Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Pete Yodis
Is this you? Claim Profile »
1 month ago
in Ask the Reader: eDrawings App for iPhone. Would You Use It? on SolidSmack
I produce and keep control of drawings that a normal desktop these days can have some slowness issues with in eDrawings. eDrawings is a dog for anything slightly complicated. Why would I want to attempt that with an Iphone. I would much rather view pdf files.
1 reply
Daedo
Its not just about 2D drawings. I want to look at 3D models.
9 months ago
in User Comment: Opening Up CAD Standards. Cool or Not Cool? on SolidSmack
Josh,
Mike made this statement...
"Workstation graphics cards are tuned in this regard and call for a more expensive workstations
as it is; despite using Direct 3D or OpenGL."
but in your post where you bolded the AutoDesk's employee quote, it was this...
"where OpenGL graphics drivers actually disable some OpenGL functionality on consumer, game, laptop, and chipset HW so you are forced to purchase the more expensive workstation graphics HW, just so your OpenGL graphics works correctly."
Who is correct here, Mike or the AutoDesk employee? I tend to think the AutoDesk employee is correct here about the "workstation" cards. Mike seems to imply that the price increase for the workstation is justified because they are "tuned". Poppycock, I say. The tuning does not explain why the workstation cards range from $200-$3,000. Do they tune more for the $3,000 workstation card? I think not. Is the hardware that much more expensive for the $3,000 workstation card - nope, not when you compare it to what you get with the top of the line gaming card hardware-wise. They charge that much because what else are you going to use, plain and simple. The argument that OpenGL is open - its crap. Its locking us into hardware that is too pricey for what we are getting. Thats not open at all. I would argue that neither OpenGL or Direct3D is truly "open". Its pick your poison...
With regards to having more exposure to more OS's.... I can understand that OpenGL could have that mark in its favor. But, come on - are people really migrating in droves to MAC or Linux or Unix so they can use SolidWorks there? Are people really clamoring for 3D CAD files on their I Phones? I would find someone at AutoDesk and ask them these same questions. I wouldn't think they would make such a huge change to their product without having thought about these matters. I'd like to see what they have to say.
I would like to know what is Mike's last name and where or who does he work for.
Mike made this statement...
"Workstation graphics cards are tuned in this regard and call for a more expensive workstations
as it is; despite using Direct 3D or OpenGL."
but in your post where you bolded the AutoDesk's employee quote, it was this...
"where OpenGL graphics drivers actually disable some OpenGL functionality on consumer, game, laptop, and chipset HW so you are forced to purchase the more expensive workstation graphics HW, just so your OpenGL graphics works correctly."
Who is correct here, Mike or the AutoDesk employee? I tend to think the AutoDesk employee is correct here about the "workstation" cards. Mike seems to imply that the price increase for the workstation is justified because they are "tuned". Poppycock, I say. The tuning does not explain why the workstation cards range from $200-$3,000. Do they tune more for the $3,000 workstation card? I think not. Is the hardware that much more expensive for the $3,000 workstation card - nope, not when you compare it to what you get with the top of the line gaming card hardware-wise. They charge that much because what else are you going to use, plain and simple. The argument that OpenGL is open - its crap. Its locking us into hardware that is too pricey for what we are getting. Thats not open at all. I would argue that neither OpenGL or Direct3D is truly "open". Its pick your poison...
With regards to having more exposure to more OS's.... I can understand that OpenGL could have that mark in its favor. But, come on - are people really migrating in droves to MAC or Linux or Unix so they can use SolidWorks there? Are people really clamoring for 3D CAD files on their I Phones? I would find someone at AutoDesk and ask them these same questions. I wouldn't think they would make such a huge change to their product without having thought about these matters. I'd like to see what they have to say.
I would like to know what is Mike's last name and where or who does he work for.
1 reply
Josh M
you said it man, "They charge that much because what else are you going to use, plain and simple"
I think he's making the observations that a lot of money is spent on a workstation despite an OpenGL or Direct3D GPU is being used.
What people want with hardware/software are really the same as really intuitive design. "Don't Make me Think." Don't make me pay and have to figure out the right set of options so something doesn't suck. whoever figures this out, has a corner on the market.
I think he's making the observations that a lot of money is spent on a workstation despite an OpenGL or Direct3D GPU is being used.
What people want with hardware/software are really the same as really intuitive design. "Don't Make me Think." Don't make me pay and have to figure out the right set of options so something doesn't suck. whoever figures this out, has a corner on the market.
10 months ago
in Apply Excitment of OpenGL vs Direct3D Directly to Forehead on SolidSmack
Josh,
A couple of points to re-emphasize. What intrigues me most about support of DirectX/Direct3D is the graphics hardware available that could run CAD software much better at a much lower price. Case in point is the new ATI 4850/4870 graphics engines. These are absolute performance monsters compared to the nVidia Qaudro line. Pound for pound they can compute much faster and have fatter lanes for transferring data back and forth. For around 200-300 dollars one of these can be had. To get the most comparable hardware solution for a "CAD workstation card" - you would have to spend thousands of dollars more - silly. It seems the OpenGL market is charging the CAD workstation market more - because it can. The bolded section in your post from the AutoDesk employee does confirm this idea.
Secondly - it seems like SolidWorks may be married to OpenGL becuase of the Real View fluff. In my mind I would rather have acess to a 200-300 card that could best anything currently costing thousands of dollars versus having real view capability. Real view doesn't really provide much value to me. Others may disagree. As hardware gets better and we see programs like PhotoView 360 used more - it may get to a point where PhotoView 360 is being used all the time - and realview goes away and the benefit of OpenGL as far as graphics eye candy becomes moot.
As far as MAC users are concerned... Charles Culp made an excellent point for MAC users running SolidWorks under dual boot. If SolidWorks did support DirectX - then MAC users would be able to use the card that came with their computer to properly drive SolidWorks. Now thats some irony - DirectX could actually help MAC users with running SolidWorks under dual boot.
A couple of points to re-emphasize. What intrigues me most about support of DirectX/Direct3D is the graphics hardware available that could run CAD software much better at a much lower price. Case in point is the new ATI 4850/4870 graphics engines. These are absolute performance monsters compared to the nVidia Qaudro line. Pound for pound they can compute much faster and have fatter lanes for transferring data back and forth. For around 200-300 dollars one of these can be had. To get the most comparable hardware solution for a "CAD workstation card" - you would have to spend thousands of dollars more - silly. It seems the OpenGL market is charging the CAD workstation market more - because it can. The bolded section in your post from the AutoDesk employee does confirm this idea.
Secondly - it seems like SolidWorks may be married to OpenGL becuase of the Real View fluff. In my mind I would rather have acess to a 200-300 card that could best anything currently costing thousands of dollars versus having real view capability. Real view doesn't really provide much value to me. Others may disagree. As hardware gets better and we see programs like PhotoView 360 used more - it may get to a point where PhotoView 360 is being used all the time - and realview goes away and the benefit of OpenGL as far as graphics eye candy becomes moot.
As far as MAC users are concerned... Charles Culp made an excellent point for MAC users running SolidWorks under dual boot. If SolidWorks did support DirectX - then MAC users would be able to use the card that came with their computer to properly drive SolidWorks. Now thats some irony - DirectX could actually help MAC users with running SolidWorks under dual boot.
1 reply
Josh M
Thanks for the re-points Pete. I'd love to be able to use those cards. I'm looking at laptops now and the FX cards drive up the cost. I've used GT cards and like them as well as the ATI, but the ATI are just awful of SolidWorks of course. It does seem like a "because they can" situation.
That's a great point about the Mac users as well. Even did a post on modding a GT to Quadro on a Mac. Would be nice if they didn't have to do that.
That's a great point about the Mac users as well. Even did a post on modding a GT to Quadro on a Mac. Would be nice if they didn't have to do that.
