Topic: Lisp with 2005LT?

[PDJ]

Profit margins at most companies are tight, and there is no way most can afford to continually upgrade their software every year and most bosses would rather buy LT with a lisp extender than shell out thousands for software which in reality they would never fully use.

Maybe if those companies would look at other means of saving money, they could afford a subscription service for the upgrades.  Is it absolutely necessary to stay in THE most expensive hotels when on business trips??  Is that conference in Las Vegas REALLY necessary??  It wouldn't take much to turn some money around for software upgrades.

My friends company still use R14, which is perfect for their needs , all of the work they do is strictly 2D layouts.  But one of his clients use 2005, so their drawings are incompatible.  They can't afford to upgrade, so LT is his companies only option if they want to use their clients drawings, and they have placed an order for LT extender to allow them to use the lisp routines they have written for their system.

Maybe AutoDesk wouldn't have the problem if they charged a reasonable price for their software?

Your friend really needs to look for a better place of employment before it's too late.  If they ever lay him off, where is he going to find work only knowing R14 AutoCad?  Most companies now want at least 2002, some looking at 04 and 05 already, and then there are the ADT, MDT and/or LDT packages they want you to know.  

Charging a resonable price would be really nice but, big corporations are always shelling out the big bucks, why change for the little guy.  I worked for one company that has a subscription price of $48,000.00 a year.  I think even the accountants had AutoCad on thier machines there.. haha..

Customize LT as much as possible.. I'm all for it.  I just have a hard time convincing others the value of lisp routines.  In my 15 years of cadd experience, I can say that I've worked with a good 100 different operators and I can honestly say, I talk to just two about lisp every couple of months or so.  I took the time and showed all the others the values of it but, none of them held the interest.

[t-bear]

I'm with Keith....  We don't go to Vegas or stay in fancy hotels. Hell, my Co. can hardly afford training thru our vendor!  We struggle to keep up with the upgrades, usually every third one.  It works out cheaper than the subscription price for that same time.....  I'm doing full-blown 3D in vanilla CAD .... with LOTS of help from 3rd party code.  To take A-Desks side would make me....hell, most of us....illegal.  After all, it's not "Authorized" modification of the original proggy..........
If the extender code is not a de-recompilation of Autodesks,  It's not in violation of the law.....wanna bet they lose this one?  And when they do, it"s gonna open up a whole new can-o-worms for them!

[Keith™]

When we upgraded the last time, (6x1000 = 6000) then after getting the upgrade we found that we had to buy new computers to run the damn thing ... now I like my new computer so don't get the wrong idea, but then 6x3700 = 22200 + 6000 = 28200 .... now Autodesk tells us that if we give them another 500 per year per seat  then we can upgrade at no additional cost.... hmmm.... 6x500 = 3000 py .....

Yes it IS the cost of doing business, but when you can buy a comparable software package that will run on most computers for under $500 for the whole shebang, it is no wonder Autodesk has so much piracy with their product.

AutoCAD 2005 ADT is $4700 per seat. If we were to outright purchase those seats, that is $28200. If I can get the same functionality with a $7800 investment, then you had better believe that I will.

Those who support such activity are the same ones who think it is a good idea to pay higher taxes... and we know how ignorant that is...

[Keith™]

Maybe if those companies would look at other means of saving money, they could afford a subscription service for the upgrades.  Is it absolutely necessary to stay in THE most expensive hotels when on business trips??  Is that conference in Las Vegas REALLY necessary??  It wouldn't take much to turn some money around for software upgrades.

Is it REALLY necessary to purchase the most expensive drafting software package?
I'd much rather use IntelliCAD everyday for the price of a seat of AutoCAD every year.

Customize LT as much as possible.. I'm all for it.  I just have a hard time convincing others the value of lisp routines.  In my 15 years of cadd experience, I can say that I've worked with a good 100 different operators and I can honestly say, I talk to just two about lisp every couple of months or so.  I took the time and showed all the others the values of it but, none of them held the interest.

To bad the people you work with are stupid....

I too have worked with lots of people on AutoCAD, the difference is that the good ones make FULL use of the programming languages while the mediocre ones are still drawing every little widget every time they need to put one in the drawing.
Trust me if my hands were tied with LT, I'd have customization like you would not believe. I'd make stand alone applications to work with it and develop my own programming interface.

[Jassper]

As I am sitting here reading this post, it comes to mind that I am using Eagle Point software and not LDD.

Is this morally wrong?

We are using lisp routines, Diesel expressions, VB(A), C++ and Visual C to create macros to do functionalities that AutoCAD does already, (just not how we want).

What about using Bubble CAD instead of the Properties in AutoCAD

What about using a different Text editor – not the one with AutoCAD

Share ware of any kind

Are these morally wrong?

If so then what about all the other programs… Are you using Internet explorer with the Windows environment or are you using Netscape or are you using Mozilla, or something else. Same for e-mail, Outlook or GroupWise or whatever. Adobe over Corel over Photo editor.

Where will it stop?
Isn’t that why Microsoft was sued? Not letting you have a choice.


Little :O)

[CADaver]

If you do mechanical design using plain AutoCAD then isi it right to not purchase MDT?

There is a HUGE difference between using a tool AS IT WAS DESIGNED for different uses, and using an inappropriatly modified tool for something it was never designed to do.  Using plain AutoCAD "as it is designed" is different from using a "cracked" version of MDT.  IS popping open the cable box and hot-wiring it to pick up un-susribed stations morally acceptable? I, personally, don't think so, and I view LTE the same.

Is it right that you should use them instead of buying the appropriate development package from Autodesk?

Yes, that is how the software is designed and marketed.  If they disabled the lisp functionality to preclude such developement, then it would not... but then it would be LT.

I see this as a ploy to force people to purchase the programs they want you to use and in the end create great wealth for the company.

I can't speak for anyone else, but that's why I'm in business.  
Show of hands, who is not in business to make money??

The "right" thing to do would be for Autodesk to drop pending lawsuits (if they are still pending ... that was Oct 2003) and embrace the ingenuity and development of more third party applications.

Then what about those of us who over the years have needed the advanced customization capailities of the software, and have paid for that privilege?  Our original investment and periodic upgrade fees have been for nought?  I doubt that AutoDESK wishes to alienate that large a portion of the current user base, and I think doing so would do great harm to their profit margin.

The simple fact is that anyone with a little bit of windows programming knowledge can write programming that will work with any program, regardless of whether the original developer ever intended it to work that way or not.

The same truth is that nearly anyone with a little specific knowledge can crack nearly any program on the market.  The capability of something is separate from it's morality.

Quite honestly I am proud that I continually produce software that works with AutoCAD, extending it's capabilities beyond that which Autodesk originally designed. In my line of work, if I were to purchase the Autodesk software using the premise that it is not "right" to develop applications that are not within the intent of use of the program, then I would be morally obligated to buy LDD, ADT, MDT and Inventor .... Clearly this is NOT what I am doing and nor will I.

discussed and dismissed above.

I support the actions of LT-Extender as a viable option to the overpriced software we now currently are relegated to use.

Would you support, as well, any other "cracked",  "hacked" or pirated software?  I mean $500 for an office suite is insane.  Would it be okay if we just bought a cracked version for our once a week use?

[CADaver]

A great analogy to this is like putting nitrous/turbo/supercharger on your car. ok you might void part of your warranty if a brand new car but you are not going to be sued(I hope not) over modifying your vehicle. Some will say we don't really own the software but that is another story.

Actually it's NOT another story, but the same.  If you modified a rent car in such a fashion, you'd be arrested, and rightly so.

[CADaver]

Profit margins at most companies are tight, and there is no way most can afford to continually upgrade their software every year and most bosses would rather buy LT with a lisp extender than shell out thousands for software which in reality they would never fully use.

So if my profits are tight it's okay to buy cracked warez?  Is it okay to snip you code off these boards without giving credit?

[CADaver]

I'm doing full-blown 3D in vanilla CAD .... with LOTS of help from 3rd party code.  To take A-Desks side would make me....hell, most of us....illegal.  After all, it's not "Authorized" modification of the original proggy..........

Sure it is, it is "as designed".  AutoDESK markets the flexibility of the full package and your customizations are completely within the spirit of the exchange.   Adding the lisp functionality (and therefore the ability to customize) is the reason it costs more than the "starter kit".

[CADaver]

Those who support such activity are the same ones who think it is a good idea to pay higher taxes... and we know how ignorant that is...

So can I assume you think it's okay to "cheat" on your taxes??  I would hope not.  

Let's remember this discussion when some outfit in India is telling our bosses that they can get the same functionality from them at a fraction of our cost.

[CADaver]

Is it REALLY necessary to purchase the most expensive drafting software package?

ummm... that would be Microstation  

I'd much rather use IntelliCAD everyday for the price of a seat of AutoCAD every year.

Fine, I'd have no problem with that, go right ahead.  But using cracked software, which is what LTE is (IMMHO) is a different matter.

[CADaver]

Is this morally wrong?

Nope, that is "as designed".  But if you take some of EaglePoint's programming, uncook it and install it on a seat for which you have not purchased Eagle Point, you've crossed the line.  That is basically what LTE does.  They figured out a way to unblock lisp functionality in AutoDESK's product (a functionality they charge extra to access).  Just like a signal de-scrambler.

[ronjonp]

Would you support, as well, any other "cracked", "hacked" or pirated software? I mean $500 for an office suite is insane. Would it be okay if we just bought a cracked version for our once a week use?

FWIW,
You don't buy "cracked:hacked" software? Generally software is cracked so you don't have to fork out the bucks for it, which is stealing. In the case of LTE, you already BOUGHT AutoCAD LT and you are BUYING add-on software that improves AutoCAD LT. Sounds like a deal to me.  

Ron
 

[CADaver]

If so then what about all the other programs… Are you using Internet explorer with the Windows environment or are you using Netscape or are you using Mozilla, or something else. Same for e-mail, Outlook or GroupWise or whatever. Adobe over Corel over Photo editor.

This is NOT about accepted "as designed" use, as much as others here would like it to be.  It's about cracking software to remove designed blocks to certain functionality.  

Adobe gives away a free PDF reader.  If someone found a way to crack the reader and give the user full Adobe functionality, it would be morally unacceptable to use that software.

Not letting you have a choice.

You have complete choice. You can buy Full AutoCAD, or LT.  LT is cheaper, but if one wants/needs the full functionality of full AutoCAD, then one needs to pay for it.


But apparently that's just me.

[CADaver]

FWIW,
You don't buy "cracked:hacked" software? Generally software is cracked so you don't have to fork out the bucks for it, which is stealing. In the case of LTE, you already BOUGHT AutoCAD LT and you are BUYING add-on software that improves AutoCAD LT. Sounds like a deal to me.  

The writers of LTE found a way to UNblock lisp functionality in LT. Basically they cracked LT, and sell a program that helps you do the same.