Re: Im changing my approach.


<johnsuth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:c1.2c.3G7G1M$0R5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In <OvkVl.31026$Ws1.1686@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <castlebravo242@xxxxxxx>
writes:

"phil scott" <phil@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:9d87fbd6-4314-49c5-98de-5366016313e2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
i like xxxxxxxxxxx a lot but its a huge burocracy though, same with
AutoDesk... I dont need the delays, frustration, arrogance and high
mantenance costs... and I dont need to set myself and my clients up to
be *dependent on them.

these gentle folk can go get phucked as far as Im concerned, (thats a
french term).


I'm changing my approach.


I'm setting up most of my clients with off the shelf, much simpler
software, which I will use also. My clients are mostly small to
medium size mechanical contractors and specialty equipment weld fab
shops, (not machine shops)

Im moving to off the shelf sofware, no maintenance fees etc...buy it
on ebay cheeep if you want. TurboCAD 16 Mechanical fo me ($695)...
TurboCAD 16 (standard package) for them...I'll set em up with
macro's ... there are over 100 user groups that trade solid models as
well...and free lance affordable live tutoring all over the place.

I had tried TurboCAD 12 earlier, no solid models, and it was low
resolution, they seem to have come a long way in the last 4
years..with a lot of cheap ad in's

***
along these lines, and for making pipe and steel frame type drawings
mostly, but they have look world class, rendered etc. with lighting
options, and a huge user base... can you nice folk offer possibly
better solutions along these lines?


Phil scott


There is a reason for Auto Desk and SolidWorks to be as popular as they
are.


Yes, universities, Government Motors, DoD.

Phil is saying that SW was overkill for his work.

Those of us who struggle to realise the potential of SW are struggling
because of the "too clever" marketing strategies and abysmal technical
writing
skills of SW Corp.

I have heard that mining engineers are driving taxi these days, so I don't
imagine that the subscriptions for their SW seats will be renewed. I
don't live
in Detroit but the same may apply there.




There are programs for the rendering that are free just not so easy to use.
I am used to AutoCAD, Inventor and SolidWorks. I have played with some of
the low cost software.Most are difficult to use and/or too functionally
limited. I can say much about the OPs issues I have no idea of his real
needs.

Bob


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Im changing my approach.
    ... I dont need the delays, frustration, arrogance and high ... I'm setting up most of my clients with off the shelf, ... Phil scott ... Those of us who struggle to realise the potential of SW are struggling ...
    (comp.cad.solidworks)
  • Re: OpenQM vs. Everything Else
    ... many MV VARs insist on keeping costs so low for their ... Pick/MV VARs, and by and large the VARs have been delivering. ... if clients are willing to pay extra for something that's not ...
    (comp.databases.pick)
  • Re: Im changing my approach.
    ... I dont need the delays, frustration, arrogance and high ... and I dont need to set myself and my clients up to ... these people are artists, they respect art. ... and provide fuzzy rendering samples.. ...
    (comp.cad.solidworks)
  • Re: Multiple Sites and Multiple DCs
    ... > My vote is for SMTP services that registers themself by site and a change ... you can semi-force> clients at DC-less sites to use DCs at specific sites. ... > Actually the value of a DC-less site to define costs is pretty> doubtful -- since all the KCCs-DCs in the actual sites will> just use the lowest costs anyway and this site will be irrelevant> to replication except for the sum of the costs -- one might as> well just put in the direct Site Link with the sum. ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.active_directory)
  • Re: Multiple Sites and Multiple DCs
    ... > My vote is for SMTP services that registers themself by site and a change ... you can semi-force> clients at DC-less sites to use DCs at specific sites. ... > Actually the value of a DC-less site to define costs is pretty> doubtful -- since all the KCCs-DCs in the actual sites will> just use the lowest costs anyway and this site will be irrelevant> to replication except for the sum of the costs -- one might as> well just put in the direct Site Link with the sum. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)