Erik Reuter wrote:
>
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 06:01:21PM -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
>
> > If you want to change a file generated in AutoCAD, the only good way
> > to do it is with AutoCAD.
>
> Actually, I have taken files home to QCad from AutoCAD. I save them
> in .dxf. And a quick web search I just did turned up a few dwg to dxf
> converters, but I don't know if they are worthwhile. I think dxf is a
> better interchange format than dwg.
Probably. But if you're sharing files with folks using AutoCAD, you're
probably pretty much stuck with using AutoCAD. (Apparently it's rather
difficult to write something that deals with .dwg properly.)
> > If you're an engineer taking your work home, you might very well want
> > AutoCAD on your home system.
>
> For the high price of AutoCAD, though, I'll take the slight
> inconvenience of using .dxf.
>
> Out of curiousity, how much did AutoCAD cost you?
Um, the cost of the time to transfer the latest build from one machine
on the home network to another. ;)
More to the point, how much is AutoCAD bringing money *in* to this
household? And the answer to that is, enough that we can afford to
build a custom house and qualify for the mortgage on same. (If you read
the whole long post by Kneem, I'm married to one of the 100k/yr hotshot
programmers mentioned a little less than halfway through, and he's
programming at home, so it's trivial to get useage of AutoCAD. In fact,
he has a copy of the last release on one machine so he can easily
compare stuff in that with stuff in the release-in-progress, and he used
that for laying out and then tweaking the plans.) But it would be worth
the cost of AutoCAD LT (no more than $800, in Dan's estimation) to have
the ability to share the file with the architect if you were doing
something weird with your custom house. Which we apparently are. (I
could do up a description of the floor plan if there were interest in
that.)
Julia
