Author Topic: Lisp with 2005LT?  (Read 11111 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

CADaver

  • Guest
Lisp with 2005LT?
« Reply #45 on: February 10, 2005, 05:55:46 PM »
Quote from: craigr
If 'modifying' AutoCad with 'add ons' is morally wrong then are my 306 customizations (macros) wrong also?
As much as Keith wishes that were my position, it isn't.  but I see he has confused the issue enough by saying it often enough that you may believe it to be so.  Add-ons are not a problem, never have been.  The improper use of proprietary code is.


Quote from: craigr
AutoCadLT doesn't fit our bill as is, so I modify it to do what I need to do.
NO problem at all with that.  Unless you use code to which you have no right to do so.  Which is what AutoDESk charges the writers of LTE.


Quote from: craigr
As long as the 'add on' programs don't decompile or change the files of AutoCad, I don't understand why it would be morally wrong.
Absolutly correct, and my position all along.


Quote from: craigr
No one can write a software that fits EVERYONES needs, that is why 'add ons'  exist. If Autodesk doesnt provide them, why can't someone else?
They still can, I've never claimed otherwise. Unless they use code to which they have no right.  Which is what AutoDESk charges the writers of LTE.

Keith™

  • Villiage Idiot
  • Seagull
  • Posts: 16899
  • Superior Stupidity at its best
Lisp with 2005LT?
« Reply #46 on: February 10, 2005, 07:15:51 PM »
I suppose then it comes down to the allegations that Autodesk makes that LTE used proprietary code.

I have said often that if LTE DID use Autodesk code, then it would be wrong to sell a product based on that code without approval from Autodesk.

It comes down to whom do you believe ...
LTE, a small company by any standard
ManuSoft (also party to the suit),  another small company
Autodesk, a large corporation...

No, being a large company does not make Autodesk bad ... attempting to force compliance with copyright and licensing issues does not make them bad ... however, if LTE and ManuSoft are exhonerated then Autodesk is indeed the bad guy.

Personally, I am still one of those people that holds judgement until an accusation has been proven.
Our system of law has always been based on the presumption of innocence, unfortunately there are those who would burn someone at the stake for merely being accused of wrong-doing.

CADaver, I'll make a deal with you...when and if Autodesk proves their case in court, I'll agree that LTE was wrong, however, if Autodesk cannot prove their case, I'd like you to agree with me that Autodesk was wrong in pursuing this case.
What do you say?
Proud provider of opinion and arrogance since November 22, 2003 at 09:35:31 am
CadJockey Militia Field Marshal

Find me on https://parler.com @kblackie

CADaver

  • Guest
Lisp with 2005LT?
« Reply #47 on: February 11, 2005, 02:17:31 PM »
Quote from: Keith
I suppose then it comes down to the allegations that Autodesk makes that LTE used proprietary code.

I have said often that if LTE DID use Autodesk code, then it would be wrong to sell a product based on that code without approval from Autodesk.

It comes down to whom do you believe ...
LTE, a small company by any standard
ManuSoft (also party to the suit),  another small company
Autodesk, a large corporation...
Nothing I have indicates that Manusoft's products are involved, but rather they played fast and loose with code they shouldn't have. And at this point, I don't think they are involved directly with the suit any longer, though I'm quite sure Owen is watching it closely.


Quote from: Keith
No, being a large company does not make Autodesk bad ... attempting to force compliance with copyright and licensing issues does not make them bad ... however, if LTE and ManuSoft are exhonerated then Autodesk is indeed the bad guy.
See below.


Quote from: Keith
Personally, I am still one of those people that holds judgement until an accusation has been proven.  Our system of law has always been based on the presumption of innocence, unfortunately there are those who would burn someone at the stake for merely being accused of wrong-doing.
I agree, but I wouldn't purchase the product until I was sure.  But then that's just me.


Quote from: Keith
CADaver, I'll make a deal with you...when and if Autodesk proves their case in court, I'll agree that LTE was wrong, however, if Autodesk cannot prove their case, I'd like you to agree with me that Autodesk was wrong in pursuing this case.
What do you say?
This goes along with that secand paragraph above.    If someone feels that they have been wronged in some manner they should be able to seek resolution.  That's what the courts are for.  Just because the court disagrees with their position, I'm not sure I could say they were wrong in bringing the case.  

I was sued by a fellow who thought I had defrauded him of certain monies.  When he asked me about it originally, I showed him the contract, and he felt it was worded in a way that supported his position.  I did not.  We went to court and the judge sided with my interpretation of the contract.  Did I think he was wrong bringing the case?  No, he was just protecting his interests, as was I.

How about this, if they, AutoDESK, lose the case, I will agree that they lost and retract my unsupport for LTE.

Keith™

  • Villiage Idiot
  • Seagull
  • Posts: 16899
  • Superior Stupidity at its best
Lisp with 2005LT?
« Reply #48 on: February 11, 2005, 03:00:36 PM »
Ok fair enough ...

If Autodesk wins, I'll concede that LTE was involved in wrong doing, if Autodesk loses you concede that LTE was not involved in wrong doing.

Presuming of course that you don't draw a distinction between "morally wrong" and "legally wrong" In any case, I'll accept "legally wrong" as the presumed method by which we measure since morals are at best very difficult to legislate and enforce.
Proud provider of opinion and arrogance since November 22, 2003 at 09:35:31 am
CadJockey Militia Field Marshal

Find me on https://parler.com @kblackie

CADaver

  • Guest
Lisp with 2005LT?
« Reply #49 on: February 11, 2005, 04:59:33 PM »
Quote from: Keith
Ok fair enough ...

If Autodesk wins, I'll concede that LTE was involved in wrong doing, if Autodesk loses you concede that LTE was not involved in wrong doing.

Presuming of course that you don't draw a distinction between "morally wrong" and "legally wrong" In any case, I'll accept "legally wrong" as the presumed method by which we measure since morals are at best very difficult to legislate and enforce.
Agreed...

...

...

okay everybody, you can get up now, fake faints noted.

VerticalMojo

  • Guest
Lisp with 2005LT?
« Reply #50 on: February 11, 2005, 05:39:52 PM »
When will we know the outcome?

Keith™

  • Villiage Idiot
  • Seagull
  • Posts: 16899
  • Superior Stupidity at its best
Lisp with 2005LT?
« Reply #51 on: February 11, 2005, 09:41:12 PM »
VM ... It could be years... but you can certainly bet that when it finally comes to a close, it will be big news, both on the Autodesk site and LTE.
Proud provider of opinion and arrogance since November 22, 2003 at 09:35:31 am
CadJockey Militia Field Marshal

Find me on https://parler.com @kblackie

Big G

  • Bull Frog
  • Posts: 415
Lisp with 2005LT?
« Reply #52 on: February 14, 2005, 05:02:55 AM »
not a bad read for a monday morning!! dang...need more coffee now too :D
I thought i seen the light at the end of the tunnel. But it was just someone with a torch bringing me more work.
"You have to accept that somedays youre the pigeon and  somedays youre the statue"

craigr

  • Guest
Lisp with 2005LT?
« Reply #53 on: February 15, 2005, 12:08:41 PM »
As a final note, (I hope) -

Please don't look down on those of us that use LT.

   I personally have tried to get our owner to at least buy me, (the CAD manager), a copy of FULL AutoCad. He said that he just can't justify spending that much money on it for what we do. - Which is basically an 'electronic pen and paper'. We do very little acutual 'drafting'.

   I did a couple of jobs, Drafting a mechanical cabinet, but it was VERY difficult in LT. So I pitched MD or the full AutoCad. He ended up outsourcing the 3D work.

So, bottom line, I don't pay the bills, the owner does. This makes it HIS choice.

craigr

CADaver

  • Guest
Lisp with 2005LT?
« Reply #54 on: February 15, 2005, 05:03:37 PM »
Quote from: craigr
As a final note, (I hope) -

Please don't look down on those of us that use LT.
I hope I didn't come across as looking down on LT users.  If I did I'm very sorry, that was never my intent.  It's just Keith I don't like.  :)  JUST KIDDING, sparring with Keith is one of the few highpoints of my workweek.  

And I dunno about anyone else, but I really enjoy a good spar (surprise, surprise) that does not degenerate into personal slurs.  Kinda keeps the few grey cells I have left oiled up.

craigr

  • Guest
Lisp with 2005LT?
« Reply #55 on: February 15, 2005, 05:06:21 PM »
Don't worry, no offense taken.

I'm just jealous that I don't have the full version. :(

Thanks anyway.

craigr

Keith™

  • Villiage Idiot
  • Seagull
  • Posts: 16899
  • Superior Stupidity at its best
Lisp with 2005LT?
« Reply #56 on: February 15, 2005, 11:47:58 PM »
Quote from: CADaver
....sparring with Keith is one of the few highpoints of my workweek.  

And I dunno about anyone else, but I really enjoy a good spar (surprise, surprise) that does not degenerate into personal slurs.  Kinda keeps the few grey cells I have left oiled up.


Well, I must say that I find it intellectually stimulating to conduct these sessions as well ... you know debate was one of my favorite subjects in school .... The dean would want to punish me for doing something and we would debate it .... he wins or he wins ... either way I lost ... at least now I don't have a punishment that goes with it ... :)
Proud provider of opinion and arrogance since November 22, 2003 at 09:35:31 am
CadJockey Militia Field Marshal

Find me on https://parler.com @kblackie