CompuServe Thread

Craig, in all fairness to the dealer who did the demo at the seminar there was various levels of prospective users who were participating in each session, and therefore, each vendor session moved as slowly as the slowest individual. I also attended that session and am very familiar with AEC Arch and Mech, and know that John, the dealer, is also very adept with these products. The version which we were using was the latest version of AEC (2.0/9.0), and John had only received it two days prior to the session. To add to that, the host of these seminars, Eric Teicholz, provided each vendor with a set of drawings that each vendor was supposed to use to show the attendees how to create drawings with their system. We were the only vendor there who did so. Although I will not say anything derogatory about ARRIS, as I have seen demonstrations of it and have respect for it's capabilities there is something to be said for the things AutoCAD offers over and above ARRIS. First of all, ARRIS is designed for Architects, however, the fact that AutoCAD runs under MS-DOS allows for compatability with other "offthe-shelf" products. Also, AutoCAD can be used consulting engineers for applications other than floor plans, etc. which allows for the exchange of information between participants in a design project (of course only if they have planned layer usage in advance). Finally, ACAD drawings containing attribute data can be used with a number of widely used supporting products, such as spreadsheets, estimators, engineering analysis programs, and bill-of-material products. Now, agreed there are a number of features which would make ACAD more useful to many than it is now, and with the elimination of the 640K barrier, implementation of these should be easier (as it would be if ACAD worked under Xenix on the PC!) plus the additional benefits listed above. Anyway, your concerns did fall on listening ears, and please do let us know your thoughts on ARRIS. Cliff