Topic: LT Add-on, 3rd Party software

[Josh Nieman]

Those both sound like an unwillingness to learn something new.

No it's not.

It's unwillingness to handicap all the benefits you once had, and go back to doing it the slower, menial way.

Take the pneumatic nailgun away from the framer and make him stick to only using a hammer.

He'd be pissed... is that because he's just afraid to learn something new?

Also, I wouldn't do it because you can't do 3D in LT.  For our structural projects, I don't use an ounce of 2D other than annotation.

[deegeecees]

Those both sound like an unwillingness to learn something new.

Or maybe LT is a "Bargain Basement" application.

Yes, and yes.

Now, go play some chess.

[craigr]

This seems to be leaning towards a battle between which is a better program.

Personally, I don't think either is a 'better' program.

They each have their pros & cons.

Price vs. funtionality.

Basically pay for what you need.

Just my opinion,
craigr

[Greg B]

Now, go play some chess.

Huh...I haven't played for a couple of months now.

[deegeecees]

Me either, too busy working on my deathmatch quota. I was kidding BTW. I kid, I kid.

[Greg B]

I was kidding BTW. I kid, I kid.

You don't say...

[Josh Nieman]

I don't think it's a battle of which is a better program... Autocad full is obviously the better program.  Whether or not you get a return on the investment on that return is a decision to be made, though... but which program is better, is certainly not a question.

Yes, LT -is- a Bargain Basement program, if  you wanna get down to it.  It's price is minimal, and it doesn't do nearly the upper-echelon that Autocad Full can do (though many people don't need that stuff... we just happen to)

[craigr]

Perhaps I should have said 'a better Choice' instead of 'a better Program'.

For us, LT is a better 'Choice' because of the cost. - We don't need all that the full version offers.

Why buy a 'Craftsman' tool set if a 'Dollar Store' tool set works fine for what you need it for?

Especially if the tool set needs to be replaced every year!

craigr

[Josh Nieman]

Ok, yea, I'll buy "better choice" over better program.  That's definitely true for many people.

I couldn't use LT... we'd take too many steps backwards... and no, Greg, that's not an unwillingness to learn something new.  I'm 24, I'm far from "set in my ways" and if anything, I'd welcome the spice to my work-life.  I tried to find a way to justify Revit being introduced into our office, but couldn't come up with a sale worth pitching to the bosses.  It just wasn't good enough for our situation.  Or maybe our situation wasn't right for what Revit was for, I should say.

[StykFacE]

I refuse to work on LT. Period. If I'm working on LT, then that means my job as a drafter must not be that important, or the company is so cheap I wouldn't want to work for them anyways. The guys that use LT in our office aren't "CAD Designers" but Project Managers that use LT when needed to add notes or dimensions when they need to take control of the drawing for quality control purposes.

Funny this topic is here because I just posted up asking about 3rd Party LT Add-on's for six guys who run LT in my office. Seems to be in violation to the EULA. Had the LT Extender Trial on one guys machine and it worked flawlessly with some of our LISP programs. It literally enabled just about everything that Lisp/VBA had to offer. Such is the choice to work on an illegal software license.... 

My boss kept asking,"Is it legal? Does is break any of the EULA?" Well I guess I have my answer, via McSwain. 

[pmvliet]

LT use to be more affordable. I think it currently runs close to $1k.
full autocad was about $3600 with 1 year subscription. subscription is about $500/year
The price gap is getting closer.

I've run both LT and full version and have 1 license of each.
I've also seen and worked in many different types of offices with all types of personnel.

There is a place for both options. There are many companies and users who do not
take advantage of a full version and could save lots of money with LT.
There are many companies and users who require the full version.

LT is just a stripped down version of the full blown thing. There use to be things in LT
that were not in the full version (not sure about now). 3D and customization (lisp, vba etc)
are not in LT natively. Yes, there are add-on's but it seems there legality is questionable...

It's like buying a 1-ton 4x4 fully loaded truck or a 1/2-ton 4x2 truck with no options.
They do majority of the same thing. One can haul more, more comfortable.
One is cheaper, hauls less and doesn't have the creature comforts....

Pieter

[It's Alive!]

I agree, but I also see a growing need for inexpensive CAD programs that might not have all the bells and whistles, but are customizable. I think the clones will soon start to eat away at Autodesk’s market share.

I’ve been doing quite a bit of research in the clones over the last few weeks, and they are putting a lot of effort into making quality programs with quality API’s. It’s going to take a while, but they will get there.

So far the best clone as far as performance goes is ZWCAD  http://www.zwcad.org/
And the best API goes to Bricscad http://www.bricscad.com/en_INTL/
 
Don’t get me wrong, I think AutoCAD rocks, but the price is getting too high for some of the smaller time players.

[Gazza]

I refuse to work on LT. Period. If I'm working on LT, then that means my job as a drafter must not be that important, or the company is so cheap I wouldn't want to work for them anyways. The guys that use LT in our office aren't "CAD Designers" but Project Managers that use LT when needed to add notes or dimensions when they need to take control of the drawing for quality control purposes.

Funny this topic is here because I just posted up asking about 3rd Party LT Add-on's for six guys who run LT in my office. Seems to be in violation to the EULA. Had the LT Extender Trial on one guys machine and it worked flawlessly with some of our LISP programs. It literally enabled just about everything that Lisp/VBA had to offer. Such is the choice to work on an illegal software license.... 

My boss kept asking,"Is it legal? Does is break any of the EULA?" Well I guess I have my answer, via McSwain. 

Your Choice but get your facts right before you give the answer to your boss.

First the posting part of the EULA here is a breach of Copyright. That's right the EULA
is covered by copyright.


LTextender were taken to a German court by AD for an entirely different reason.

At the time that were inciting people to download a full version (trail) and then they would
use those DLL. Once they stopped doing this the case fizzled away and they where paid
hush money. Hence they still exist today.

So how does that make it illegal and what part of the EULA do you think it breaks?

[Bob Wahr]

First the posting part of the EULA here is a breach of Copyright. That's right the EULA
is covered by copyright.

The posting of the section of the EULA would fall under fair use and as such is not a copyright violation.

LTextender were taken to a German court by AD for an entirely different reason.

At the time that were inciting people to download a full version (trail) and then they would
use those DLL. Once they stopped doing this the case fizzled away and they where paid
hush money. Hence they still exist today.

So how does that make it illegal and what part of the EULA do you think it breaks?

If you would quit being so defensive and actually offer some information this topic might get somewhere.  Maybe you could enlighten us on how the connection is made, and what they coded.  I have a really hard time believing that a software package that was made to enhance LT, and that sells cheaply, took the time, expense, and effort, to rewrite the functionality of Autolisp and the handling of ARX.  I would be a lot more inclined to believe that they used code from Autodesk.

[Bob Wahr]

LTextender were taken to a German court by AD for an entirely different reason.

At the time that were inciting people to download a full version (trail) and then they would
use those DLL. Once they stopped doing this the case fizzled away and they where paid
hush money. Hence they still exist today.

And yet, they haven't upated since 2004.  I wonder why.
quote]
So how does that make it illegal and what part of the EULA do you think it breaks?
[/quote]Bolding mine

From LT-Extender documentation

LT-Extender 2000 Plus for AutoCAD© LT 2000 (or higher) is the most advanced software for customising
AutoCAD© LT. Using several advanced technologies, LT-Extender 2000 Plus offers the unique power to
break through (nearly) all AutoCAD© LT limitations – activating and enabling hidden features, emulating nonexisting
features and providing easy-to-use interface, users will get AutoCAD© power running AutoCAD© LT !

You may not utilize any equipment, device, software or other means designed to circumvent or remove any usage restrictions, or to enable functionality disabled by Autodesk in connection with the Excluded Materials.

Now maybe you can enlighten us on how this doesn't violate the EULA.