Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: CAD Programs

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
As I recall, in 1984 there were very few choices for CAD systems 
among the Aerospace industry. It was either Cadam or Integraph. 
AutoCad was in it's infancy and not, as I know, on mainframes.
I believe the choice of systems evolved from those days were 
mainframe systems were limited by evolved.
Dennis Wish PE

-----Original Message-----
From:	Caldwell, Stan [SMTP:scaldwell(--nospam--at)]
Sent:	Thursday, November 06, 1997 12:34 PM
To:	'seaoc(--nospam--at)'
Subject:	RE: CAD Programs

>I'm a bit biased, I'll say this up front...
>But, no one has even mentioned the second most popular (in 
terms of seats)
>CAD program, MicroStation, written by Bentley Systems, Inc.
>Considering Structural engineering only, there appears to be a 
>corelation between the size of the structural firm, and the 
choice between
>Autocad and MicroStation.   The larger the structural firm, the 
more likely
>they are to use MicroStation... the smaller the firm, the more 
Autocad is
>Can you all please comment on why this is?
>Intergraph Developer
Yes:  "Bigger is Better!"  ... and so is Bentley Microstation!

The other reason that large firms use Microstation is that most 
firms are multi-disciplined, and heavily involved in public 
projects.  Most government agencies (at least in Texas) require
Intergraph.  On the other hand, many of our private sector 
require AutoCad.  Fortunately, the two platforms finally have 
evolved to
where they translate back and forth pretty well.  We have a few 
seats, but they are out-numbered 10:1 by Microstation seats. 
 Most of
our work, even in the private sector, is happily produced in

Stan R. Caldwell, P.E.
Dallas, Texas

Bumper Sticker Wisdom:
"Jack Kevorkian for White House Physician"