I agree with Bill. I have used both products, and there are functions
that I like in each.
For basic drawing, all programs are much same apart from syntax.
i.e block(AutoCAD), cell(Microstation) and object (GDS) are one
and the same item. What "add-ons" you use, or customization you
implement dictates the l level of productivity.
From: "Polhemus, Bill" <wlpolhemus(--nospam--at)sbinfra.com>
To: "'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'" <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Subject: RE: Autocad layering standards
Date sent: Wed, 2 Feb 2000 08:10:10 -0600
Send reply to: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> Our firm uses both Autocad and Microstation. The consensus from those cad
> designers who are adept at using both is that Autocad is very good for some
> things, and Microstation for others. Ultimately, it depends on the type of
> work, the client's preferences, etc.
> Since we are committed to do the best for our clients, we can't afford to
> "choose sides" so readily.
> I don't know Microstation very well, but I'm pretty good at Autocad.
> However, I admit that we do some AWESOME work, especially with the add-in
> tools available for transportation engineering, in Microstation.
> And by the way, whether you're talking "layers" or "levels," the same issue
> comes up. This guy's remark was sophomoric.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Francis.Ang(--nospam--at)toyota.com.ph [mailto:Francis.Ang(--nospam--at)toyota.com.ph]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 11:15 PM
> To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> Subject: RE: Autocad layering standards
> That's as if your'e from the company who sells Microstation. Please make
> your point (advantages and disadvantages) for everyone to know and
> > ----------
> > From: Ido Shimony[SMTP:Ido_Shimony(--nospam--at)geopak.com]
> > Reply To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2000 3:16 AM
> > To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> > Subject: Autocad layering standards
> > Stop using Autocad
> > Switch to Microstation