CompuServe Thread

#Auto-Cad ?

20 messages in this thread
#114443From: John F. Abess, M.D.Jul 25, 1990 8:01 PM
Does anybody know if the CAD program "Auto-Cad" can be satisfactorily run on an Amiga 2000 with a bridgeboard? My son is an architecture student and favors the Amiga, however, "Auto-Cad" is pretty much a standard CAD program and seems to be either MS-Dos or Unix. Must he purchase an IBM compatible in order to run this program?
#114484From: Betty Clay/SYSOPJul 25, 1990 11:09 PM
I have not personally run Auto-Cad on the bridgeboard, but a member of my club has done it. He recently presented a program showing some work he had done in Auto-Cad, along with the steps he had to take in order to transfer the results to the Amiga and then showed his project after he had touched it up with some of the AMiga art programs. So – I'm sure it runs on the Bridgeboard. ……Betty
#115069From: John F. Abess, M.D.Jul 30, 1990 8:23 PM
Betty, thank you for your response. I am truly gratified with being able to obtain assistance. Locally, there just are no knowledgeable people on Amiga. From you comments, it sounded as though Auto-Cad worked, but only after a great deal of trouble — this does not sound practical. Maybe there will be other responses to my question to confirm or deny my suspicion. Thanks again. John.
#115110From: Betty Clay/SYSOPJul 30, 1990 11:33 PM
John, I am sorry if I made it sound like Auto-Cad was troublesome! I did not mean that at all. I probably went to far too much detail to tell you how a man here has used the output of Auto-Cad with some of his Amiga programs in order to enhance the output. I cannot believe that Auto-Cad is any more trouble on the Bridgeboard than it would be on any clone. ……Betty
#114518From: John Sobernheim(TCR)Jul 26, 1990 1:16 AM
John, Yes, AutoCAD runs fine on the BridgeBoard. It requires a math-coprocessor though, so you will need to add one to the bridge. -John
#114590From: Sylvain DufordJul 26, 1990 7:09 PM
X-CAD Professionnal read and writes AUTOCAD DXF files,so he could transfer the drawings back and forth between Amiga and IBM disks. *** SLY ***
#114637From: John Sobernheim(TCR)Jul 27, 1990 12:51 AM
True Sylvain, and for an educational environment I think that doing just that would be a fine solution. Good point! -John
#114808From: Jim HatcherJul 28, 1990 7:44 PM
I am currently using AutoCAD on a 2088 BridgeBoard, using release 10…It is true you need a math coprosser, but only for versions 9 and later, of which 10 is the mostrent…however, it is EXTREMELY slow, so I only use it for minor modifications to drawings I have created at work, using a 386 clone… There are several Amiga CAD programs out that do offer DXF compatibility, but you should know that DXF is not a very good standard…even importing one back into AutoCAD, you lose some information(i.e. attributes do not survive) and at 4.77, the 2088 board is unbearible for serious work…I love my Amigas (I have 2) but for IBM emulation, they just don't compair to a good clone… for the same price of the 286 BridgeBoard, you can get a 286 clone, with 1Meg of ram, VGA card and monitor, and a 12Mhz speed…Hope this helps…
#114840From: John Sobernheim(TCR)Jul 28, 1990 11:55 PM
Jim, Mmmm… I didn't realize that dfx was that bad a interchange standard. I still think that in an educational environment (at least the ones I'm used to) they are going to be busy enough figureing out what SNAP, VIEWPORT, LAYER, etc. are, that the limits of the dfx format will be small. -John
#114886From: SyndesisJul 29, 1990 12:02 PM
It's not that it's a "bad" standard, it's just a large one, and it's oriented to AutoCAD, not every CAD program in the world. Moving DXF files between machines and CAD programs is always a learning experience. Moving them between 3D and drawing or illustration or desktop publishing programs is always an adventure, too. We've had many requests for a DXF module for InterChange. I've looked into it, made a few prototypes, and decided against it. I investigated a local CAD company… they've had one guy working full-time on their DXF converter, for more than a year and a half. He's still working on it. DXF involves hundreds of entity types, interpreted a dozen different ways.
#115117From: John Sobernheim(TCR)Jul 30, 1990 11:49 PM
John, About the only experience I've had with DXF files is when I was playing around with Access Technologies ACAD Translator a few months ago. I was working with some AutoCAD Release 10 files, some 2-D and some 3-D. At that time, ACAD could only handle the 2-D files and even on them I had to edit the DXF file to take out a few of the entity types to get it through ACAD. Their version 2 is supposed to handle Release 10 files better, both 2-D and 3-D. (er, maybe it was X-CAD Professional that had problems with the 2-D file…) -John
#115072From: John F. Abess, M.D.Jul 30, 1990 8:27 PM
John, I am excited to hear your response. Can you give me any more info? Do you have a good deal of experience with auto can? Are you in the field of architecture? Are you using a 2000 with the 286 bridgeboard? How much RAM would you recommend? Any trouble driving common plotters. I am asking on behalf of my son who is studying architecture and is ready to purchase a computer — perhaps the 3000 with a bridgeboard? Thanks again for your response. John.
#115115From: John Sobernheim(TCR)Jul 30, 1990 11:49 PM
John, No, I don't use AutoCad at all. We used to be a dealer for it 4-5 years ago, but we lacked the people to train and support customers so we let our dealership drop. Another gentleman left a message here saying that version of AutoCad prior to version 10 did not require the math chip. However I'd still recommend getting the math chip as you will see a considerable speed improvement. I'd say the 1MB of RAM that comes with the 80286 BridgeBoard will be a good starting point because when/if your son finds that he needs more RAM, then you can just go by a RAM board, plug it in, and go. One of the reasons that AutoCad is such a popular package is that they have device drivers available for a huge number of plotters/printers, etc. I would, if I were you, get an HPGL compatible plotter as the HPGL format seems to be the "standard" command format for plotters. If you do buy an Amiga 3000 and add the BridgeBoard, keep in mind that Commodore is still shipping the BridgeBoard with a 5.25" drive for the IBM side. There is not any room in the A3000 for a 5.25" drive, so make some arangement with your dealer to see if he will swap you a 3.5" High Density Drive. -John ps. John, that other gentleman I spoke of earlier had what I thought was a good idea. Your son could forego getting the BridgeBoard altogether by buying one of the excellent Amiga CAD programs that can read/write DXF format files (X-CAD Professional does this and it's a gorgeous CAD program). This would allow your son to work with AutoCad in the classroom, and bring his work back to the dormitory and use it with X-CAD Professional on his Amiga. This may actually be better as he will learn how to implement the _concepts_ that he's taught in two _different_ CAD programs.
#115300From: John F. Abess, M.D.Aug 1, 1990 6:47 PM
John, Thanks so much for your lengthy and helpful response. I think your idea is meritable. I will discuss this with him and continue to explore the topic. . . John
#114618From: Kevin UshkoJul 26, 1990 11:36 PM
John, my wife has used AutoCad on a BridgeBoard. It does work fine. Release 10 requires a math coprocessor! But previous releases don't require the coprocessor. But it is definately recommened. I hate to say this, but if he is really going to use AutoCad nothing beats a 386! (ouch that hurts to talk like this 🙂 ) However some people here have placed 386 accelerators in their Amigas. The SOTA 386i is the one I remeber. Kevin Ushko Edmonton, Alberta
#115074From: John F. Abess, M.D.Jul 30, 1990 8:35 PM
Kevin, Thanks so much for your response. I was unaware of the availability of a 386 processor for the Amiga — any more information on where to inquire about this would be appreciated. Does it attach to the 286 bridgeboard made by Commodore? Also, would be interested in knowing if the only disadvantage your wife has experienced is slower than desired operating speed. Can the normal plotters be driven? Can the monitor display accurately reflect the designs, etc. Thanks again, Kevin.
#115390From: Matthew J. W. RatcliffAug 2, 1990 12:26 PM
People here on CIS have used 386 cards made for PC inn their Amiga PC side expansion slots.. maybe even with the XT bridgeboard.. SOTA386i
#115422From: John F. Abess, M.D.Aug 2, 1990 7:27 PM
Well, Ernie, I can see you like to leave short messages. I take it the SOTA386i is an internal board made to fit inside of any PC compatible which seems also to work in the Amiga slots designed for IBM peripherals. I take it this board works if there already is a Commodore Bridgeboard installed, whether it is the XT or the 286. My guess is that if I look in Byte or other PC mags, I could find the mfg or information on the SOTA board. However, I also guess you yourself have not had any first hand experience with this. Am I a good guesser? Bye.
#115451From: Betty Clay/SYSOPAug 2, 1990 9:32 PM
John, Ron Troy is a regular here, and he has the SOTA 386 board in his Amiga. I feel sure he will tell you about it. He's always willing to help people when he can. ……Betty
#115477From: Kevin UshkoAug 2, 1990 11:58 PM
John, you might want to post another message about the accelerators. I don't have one on my machine. I just remember reading about it here in AmigaTech. I just recently got a brochure from SOTA Technology about their products. Their address is 559 Weddell Drive, Sunnyvale, CA 94089. Margaret hasn't used any plotters connected to the bridgeboard, only an Epson LQ500 printer. The output from that is quite good though. They have an AT that they use to plot all drawings. The displays seem ok in CGA, but the resolution isn't that great. But if you install a VGA card you will get exactly the same displays as any IBM PC. Kevin Ushko Edmonton, Alberta