AutoCAD is f-ing terrible. Let's talk about it
I've used AutoCAD for ten years, and I fucking hate it. When it's good, it's just marginally not too shitty. When it's bad, it's terrible. While I have become fairly experienced with using it, the quirks, inconsistencies and limitations often make it exasperating to deal with, and occasionally make it nightmarish. This puts me in the awkward position of doing something I've come more often recently to downright hate.
I want your best AutoCAD time saving and optimization tricks. Maybe a knowledge share like this will also be useful for other drafters and engineers who scroll HN.
While I'm not a programmer, I'd also like to hear thoughts from programmers who are familiar with AutoCAD. If an engineering entrepreneur with an unlimited budget, determined to start from scratch while keeping goodness about the things that are good, dropped the code on your desk and said 'okay what do we do with this shit?', what would your answer be?
Oh and, BTW, please don't hold back if you happen to have dank AutoCAD memes and/or a similar amount of ire (all of it) as I do for Autodesk and their associated hellspawn.
Thanks!
20 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 60.4 ms ] threadhttps://twitter.com/ColinWilliamson/status/15702108536891105...
If I never use another adobe product in my life, I'm fine with that totally.
Oh. That's why they bought Figma. My heart breaks
3: I'm an architect (housing kind).
Newbies use to hate Autocad. I hated it in the beginning also. It will take at least a couple months until you start to get some profits from it. A couple years to get proficient.
But really why is 3D in AutoCAD so slow even on a very fast computer with a top of the line graphics card?
https://brlcad.org/
I haven't used it lately but it was very stable, reliable, and powerful. It had a command line interface which made it somewhat clunky to use, but it was a very capable program. I think a GUI or two have been added to it to make it easier to use. It uses constructive solid geometry (adding and subtracting solids) to create objects, though I see they have added B-Reps to it.
The fact that the early CAD tools all used command line interfaces instead of GUI's also may explain some of the awfulness, many of them tacked a GUI on top of the command line interface instead of rewriting the software from the ground up, and some of that funky command line weirdness may persist in the strange workarounds the GUI's had to use.
I think the reasons it is still popular are:
- People who learnt to draft with pencil and paper are still around
- Legacy, still so many drawings that they don't want to have to remodel. The open format exports are never perfect.
- 2D layouts are just practical for a lot of industries (electrical, HVAC, MEP, etc) where they are just need to convey connection information or everything is nice boxes on planes and they don't need spend more time extruding out a 3D when they can just easily just draw an arrow and go "AxBmm". But apparently Revit, which haven't used, is becoming more popular int the MEP/HVAC space apparently?
I know my friend has lots of drop in templates and scripts that they have built up over the years.
Imagine you are starting a concept for an housing block. You are just starting to "shape it". You don't really know if it will be a square or a rectangle or even a more complex polygon. If you use BIM (e.g. Revit), you'll need to define what wall is exactly made of, what kind (and brand!) of window is it, etc, since the beginning.. you don't even know yet what the building will look like! It's completely nonsense and an huge incentive to repetition: you use what you already have in your library once it is a massive hassle to create new objects.
When the project is settled and approved by authorities, then and only then, may pay (depending on the scale) to convert it to BIM: you'll get 3D renderings, bill of quantities and a realtime model of the building out of the box.
An analogy for HNers: Autocad is a text editor (emacs kind), BIM is an IDE.