28 February 2010


Yea, it's been quiet around this little blog since the new year. I'm not going to complain about being busy in this economy, but it is being busy which seems to keep me hoping around so much so that I never find time or topic to post here.

But I have one now...

Recently I had another go at using AutoCAD Architecture for generating structural drawings. It didn't go so well. ACA (and the AutoCAD parent) are great at modeling, I've used them many times over the years. But from a standpoint of documentation, ACA just doesn't do it for a structural drawing. Too many limitations, too much configuration is required to get something that looks "ok". Now this may spawn some negative feedback from some solid ACA users who do structural work, but that's okay, I don't mind. I have to wonder though, if Autodesk itself thought ACA was a good SE solution - don't you think they would be marketing that way? They don't and it is that fact that should be the clue as to how well it works. If Autodesk thought they could provide a solution (without having to create new s/w) and make a buck/quid doing it, they would! Duh... I kinda feel dumb for even trying now.

1 comment:

hoogli said...

I've never had a factory worker mention to me to use ACA. What led you to another go at ACA? Was it a client request?