TinkerCad is ending

[Joe Larson (aka Cymon)]

Anyone want to go in with me and buy the code and servers from them? I can chip in $20.

http://joesmakerbot.blogspot.com/2013/03/tinkercad-is-ending.html

[bart jonkers]

+1
Op 26/03/13 20:29, Joe Larson (aka Cymon) schreef:

> Anyone want to go in with me and buy the code and servers from them? I
> can chip in $20.
>
> http://joesmakerbot.blogspot.com/2013/03/tinkercad-is-ending.html

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "MakerBot Operators" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to makerbot+u...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>

[Joseph Chiu]

Hmmm, reading between the lines, it seems TinkerCAD was a (unintended?) stepping stone to their design engineering/simulation product.  Too bad -- our makerspace was starting to promote its use recently to get people into 3D design...

I suspect that because the core code behind TinkerCAD is what goes into their new offering, it's unlikely to be spun off anytime soon... 

So much for the cloud's offerings...

On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 12:33 PM, bart jonkers <ict.den...@gmail.com> wrote:

+1
Op 26/03/13 20:29, Joe Larson (aka Cymon) schreef:

Anyone want to go in with me and buy the code and servers from them? I can chip in $20.

http://joesmakerbot.blogspot.com/2013/03/tinkercad-is-ending.html
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MakerBot Operators" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to makerbot+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MakerBot Operators" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to makerbot+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[MacGyver]

If it is possible to save it I would be interested in donating for the cause.

[David Celento]

Wow. This really sucks for new users—those without a good 3D cad program, or skills to drive one.

Aside from the really dumb idea of monthly subscriptions, rather than a pay-per-use model (I had some very thoughtful correspondence with them about this) the operability and user interface was very very promising.

It should be interesting to see what happens next from them, or if another competitor rises up to fill the void.

[Ethan Dicks]

On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Joseph Chiu <joe...@joechiu.com> wrote:
>
> So much for the cloud's offerings...

One reason I hesitate to drink the cloud koolaid... it's over when
they say it's over. You, as the user/consumer, are held hostage.
With a software (or hardware) product you own, it's over when _you_
decide it's over, by upgrading to something new, or not, for your own
reasons, on your own schedule.

This goes double for cloud-based DRM (there have been numerous
occasions where content became locked because the sellers turned off
authentication servers).

-ethan

[David Celento]

Bingo, Ethan!

[AKron]

I got the email from TinkerCAD when I got home. Curiously, Thunderbird
thought it was a scam.
It was fun to mess around with, but there's no way I could use it
seriously. If I ever lose access to SolidWorks I think I'll bite the
bullet, and get Alibre, or use the Creo PTC I have sitting on the hard
drive. PTC is quite interesting for those who haven't tried it yet. I
think the main thing they limit on the "free" version is a maximum of
65 parts in assemblies. Almost all of the things I make for printing
are only one part anyway.

[BTHOON]

VERY upset about this.  I've made hundreds of things in Tinkercad, and many of the things I've made were one-off small parts that I made in a few minutes there.   I am feeling VERY burned by the whole experience and will find it hard not to VERY loudly complain about whatever they do next.   Very little warning was given, and I am responsible for sending them no less than 9 paid customers, so I've got both time and reputation invested.  

I am FINE at tools like Sketchup, but when I simply need a 40mm non-threaded cap with a 5mm wall, it's a 30 second process in tinkercad, and I can create it from one machine and easily download on another.   Another feature it had that I found INCREDIBLY useful was extruding SVGs.  If I've got a nice font and want to write a word then make it 10mm high, that's 5 seconds in tinkercad.  My only other options thusfar have been blender (which while powerful, is not in any way as friendly).

Is anyone aware of a modeling program that uses the primitives and shape subtraction paradigm like tinkercad does? 

MAN I'm upset!

[Big-E]

While I honestly haven't built a lot in Tinkercad, I did use it to perform quick fixes on models at times. I found it useful for quickly poking holes in models easily, or for creating a closed, flat surface on an object. I just found out today it was closing down. Bummer.

I feel sorry for the paid users. From their description of airstone, It sounds like another minecraft-y sort of app, or maybe a 3d physics engine (sort of like the old 2D physics sim, PHUN)

I dunno. I think they're making a bonehead move. Cymon, If you're serious about buying it off them, I wish you luck; It sounds like a great idea, but I wouldn't be shocked if they already sold it to another company (like autodesk! Blah!)

[DronE Pump]

I recommend forget this idea and go Blender.

[pashakun]

+1 for Blender! 

The community will never "pivot" into some new service you don't want or can't afford.

But TinkerCAD will be missed. 

Thanks to it my girlfriend was able to design and print her first thing - doubt I could have lured her in with Blender. 

[Chris Milnes]

im in for $500/yr.

I use Tinkercad all day everyday.

This is seriously bad news - 

[Jeremy Herrman]

You guys should check out shapesmith, the open source alternative to tinkercad: http://shapesmith.net

[MacGyver]

Shapesmith looks really cool and hopefully will become as easy to use as Tinkercad was.

[Pasha Alpeyev]

Jeremy, thank you for sharing Shapesmith link ~

On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:33 AM, MacGyver <bdwel...@gmail.com> wrote:

Shapesmith looks really cool and hopefully will become as easy to use as Tinkercad was.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "MakerBot Operators" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/makerbot/8bNq2gNbrWo/unsubscribe?hl=en-US.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to makerbot+u...@googlegroups.com.

[DronE Pump]

Agree.  

Also, any client based service places the user at risk of losing all the IP invested in getting to a productive status.  In fact I am weary of any "free" offer simply because history(and physics) shows that nothing is ever really free as in the case of TinkerCad.

Yet with a sublime tool like Blender - you have an active community that continues to support the product, once you get familiar with it there is unlimited scope for design, and you can run it everywhere - I have it on my tablet (along with OpenScad) and I can sit on the train and work at ideas without concerning myself with 3G/LTE/WiFi or such - life is bliss!!

[Pasha Alpeyev]

Just dreaming out loud, but it would be great if there was a Blender distro or a skin that makes it more accessible to beginners.

I think the barriers to entry are in large part psychological. It's that information overload vertigo of an unfamiliar and busy interface.

On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:02 AM, DronE Pump <sole...@gmail.com> wrote:

Agree.  

Also, any client based service places the user at risk of losing all the IP invested in getting to a productive status.  In fact I am weary of any "free" offer simply because history(and physics) shows that nothing is ever really free.

Yet with a sublime tool like Blender - you have an active community that continues to support the product, once you get familiar with it there is unlimited scope for design, and you can run it everywhere - I have it on my table (along with OpenScad) and I can sit on the train and work at ideas without concerning myself with 3G/LTE/WiFi or such - life is bliss!!

On Wednesday, March 27, 2013 11:25:30 AM UTC+11, pashakun wrote:

--

[Ethan Dicks]

On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 10:02 PM, DronE Pump <sole...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Agree.
> Also, any client based service places the user at risk of losing all the IP
> invested in getting to a productive status. In fact I am weary of any
> "free" offer simply because history(and physics) shows that nothing is ever
> really free.
> Yet with a sublime tool like Blender - you have an active community that
> continues to support the product, once you get familiar with it there is
> unlimited scope for design, and you can run it everywhere - I have it on my
> table (along with OpenScad) and I can sit on the train and work at ideas
> without concerning myself with 3G/LTE/WiFi or such - life is bliss!!

I'm quite fond of Open Source in general and OpenSCAD in particular.
While it's possible that the tide may turn and developers will move on
to other projects, the worst that will happen is that nobody will add new
features to OpenSCAD. What won't happen is that suddenly my copy
of OpenSCAD will stop working and freeze out my designs.

-ethan

[David Celento]

Agreed on the user interface for Blender. It's not that it's confusing, it's that it is contrary to many other apps in some fundamental ways. Yes, in some ways, all programs and operating systems are "what you've become (ab)used to". <credit to Stephen Irvin for this pearl>

As much as I want to use it more—the results are stunning—simple navigation and data input tasks are quite different than most other 3D CAD programs I use. I tried to use the Maya "skin" and found that many of the common hotkeys I rely on did not work. I sort of fear that if I start driving on the left side of the road, I'll be less able to drive on the right side of the road. (No offense to the Brits in the audience!)

[Jeremy Herrman]

Blender will never reach mass adoption with its current direction. 

It tries to be too many things to too many people: a solid modeling CAD, movie editing, scene rendering. Because they lack to focus to make a product that does one thing amazingly well, we end up with a mess that does many things mediocrely. Out of the box, blender is setup for people with keyboard that have number pads and 3 button mice. Just look at what comes up when you type "blender is" into google:

Everyone with a clue knows where the future is: WebGL. WebGL makes it possible to have a fast, plugin-less, 3D context with no installation necessary. Since it's a new technology there aren't that many players in the WebGL CAD space, which is why it's such a shame that tinkercad is going away. Luckily we have alternatives like 3DTin and the open source shapesmith.

- Jeremy

[Matthew Marlowe]

>
> I'm quite fond of Open Source in general and OpenSCAD in particular.
> While it's possible that the tide may turn and developers will move on
> to other projects, the worst that will happen is that nobody will add new
> features to OpenSCAD. What won't happen is that suddenly my copy
> of OpenSCAD will stop working and freeze out my designs.
>

Yes, I don't how many times I've seen people bitten by proprietary
software companies that don't stay in business, stop supporting their
products, put in place restrictions which make using prior purchased
licenses impossible, or otherwise charge 10x what is reasonable to
stay 'current' with the latest release. Been burned on my own too,
which is why my policy is never to use a commercial product when an
open source product is available, active, and good enough to get the
job done. Sure, short term productivity might not be as good....but
then I spend a lot less $ long term and eventually productivity evens
out and the long term stability of owning ones own data with
documented api's has its own value.

The only areas where I still bother to fire up a windows virtual
machine is for turbotax, quickbooks, framemaker, and a few other apps
that there is no leading open source alternative.

I was on the fence with tinkercad for a long time, but the simple fact
that my two 8-10yr old boys could use it without any instructions or
long training was a good enough reason to spend the $ for them to
become familiar with 3d modeling....especially when one could connect
with any browser...and download the final STL's to be imported into
other tools. And, the older son was briefly even able to use it with
just an android tablet w/ firefox app installed. Going forward, I've
been considering running an class afterschool for elementary age kids
next year using tinkercad... should have been thinking openscad or
blender from the start, although that might limit the number of
younger kids that can participate.

[DronE Pump]

Fully understand where you are coming from.  Yes, the initial experience can be daunting.  But I think that can also be said for anyone attempting any 3D design tool for the first time.  And it is a case of what you are (ab)used to.  hehe

Once the pathways are carved in our brains for a specific way of doing things, we resist having to reorganise the functional/heuristic models.  I was not a willing convert to Blender - I had been weaned on LightWave & WaveFront and I did not quite get the approach at first but with some annoyance and perseverance the modelling methods and user interface began to make sense (and BTW - Blender is in many ways rather similar to Cinema4D).   After all this, I had to ramp up to using Solidworks and sure enough, this was yet another new thinking space to get into and I would go as far as to state that Solidworks has been most demanding system to get to know and use well.   

But after all that I maintain that with a little invested time Blender is by far the most versatile "free" system there is.  And in the end it's all about how receptive you want to be.  I am teaching my 10yr old son to use Blender and he enjoys it very much - I wonder what he will say years from now.

[Joe Larson (aka Cymon)]

Jeremy, offensive as it may be I'm just gonna blanket statement your post with a "Nope, you're wrong".

It is exactly because Blender covers so much ground that mass adoption is inevitable. Will it do any of those things as well as something that focuses? Maybe not. but I heard about Blender from a coworker who was using it for low level CAD type things. Blender's not super good at that, but it does it well enough. When I said "Yeah, but I'm more interested in modeling artistic shaped" he said "oh, it's totally set up for that and does it better than the stuff I'm doing. It's that cross pollination that is it's strength.

As for a beginner skin that makes it as easy to use as TinkerCad, on thing that TinkerCad had going for it was that when you grouped objects it was under the surface a nondestructive Boolean operation. In other words the original shapes being Booleaned together were preserved but all you were shown was the final product. I think Blender could be extended to do some of that, but not in it's current form, and if you combined it with Blender's current tools of vertex editing after Boolean operations things get complicated. I might have to sit down and work this out a bit.

[Joe Larson (aka Cymon)]

And TinkerCad's fall shows exactly why Web-anything in general is not the answer. Without a downloadable whoever is hosting the WebGL application decides they're done we're all out. WebGL may be the best technology from a development standpoint, but it is not the consumer's choice.

On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 9:43:20 PM UTC-6, Jeremy Herrman wrote:

[TaErog]

"we end up with a mess that does many things mediocrely."

I can totally agree with this! there has to be good and useful features that are easy to use in a workflow.  If features are there but in a jumbled fashion workflow suffers and time is wasted (let alone having the learning curve increase.  Blender CAN do just about anything most other packages do, But rather painfully, slowly, inefficiently and often missing refinement.. Open office is another good example - good enough for normal basic tasks, can be clunky with some features, other features are 1/2 baked but mostly functional. Try to be a Power user and you find how woefully inadequate it is for that level of work.

Now having said that, being "free" and basically functional (nothing really wrong with it) it is and can be quite useful to people . . . but it is FAR from best, and IMO and my use less then ideal.

I am also not Hot on these new WebGL and clowd based systems as my PC is a powerhouse made to do high end graphics and 3D work . . there is NO need to farm that out and bottle neck that through a !@# browser or even worse use an Ipad as the main interface.

[Joseph Chiu]

You, the power user, are not the audience.  I'm sure big-rig operators sometimes sneer at pickup trucks used to "deliver cargo".  But there's a heckuvalotmore pickup trucks out there on the road, driven by people who barely know how to drive, and they're perfectly happy.   And then there's people who use their passenger minivan to freight cargo, in between driving their team between soccer matches, going to the grocery and, on the rare occasion, go camping.

Blender is the minivan.  Don't underestimate the minivan.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MakerBot Operators" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to makerbot+u...@googlegroups.com.

[Hugh Johnson]

Is there a tinkercad like program that uses the iPad as the "main interface"? I'd like to check that out.

Thanks,

Hugh Johnson

--

[Pasha Alpeyev]

@Joseph

a minivan LOL!

that's exactly what I had in mind when I chose Blender (in part sentimentally bc of its open source nature)
a minivan with a jetfighter cockpit for a dashboard :)

I've had an amazing return on investment with Blender so far and would definitely recommend it as a successor for the more determined TinkerCADers out there

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "MakerBot Operators" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/makerbot/8bNq2gNbrWo/unsubscribe?hl=en-US.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to makerbot+u...@googlegroups.com.

[Pasha Alpeyev]

@TaErog / Jeremy

Both you and Jeremy say Blender is not as good as more specialized software

Can you be more specific, in which areas does it fall short of the likes of Maya etc in your experience ?

There's modeling, animating, rigging, rendering and so on

Not intended as a dig, just asking as someone completely removed from the rigors of professional 3DCG but very interested in capabilities of open-source software

--

[Jeremy Herrman]

Disagreement is what the internet is made for! :-D

Here's a useful exercise to explain my point: 

1. Install a freshly downloaded copy of blender 2.66a onto a laptop
2. open blender
3. give it to an adolescent with no instruction.
   
4. see if they can do anything - like orbit around the default cube, or add a new shape
5. watch them fail miserably because blender is terrible at usability

While this might seem like a test that no serious CAD program could hold up to, it is exactly what tinkercad, 3DTin and shapesmith all allow. What everyone here should realize is that this kind of usability is the future of mainstream CAD, and it's exactly why blender will be left behind unless they have a 180° shift in direction. I say "mainstream" because the millions of people that will use CAD for a 3D printer in the next decade will most definitely NOT be professionals, and not have the time for weeks of training to learn how to use the ridiculous interface that blender provides.

While most of us on this list might have several desktop computers with full keyboards and 3 button mice, it's most definitely not what the vast majority of technology users will have a few years from now. There's no reason those people shouldn't be able to make amazing CAD models just because they have different hardware. The team behind blender seems to be happy with the status quo of software in the 90's: keyboard, mouse, bad usability, tailored for professionals. They're completely ignoring the sea change that is all around us.

From the official Blender User Interface Tutorial:

Here is what I found to be the Golden Rule of Blender:
"Keep one hand on your keyboard and one on your mouse."

Blender is part of an endangered species of software, and I for one am happy to see it fade into irrelevance.

- Jeremy

[TaErog]

Sure did you read all of my post?? I said not ideal, slow, not optimized. . I never said bad or not useable or not to use.
But if you want ease of use, speed, good workflow other programs are much better.  Just by using Blender you are doing it a harder slower way . . does this mean it should not be used again no it can be quite useful, but you can not really compare it to the pro-sumor or professional programs out there  1 to 1.

Just a Opinion from a person that has used most all of them . . . it is a mini van but a temperamental one that may only have a tape player. Still very usable, even ideal in some aspects for some people, totally painful to do and use for other things.

Alibre looks interesting and nice all in one package for serious work, but they are rather coy on $ . . probably a bad sign.
There are allot of new web based apps . . not ideal and tend to be clunky.
There used to be a large number of other free programs out there but is seems allot of dried up . . :(  The free 3D max version was useful for allot of people.

[Jeremy Herrman]

I think you mean "closed source" instead of "Web-anything". I could make the same argument for blender because the binary is hosted on their website and they could take it down. Since it's open source the application can live on under another maintainer. For an open source WebGL CAD program like shapesmith, if the maintainer, Benjamin Nortier, decided to take it offline, I could just host my own. Plus there's been significant progress with offline webapps.

[Ethan Dicks]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Jeremy Herrman <grud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here's a useful exercise to explain my point:
>
> Install a freshly downloaded copy of blender 2.66a onto a laptop
> open blender
> give it to an adolescent with no instruction.

Or even an experienced Tech Professional...

> see if they can do anything - like orbit around the default cube, or add a new shape
> watch them fail miserably because blender is terrible at usability

That completely describes my first 2 hours trying to work with Blender.
It was also my last 2 hours. I switched to OpenSCAD, got done
what I needed to get done *in 5 minutes* (removing three holes
from a part I got from Thingiverse) and never looked back.

> While this might seem like a test that no serious CAD program could
> hold up to, it is exactly what tinkercad, 3DTin and shapesmith all allow.

I completely agree. I didn't get into TinkerCAD when it was free
because I was worried about getting locked in. Looks like my fears
were completely founded. It did look easy to use and I did
recommend it to novices, and I'm sorry to see it go.

I've dabbled with Solidworks (on a machine at our local
hackerspace that had a one-year student license that is
now expired) and it looked really great but I don't have
that kind of money to throw at my hobby (and, no, I'm
not a student so I can't get all the super special "get 'em
while they're young" discounts on commercial 3D CAD
software).

> While most of us on this list might have several desktop
> computers with full keyboards and 3 button mice, it

> most definitely not what the vast majority of technology

> users will have a few years from now...

I found out part of my problem with Blender was that I do
*all* of my work from an Ubuntu Laptop. I spend more than
10 hrs a day on it. I don't use a desktop computer and
haven't for five years (and 5 years ago, I was splitting
my time between a RedHat Desktop and an Apple
laptop).

I have an external portable USB keypad now, but I didn't
then. Who expected to need special hardware to use
an application? Might as well say up front "*NOT FOR
LAPTOP/TABLET USERS!!!*", or say "3D SpaceMouse
Required!".

-ethan
(not a Blender fan)

[TaErog]

For me it is manly workflow and interface and the main negatives, though some features are there (checkmarked are there) but are quite light weight or missing useful elements that bring it home.  Having to make things fast and with the least "crap"  (menus, hoops etc) to jump through to get a product I become very aware of the in inefficiency of most consumer products.   And if the learning curve is no better (blender owners often site it is hard to get used to) then a more pro package then for some it makes sense to bight the bullet and get a more pro package (that may cost something) and in turn have a easier time in the long run.  personal choice here.
Now my disclaimer is that this was the last time I had attempted to use it (about a year ago)  I have not seen any big shifts since and people I know still use it have not reported anything earthshaking different, I can only hope and do expect they are striving to improve it.  Again not bad per-say but when you learn a pro package to a proficient level (these are DEEP programs) you have a really hard time looking back - and everything else looks like a toy.)
Sort of like the Gimp / Photoshop debate  . . .  Gimp works, but Photoshop has the workflow and power to not only do what I need but to do faster and easier.  This is more then one feature or two but the package as a whole.
I currently use 3D MAX to do most of my 3D modeling I need to do, games, animation, product prototypes, book covers,  and now 3d printed parts simply because it can do allot of this well and fast, Maya leans more to animation and character modeling which is cool but does not have the CAD/architecture elements MAX does . . though MAX is no autocad either which is overkill.  MAX Just happens to be the current catch all that works very well and I have used allot of others and some no longer exist really to contrast that with..  (note educational discounts are a MUST with any of these - even a older timer can go take a simple single course and get the ability very easy)
I have not found a great program to do only the 3D printing aspect I need yet and blender is FAR from that and MAX is not ideal either. So still on the look out

I hope that helped,  My post was supposed to be less a criticism but a expansion of perceptive. Blender works fine but IS limited and knowing that IS helpful. . and there seemed to be a current of people dissing the commercial products and only praising opensource products. I just wanted to relay that at least in this field (and well as and image editing) that there is really no opensource competition in serious use and production.. but as pointed out, serious use and production is not always needed either and free goes a long way. :)

[Joe Larson (aka Cymon)]

Ethan, you couldn't get Blender to work in 2 hours but managed to do what you wanted in OpenSCAD in 5 minutes? I think your brain is wired backwards.

I mean, yeah, you need a tutorial to use Blender (and there are many great ones out there like http://cgcookie.com/blender/cgc-series/blender-basics-introduction-beginners/ ) but at least it's visually responsive. I write code for a living but every foray into  OpenSCAD ends badly. And looking for OpenSCAD tutorials turns up nothing that has helped yet. I'm not trying to say Blender is the best but I can't back up your assertion that OpenSCAD is better. Quite frankly you've lost credibility with that assertion.

[Jeremy Herrman]

Cymon - Just because Ethan is able to grasp the logic of programming solid models in OpenSCAD more quickly than going through the rats nest that is blender doesn't automatically make him lose credibility. 

Just by saying that I think you've just lost yours.

Also, I too enjoy OpenSCAD. Unions, differences, cubes, cylinders, etc - what's not to understand? I think any decent programmer would feel more at home in a tool like OpenSCAD rather than blender. Maybe that says something...

- Jeremy

[Ethan Dicks]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Joe Larson (aka Cymon)
<joeal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ethan, you couldn't get Blender to work in 2 hours but managed to do what
> you wanted in OpenSCAD in 5 minutes? I think your brain is wired backwards.

I won't disagree with that. I've been a professional coder for 2/3rds
of my life.

> I mean, yeah, you need a tutorial to use Blender (and there are many great
> ones out there like
> http://cgcookie.com/blender/cgc-series/blender-basics-introduction-beginners/
> ) but at least it's visually responsive.

I tried Blender tutorials. I couldn't find what I needed, which was "I want
to select these three holes in this object and "remove" the holes."

My goal was not to become a Blender user. My goal was to modify an
object (Mendel Vertex Bracket) posted by someone else. The learning
curve for Blender was too steep for me to continue fighting with the
terrible UI on a laptop.

> I write code for a living but every
> foray into OpenSCAD ends badly. And looking for OpenSCAD tutorials turns up
> nothing that has helped yet. I'm not trying to say Blender is the best but I
> can't back up your assertion that OpenSCAD is better. Quite frankly you've
> lost credibility with that assertion.

I didn't need a tutorial for OpenSCAD. I opened up the code that
was posted on Thingiverse, looked at it, made some changes, hit
"F5" and got what I wanted.

I've written thousands of lines of C and Perl and other Algol-family
languages (and plenty of assembler and other things, too). I didn't
need *any* instruction in how to do basic things in OpenSCAD
beyond inspecting other people's code. To me, it's all right there
and makes sense because it builds on shared principles I've already
absorbed.

People often ask me what I use for 3D design. I tell them that
unless you are already a hardcore programmer, you don't want
to use what I use. I was productive in OpenSCAD in less time
than it took to download and install. Mind you, I'm also the
guy that writes Perl scripts to pump out coordinate pairs and
command-line shortcuts that I feed into Q-Cad for 2D CAD. I
can't stand grid mismatches and manually tweaking the
approximations you get from mousing CAD objects. I want
a 10 unit x 10 unit square, not 9.9998 x 10.0002.

So back to your first comment, yeah... I'd rather write
code than pick up a mouse. I'm certain I'm in the minority
with that, but it doesn't invalidate my horrible Blender
experience. I just ran into the same problems other
people had, I ran into them faster and harder, and I
decided I'd rather switch than fight.

FWIW, I had no problems learning Solidworks. I only
scratched the surface in the first few hours, but I didn't
spend the entire time screaming at Dassault Systemes.
Unfortunately for me, I just can't justify that kind of
expense for my hobby. I'll happily accept a free or
low-cost license for Solid Works, but since there's no
chance of that (and they have every right to charge
whatever they can get for their product), I'll stick
with OpenSCAD. I have no need to make "organic"
parts, so it fills my requirements and doesn't give
me application rage.

-ethan

[Dan Newman]

> I've written thousands of lines of C and Perl and other Algol-family
> languages (and plenty of assembler and other things, too). I didn't

Yeah! Long live Algol-68. (I kind of liked PL/1 as well.)
But I'm with Ethan here: OpenSCAD is a no-brainer for me.
Blender on the other hand….

> So back to your first comment, yeah... I'd rather write
> code than pick up a mouse.

I've done lots and lots of "math art" over the years and often
get asked how I did one thing or another. The answer is 99.83%
of the time whatever programming language I was teaching myself
that month/week/year.

Dan

[TaErog]

I hear you man :)

[Joe Larson (aka Cymon)]

On Wednesday, March 27, 2013 2:39:32 PM UTC-6, Ethan wrote:

On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Joe Larson (aka Cymon)
<joeal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ethan, you couldn't get Blender to work in 2 hours but managed to do what
> you wanted in OpenSCAD in 5 minutes? I think your brain is wired backwards.

I won't disagree with that.  I've been a professional coder for 2/3rds
of my life.

Nothing wrong with that. Just realize you're not typical.

 

I didn't need a tutorial for OpenSCAD.  I opened up the code that
was posted on Thingiverse, looked at it, made some changes, hit
"F5" and got what I wanted.

 

Oh, so it was already OpenSCAD and you edited it. Yeah, I've gotten that far in OpenSCAD myself. If something is OpenSCAD then editing the OpenSCAD files is definitely easy if you know code. Mind I haven't gone much further with OpenSCAD than that.

My background is both code and artistic. I learned 3D Studio Max years ago, long enough that I forgot all but the basics when i started with Blender so it wasn't that hard for me to learn. But if a total novice were to ask me I would still recommend Blender over OpenSCAD.

[Pasha Alpeyev]

Most vehement objections to Blender seem to come from people already versed in some other software.

So everyone is comparing Blender oranges to their own particular fruit of choice.  (Or a whole fruit cart in some cases :)

So if you are just getting started, can't write OpenSCAD haiku and don't want to spend major $$$, this may be the roadmap:

- TinkerCAD as a gateway drug. 

- Shapesmith or 3Dtin to graduate to more precise mesh control 

- Then on to the vastness of Blender.

- Tap OpenSCAD for precise parametric models and serious geek cred

--

[Chris Milnes]

Lot's of Blender pro/con talk. 

Simple question is:
For a person that uses Tinkercad daily and is happy with it's simplicity - what is the logical replacement (similar workflow - similar price range)?
Best, Chris 

[MacGyver]

I think this might be the most important question yet.  Now that Tinkercad is dead how can I get my 9 and 11 year old interested in designing 3D models?  

Sketchup - Meh

Blender - NO (not even possible)

OpenSCAD - NO (are you kidding)

Shapesmith - Maybe with some video tutorials.

Tinkercad - They designed some things that I was able to print.

[GBR1]

I cant believe nobody has mentioned Bonzai 3D, I was using Sketch Up but it is a pain for 3D modeling every time you try to do do something other that a cube it had a hole in it or not enough wall thickness etc etc (admittedly mostly down to my skill level)..

Been using Bonzai 3d for a few weeks now, great tutorials on you tube and their site, free 30 day full trial so you cant go wrong..  Only issue is that is does cost once/if you like it, I think its like $300!?

Have a look, I have been impressed so far!

http://www.formz.com/products/bonzai3d/bonzai3dFeatures.php

GBR1

[Pasha Alpeyev]

3DTin was also suggested and may be the closest one to TinkerCAD

http://www.3dtin.com/

[TaErog]

"Most vehement objections to Blender seem to come from people already versed in some other software."

I think that is very Fair,   

MAX to Maya to lightwave to Alias to etc etc  all have big UI and workflow changes that can turn people off to a software they are not used to.

But also knowledge of more then one software package is the only way to make any comparisons + It is a 3d Model editor with texture, animation support . . hardly apples and oranges to these other packages that do the same thing (obviously not solidworks). The software needs to accomplish the same tasks and it is how they do it that makes the difference.

It is better then any other Free editor out there that is good cred.  But owners themselves compare it to other $$ software, often with little knowledge of the other packages and often exaggerate blender a bit not knowing how powerful the other $$ software packages really are.

[TaErog]

Have not seen that . . lightweight, fast but with accuracy . . still for a stripped down editor $300 seems a bit much.  Will download the demo though and take a look.

[Joe Larson (aka Cymon)]

Chris, excellent question. If you're comparing TinkerCad before it's prohibitive price model there has yet to be anything as simple to use, tho autodesk 123D Design is pretty good (and bless 'em for their work) and there are a few contenders on the horizon that we'll have to see how they go. If you're talking about something that costs silly amounts of money for something that simple... why would you do that? But in that realm Bonzai 3D looks pretty good, tho I have no hands on with it.

[Matthew Marlowe]

On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Andrew <publishy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> how about this one : http://www.publishyourdesign.com/modeler. It is a new
> browser based 3D modeling tool, which provides similar functions as
> TinkerCad, and perhaps more. Beside the capability to build models using
> pre-define shapes, the web app is also able to create shapes from 2D sketch
> using advanced modeling tools extrude, revolve, sweep and boolean
> operations. It works offline. You could save model in local and save to
> cloud when has network access later. Model can be exported as STL for 3D
> printing as well.
>
>

I just did a quick test with this....the online client/gui was the
closest I've seen to tinkercad.
And, it was easy enough to create something in five minutes without
knowing any of the controls before hand.
Where I did have a problem is when I asked it to export to STL, it
didn't give me an stl file to download..but instead a bin/part
file...and then the browser crashed.
Looking at the file it downloaded, it does appear to be an STL file
but with the wrong extension...

[TobyCWoods]

No Mention of the Punch SW products ViaCAD - Shark. Many of the concepts apply to many other 3D CAD/Solid model packages so you're conceptual learning applies to those as well. Starting in 2D is almost as nice as good old MacDraw.

Pricing from $29 all the way up. My choice currently is ViaCAD2D-3D. Amazon has it for $50. The control over .stl export makes this a steal.

I gave Blender a VERY good try going through a lot of the relevant tutorials.... Yeah I got up alot of the curve and was able to use it... until I stopped for awhile... then trying to feel my way back was impossible and I had to review the tutorials and docs. Not what I wanted.

[BTHOON]

I've just spent a couple hours with this, and I have to say it's fantastic.   I have a save up a bit for the license (it's actually $500 for non-educational), but it looks absolutely worth it.  the ONLY thing I haven't found out how to mimic yet is the dead simple extrusion of an SVG file.    I imagine I'll be able to convert from SVG to DXF in inkscape, then import and extrude that.

Thank you so much for mentioning it!

[Andrew]

I guess you are using Firefox browser? Just rame download file
to .stl. Try Chrome, should have no such problem.

On Mar 29, 12:08 am, Matthew Marlowe <m...@professionalsysadmin.com>
wrote: