more about Windows written by John Walker :)
http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/top10.html
ain
Martin Shoemaker
...
If there had been even one seriously better competitive application, it
would have "won"
by now.
I must disagree. I can name several CAD programs that are more reliable,
that have a corporate ethic of fixing bugs before adding "features",
that are faster, that are as easily programmable, and that cost a
fraction of what AutoCAD does. What they can't do is exactly duplicate
existing AutoCAD drawings (usually due to issues with how AutoCAD
handles text and/or with proxy objects). In my end of the industry I
have to work with backgrounds created in R14, LT2002, and ADT3.3 (no one
seems to be using any full version in the 2K series). I haven't had
time recently to re-review the competition, but the last time I looked
there was nothing that would take the types of files I have to work with
and produce a plot identical to the plot which AutoCAD produces.
The AutoDesk market stranglehold has little to do with quality,
features, or ease of use. It has everything to do with the millions of
files that exist in a proprietary format.
Martin
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
David Hostetler
> At our company, we're replacing 15 Hp and Sun Unix Boxes and about 10 Linux
> boxes with Windows, 1 station at a time (of 115). And we're not alone. 90%
> of the rest of the world has already done it.
Yes Microsoft has taken 90% market share. I will not argue that. I am
surprised however that your company would, particularly with the
concerns over security and TCO of data systems even consider a
migration to Windows. Do I believe Windows has no place at all? No not
really, there are a lot of execs and secretaries that need to be hand
held with their computers, of course these folks probably would be
better off with a Mac.
--snip--
> Albeit, MS has no grip on
> Servers (especially Web-Servers), but as for as workstations go, people who
> want to work use Windows, people who want to play use Linux. The other 97%
> of Linux users are plain and simply Microsoft haters, as our friendly postor
> here appears to be.
--/snip--
Microsoft even concedes that they have marketing troubles in the
server arena. Love or hate Microsoft they are a fact of life. I am no
big fan of General Motors either, but my wife drives a Saturn. Why? It
does the job she wants it to the way she wants. Just like Windows does
what some folks want it to the way they want. And of course Linux does
what some folks want the way they want. As far as work vs. play. Which
platform has more games? Which platform includes more development
environments and programming languages? How do you want to define
work? Playing Half Life or building that next killer app that will
bring revenue into your company? What about watching out for the
bottom line? The trick to business is of course bringing more money in
the door than goes out. What I can see from Microsoft products is that
they do a fantastic job for Microsoft in that manner, however for
their clients this is questionable. It
--snip--
> It's source is
> open but U have to be able to compile it b4 it becomes free :-) And even
> then, look what U get for your troubles ... Linux!
--/snip--
It would appear that you don't like compiling software. Of course you
can use precompiled binaries. This is particularly nice with rpm based
systems like Red Hat, Mandrake, and SuSe. No it isn't as convenient as
simply clicking on install.exe, but it is far more flexible if you
want to customize your system. That is assuming you know what you are
doing.
--snip--
> P.S. What the HECK does Corel draw have to do with AutoCAD on Linux? Why
> is some guy who hates AutoCAD monitoring this group?
--snip--
Did I say I hated AutoCAD??? I did say we wouldn't have anything to do
with it because of it's attachment to a single OS vendor. But hate
AutoCAD? Hardly. Please do not put words in my mouth. Anyway what
Corel DRAW has to do with my point is the assertion that Linux users
do not want to pay for software. My point is that this is a false
assertion. That is the extent of the relevance of Corel DRAW in this
discussion. If you can't see the point, I am not going to hold your
hand and explain it to you.
--snip--
> Why am I replying to a
> CAD layman? If you're not the one using AutoCAD then I guess that pretty
> much sums up the value of your input into an AutoCAD newsgroup discussing
> AutoCAD on Linux!!!!
--/snip--
Without putting words into my mouth. Please quote the section from my
posting that gives the impression that I do not use or am involved
with the use of CAD programs. You are correct that I am not the end
user of this product, but my users are and I have to support them.
Does this make my opinion irrelevant in your world? Your loss.
--snip--
> Can't U find a good Linux newsgroup? Not enough users
> to support a newsgroup???
--snip--
Look in your newsreader (probably outlook express) and search for
"Linux". Tell me how many groups you find. Your assertion is utterly
without merit. Linux boasts some of the strongest online communities.
With actual people participating and helping each other.
--snip--
> Maybe next year, you know, when Linux makes it
> big. or wait. That was last year. No, the year before. Anyway, When it
> makes it big, then You'll show Bill Gates!!! You hang in there! Someday!!!
--/snip--
You admit that Microsoft has no grip on the server market. What runs
on all of those servers? For the most part Linux! Is Linux on the
desktop a threat to Microsoft's market share? Why not ask Microsoft?
They themselves claim that the biggest threat to their profitability
is IBM and Linux. Is Linux in the big time on dektops? No, funny thing
about the desktop. In order to get a system on the desktop there need
to be applications, in order for the application vendors to port their
apps to a specific platform they need to have that platform on the
desktop in serious numbers. Applications such as ProE, StarOffice, and
Evolution have made it possible to replace Windows desktops with Linux
units. And I will see your paltry 115 systems with at least 2500 I
will be involved with migrating over the next year.
You appear to assert that Linux will not ever be enough of a market
force to be profitable for companies to port their software to.
Perhaps I am incorrect here. But that is what I get from your posting.
I contend that not only is Linux enough of a market as can be seen by
the number of major players throwing big money into supporting and
advancing Linux and related technologies, but it is a growing market.
Will Linux ever topple Microsoft? Not without Microsoft's help.
However that day may actually come sooner than many folks think. Many
I.T. managers are looking for ways around Microsoft's expensive and
aggresive licensing schemes, as well as proven, secure technologies
for use on critical desktops. With the many advances the open source
community has had over the last two years Linux is certainly ready for
desktop application for serious users. Those that fight change every
step of the way probably aren't willing to give up their Windows 95 /
98 desktop, even to go to WinXP let alone a UNIX type system, and will
likely only migrate when they have no other choice, for them, and they
are numerous, they will stay as close as possible to the familiar. But
without leaving the familiar, and stepping outside of our comfort
zones, we never achieve any sort of greatness.
David Hostetler
JotM.
I certainly respect your view on the matter, but I stand by my
(intended statement) that I HAVE to deal with AutoCAD on Windows
because of a few engineers that do not know how to use the more common
in our environment programs that run under Linux. That was what I mean
to say. I am terribly sorry I misstated my intent.
Looking at it now I see I have misstated my intent however. My lament
is that AutoCAD is not ported to non MS operating systems. Not with
the AutoCAD product itself or any of its functions. That is MY mistake
and I apologize to AutoDesk for mistating it. I was meaning better OS
not better programs. So if you will pardon me while I pull my toes out
of my virtual mouth....
My question stands however, how is it that other companies can get
into the Linux market and make buckets of money, but AutoDesk can't
seem to find a profit outside of being tied at the hip to Microsoft?
Tim
> Yes Microsoft has taken 90% market share. I will not argue that. I am
> surprised however that your company would, particularly with the
> concerns over security and TCO of data systems even consider a
> migration to Windows. Do I believe Windows has no place at all? No not
> really, there are a lot of execs and secretaries that need to be hand
> held with their computers, of course these folks probably would be
> better off with a Mac.
Security? I do not work in the hacking environment. I'm in an engineering
department. I've never had any security problems. Our department has a
Unix Server, & 2 NT (2000 for now ....) servers. Unix is too expensive to
maintain. A bunch of the guys in our department installed and ran Linux for
a while. As thier efficiency dropped away, they were eliminated along with
thier OS's. We don't pay engineers to develop killer apps and play games
while they are supposed to be engineering products. By using windows, we
remove the need to have hackers and gamers sitting in our department. We've
never had a requirement for Linux. Never seen a program I ever wanted to
run that REQUIRED Linux. I don't like Windows, but it does everything we
need. And the administration of the OS is simple. Plug it in and install
your apps. Why complicate it??
> Microsoft even concedes that they have marketing troubles in the
> server arena. Love or hate Microsoft they are a fact of life. I am no
> big fan of General Motors either, but my wife drives a Saturn. Why? It
> does the job she wants it to the way she wants. Just like Windows does
> what some folks want it to the way they want. And of course Linux does
> what some folks want the way they want. As far as work vs. play. Which
> platform has more games? Which platform includes more development
> environments and programming languages? How do you want to define
> work? Playing Half Life or building that next killer app that will
> bring revenue into your company? What about watching out for the
> bottom line? The trick to business is of course bringing more money in
> the door than goes out. What I can see from Microsoft products is that
> they do a fantastic job for Microsoft in that manner, however for
> their clients this is questionable. It
Developing killer apps? Who has the most games? Like I said, I don't play
at work. I engineer products. The only programming tools I use are
fortran, Basic & C++. None of which require Linux. So why switch to an OS
that offers me things I don't want and don't need? We buy our apps ...
(they're usually not killer apps, thou. we'd need linux to run hacking
programs). We are not developers, we are engineering staff.
> It would appear that you don't like compiling software. Of course you
> can use precompiled binaries. This is particularly nice with rpm based
> systems like Red Hat, Mandrake, and SuSe. No it isn't as convenient as
> simply clicking on install.exe, but it is far more flexible if you
> want to customize your system. That is assuming you know what you are
> doing.
But I don't customize and re-compile autocad. I don't play games at work.
What part of alt.cad.autocad do you not understand? We are not debating who
builds the Killer Apps?? You do. We engineer products, buildings, roads.
We don't compile killer apps. So as stated, Linux is great for Gamers and
Killer app creators. Like you said, Linux has got all the good games.
Sorry, I mistook you for someone who was involved with engineering design
software. Stupid me. You build games and killer apps for Linux .... Good
for you. We don't. We use AutoCAD because 75% of the rest of the world
does. So what does that mean? It means no matter who I talk to who is
involved in the projects I work on, they have the ability to open, print,
modify, and work with the files I generate. They don't have killer apps and
killer games, but they've got AutoCAD. So do I.
> Did I say I hated AutoCAD??? I did say we wouldn't have anything to do
> with it because of it's attachment to a single OS vendor. But hate
> AutoCAD? Hardly. Please do not put words in my mouth. Anyway what
> Corel DRAW has to do with my point is the assertion that Linux users
> do not want to pay for software. My point is that this is a false
> assertion. That is the extent of the relevance of Corel DRAW in this
> discussion. If you can't see the point, I am not going to hold your
> hand and explain it to you.
>
'I HAVE to deal with AutoCAD' Does that sound like someone who enjoys it?
You can't say that 'YOU HAVE TO' work with it and that people won't use
superior products without implying dislike ....
> Without putting words into my mouth. Please quote the section from my
> posting that gives the impression that I do not use or am involved
> with the use of CAD programs. You are correct that I am not the end
> user of this product, but my users are and I have to support them.
> Does this make my opinion irrelevant in your world? Your loss.
>
> Look in your newsreader (probably outlook express) and search for
> "Linux". Tell me how many groups you find. Your assertion is utterly
> without merit. Linux boasts some of the strongest online communities.
> With actual people participating and helping each other.
I know the hacking community is strong. So are the gamers. Why aren't you
over there writing killer apps?? and killer games??
>
> --snip--
> > Maybe next year, you know, when Linux makes it
> > big. or wait. That was last year. No, the year before. Anyway, When
it
> > makes it big, then You'll show Bill Gates!!! You hang in there!
Someday!!!
> --/snip--
> You admit that Microsoft has no grip on the server market. What runs
> on all of those servers?
Mostly Unix at this time. Linux is starting to make significant gains.
Look how far dominating the server market has gotten UNIX? they're still
hanging in there. With all 800 licenses up and running.
> For the most part Linux! Is Linux on the
> desktop a threat to Microsoft's market share? Why not ask Microsoft?
> They themselves claim that the biggest threat to their profitability
> is IBM and Linux. Is Linux in the big time on dektops? No, funny thing
> about the desktop. In order to get a system on the desktop there need
> to be applications, in order for the application vendors to port their
> apps to a specific platform they need to have that platform on the
> desktop in serious numbers. Applications such as ProE, StarOffice, and
> Evolution have made it possible to replace Windows desktops with Linux
> units. And I will see your paltry 115 systems with at least 2500
Wow. Imagine what microsoft could do with 2500 seats, ho wait, I think they
have more than that. That will quadruple Linux's world share of users! We
have 115 people in our engineering group. The rest of our company has been
and still will be using Windows. We've got better things to do than create
killer apps and killer games.
> I will be involved with migrating over the next year.
> You appear to assert that Linux will not ever be enough of a market
> force to be profitable for companies to port their software to.
No eventually they may. But at this time, to port an OS over to linux to
capture 12 new customers seems pretty unfeasible. ProE, similar to SDRC
Ideas, CATIA, UG, all have been long time Unix applications. Porting a Unix
app to Linux is simple. 10 yrs ago you couldn't put ProE on Windows. Only
Unix ... but they seen where the market headed and started gearing thier
product towards windows. Now they have the problem of being bashed by Solid
Works and slowly fading away, so they need a new niche market .. and there's
a few hundred engineers who want to run thier killer apps on Linux. So PTC
decided to port thier already existing code from unix over to linux. Cost?
relatively low. AutoCAD never supported Unix for any amount of time. Why?
Because thier license's are 1/10 the price of ProE and selling 500 license
to John Deere doesn't generate enough cash to justify the cost of porting to
Unix or Linux. Markets drive the world. And right now, You either run on
windows or you go to sleep with Linux. 3 Yrs ago, Linux was making big
breakthroughs. Now, the only place they can make market gains is at the
expense of Unix and Mac. Windows isn't worried about Linux. They are
worried about ALL competition. If they felt is was a real threat, they'd
buy it out ... not that that's right, but don't they have some pretty
healthy shares in your CorelDraw program and it's OS???????? If the Market
was there, Autodesk would go after it. PTC had no choice. Thier survivial
is hinging on replacing all the customers they've lost to Solid Works and
the money they've lost by being forced to cut thier prices by 2/3rds.
They've always catered to a minority of unix Customers. now they're
catering to a minority of Linux users. No change of policy. just a change
to the compiler output.
> Perhaps I am incorrect here. But that is what I get from your posting.
> I contend that not only is Linux enough of a market as can be seen by
> the number of major players throwing big money into supporting and
> advancing Linux and related technologies, but it is a growing market.
> Will Linux ever topple Microsoft? Not without Microsoft's help.
> However that day may actually come sooner than many folks think. Many
> I.T. managers are looking for ways around Microsoft's expensive and
> aggresive licensing schemes, as well as proven, secure technologies
> for use on critical desktops. With the many advances the open source
> community has had over the last two years Linux is certainly ready for
> desktop application for serious users. Those that fight change every
> step of the way probably aren't willing to give up their Windows 95 /
> 98 desktop, even to go to WinXP let alone a UNIX type system, and will
> likely only migrate when they have no other choice, for them, and they
> are numerous, they will stay as close as possible to the familiar. But
> without leaving the familiar, and stepping outside of our comfort
> zones, we never achieve any sort of greatness.
I am in no way against open Source developers. I think they force companies
like Microsoft to radically rethink their strategies. but you are sitting
here (I don't know, maybe you're standing, don't want to be presumptuous!!)
telling people who spent $5000 on AutoCAD about how horrible their $150
investment in Windows was. What a horrible pricing strategy! Or how my
$25000 Full ProE (I've got both ...) license shouldn't be run on that
expensive $150 windows OS. Who's ripping off who? I think Microsoft gives
a fairly good product for the dollar. I'm accustomed to purchasing $50000
Unix workstations running $20k and $30k software and $1000 OS's. My $8500
Windows XP Pro Station was a joke. I paid more in tax on my last HP Unix
box than that. And it was no super computer ... no faster than the Xp
station I just purchased .... and I got to hire another engineer for a year
with what I saved. Linux is way too undersupported. A platform can't
market itself. It needs a company behind it, and the Linux market just
doesn't have any impressive companies behind it. HP, couldn't solve a
problem for you if they caused it. IBM doesn't seem to want to. And Corel,
well, let's just see if they're alive next year before we invest in their
OS. People stick with what works and what they think will still be alive in
2 years. And Linux OS's aren't stable enough (The companies, not the
software) to be able to rely on them for the long term, which can jeopardise
companies who make large investments. We can't afford (time wise ...) to
put 115 engineers on Red-Hat to have it go bankrupt next spring and replace
it. We're paying $40-$125k per year for engineers. $150 for each of them
to have an OS is well worth the money. It's a lot less than the tax on the
programs they are running on them! Maybe $150 is a high price for an OS
where you work, but where we work, with the long term prospects for having
our OS fully supported, and the 3 years we've already spent converting and
the 6 months we have left, dozens of Linux companies have come and gone.
When Linux gets up to the point where it looks like there are enough
customers to provide long term stability, then we may re-consider. But for
now, it's mostly for hackers, gamers, system admins who hate Microsoft, and
for web servers. On my desktop there will set a Microsoft OS for some time
yet .......... until Microsoft steals Linux's strong points and re-markets
under the Microsoft Windows Label. Then I'll switch ... he he he
gruhn
Doug T
>
> JotM wrote:
> ...
> If there had been even one seriously better competitive application, it
> would have "won"
> by now.
> ...
>
> I must disagree. I can name several CAD programs that are more reliable,
> that have a corporate ethic of fixing bugs before adding "features",
> that are faster, that are as easily programmable, and that cost a
> fraction of what AutoCAD does.
>
> Martin
America has no history of buying the hype and going with the inferior product
over the less well marketed superior product, no none at all, we always pick the
best product.
Yea right
Doug T
gruhn
That's as, if not more, easily the product of being a small shop with poor
talent management than of any "ethic".
jo...@fel.u-net.com.invalid
wrote:
>
>America has no history of buying the hype and going with the inferior product
>over the less well marketed superior product, no none at all, we always pick the
>best product.
>
>Yea right
Phew, you had me worried right up to the last line.
John B
johnbogie btinternet.com
Put the "at" in the gap.
JotM
news:nb2nlu80pcg21odhg...@4ax.com...
> In alt.cad.autocad, JotM wrote:
...
> >Should they really start supporting multiple OS's again just so you would
> >have an alternative for the sake of the alternative? Or should the
> >application be at it's best for your engineers on one OS?
> But the claim that an AutoCAD port to Linux will never be profitable,
> or that 'Windows is the best solution' doesn't hold a drop of water.
what's best: an application for multiple OS's or for a single OS? Kinetix
(3DS Max) once explained their choice to limit themselves to Windows, so all
their developers and support staff could be concentrated at that OS
expecting it would enable them to deliver a high quality and faster
innovations at reasonable costs.
JotM.
JotM
....
> My question stands however, how is it that other companies can get
> into the Linux market and make buckets of money, but AutoDesk can't
> seem to find a profit outside of being tied at the hip to Microsoft?
Would it be the contracts making them a strategic partner, allowed to see
the _holy_ M$ Windows core?
JotM.