Latest release & updates ›. Selection of manufacturer-verified BIM objects for MEP design with comprehensive functional data for engineering calculations.
Recent Mep Part For Mac Free
Why shouldn’t your project use high performance, low energy building systems? The operational efficiency of your building is set by the parameters of its building services systems and the quality of its internal environment. Our design approach to your brief is at once innovative and integrated. We embrace the latest technologies to improve performance and sustainability. Using advanced modelling techniques we can analyse the building envelope and its floor layouts. The systems we specify on your behalf are then integrated into the building fabric, to create functional internal spaces and balanced, controllable conditions.
Where practical, passive heating and lighting systems such as natural ventilation, external shading and thermal mass are employed to regulate conditions. These can be combined with active systems, such as air conditioning, to provide high levels of comfort and efficiency. As buildings are responsible for over 40% of all energy consumption, sustainable design is now top of the regulatory and corporate agenda. Working as part of a team we are able to balance our client’s aspirations with engineering (and often budgetary) constraints, to design high performance, low energy building systems.
Planning pays Given the significant proportional cost of a project, building services require significant planning, in order to be delivered on time and on budget. Our global team brings deep experience on projects from around the world, where climates, codes and standards can vary substantially. Think ‘whole life’ for your building Future flexibility for changes of use is considered, both in terms of the engineering systems and commercial viability. To add value to a project we can carry out a ‘whole life’ costing to assess ongoing and initial costs of maintenance, repair, servicing and operation, as well as social and environmental costs. This process can help the design team and the client choose between alternative designs, systems and strategies and to achieve cost control and certainty right from the start.
There has been a fair bit of from Autodesk lately on the subject of a possible future OS X AutoCAD version. The more I think about this, the more I am inclined to believe that this would be a bad idea. A very bad idea. It pains me to write this, because I’m very much a user advocate and I’m arguing here against something that some users have been requesting for a long time. If you’re one of those users, I’m sorry, but I think this is one of those cases when giving you what you want would be bad for everybody, and bad for you in particular. Now, this sort of platform discussion often degenerates into a quasi-religious debate, so let’s see if I can head it off at the pass.
Part For Mac Charger Cord
If you’re a Mac fan who wants to tell me the benefits of your chosen computer family and how inferior Windows is, save it. I’ll concede right here and now that you are probably right. My experience of Apple products has generally been very positive. They look good, they’re well made, they work well, the Mac OS has been shamelessly copied by Microsoft for decades, and so on, ad nauseam.
Not disputed. Also, not relevant to the point I’m about to make. Ever since the last multi-platform AutoCAD (Release 13), Autodesk has dedicated its primary product solely to Windows. Since then, the code base has been spreading its mass of roots deeper and deeper into the Windows soil. Any Windows-specific advantage the developers can take has been taken. Reversing or working around that process is a very substantial undertaking.
If it were done, I think it would have the following outcomes: AutoCAD for Mac would suck The performance is likely to be poor, because all the Windows-specific stuff will have to be redirected, recreated or emulated. The stability is likely to be awful, because this will be new ground for almost all of the developers involved.
Developers with AutoCAD experience are going to have little or no Mac experience and vice-versa. They would be trying to make significant changes to the code base at the same time that that code base is being modified for the next release. The bug level is likely to be abysmal, both for the above reasons and also because the number of pre-release testers available to Autodesk on this platform is likely to be relatively tiny. The user interface is likely to be an uncomfortable square-peg-in-round-hole effort, which will work badly and be derided by OS X users. AutoCAD for Mac would be half-baked Not just half-baked in the usual let’s-put-this-out-as-is-and-maybe-we-can-fix-it-later way, but half-baked by design.
The Autodesk survey implies that serious consideration is being put into a version of AutoCAD that is missing some of the things that make AutoCAD what it is. Things like paper/model space functionality, the command line, 3D, LISP, the ability to use third-party apps AutoCAD for Mac LT Lite, anyone? If the APIs are not all there, that means no OS X version of any of the AutoCAD-based vertical products, either. AutoCAD for Mac would be bad for Mac users Last time this was attempted, it was a failure. The early 90s attempt at AutoCAD for Mac lasted for two three releases: 10 to 12. Autodesk had little option but to pull the pin on a non-viable product, but the orphaned users weren’t happy.
Fortunately, there weren’t that many of them. Would this happen again? Yes, I think it probably would. Any Mac user with any sense wouldn’t touch the first new Mac release with a bargepole. That, of course, makes it much less likely that there would be a second or third release. Autodesk’s corporate culture (espoused very strongly by Carol Bartz, but dating back to John Walker) encourages brave attempts that may lead to failure.
This policy has unfortunately left large numbers of orphans in its wake over the years. In the event of poor sales, Mac for AutoCAD users would just be another set of unfortunates to add to a long list. AutoCAD for Mac would be bad for Windows users The very substantial effort required to produce any kind of AutoCAD for Mac at all would be a major drain on very limited (and shrinking) development resources.
That means Windows users of AutoCAD would look forward to a release (or more likely several releases) with fewer new features, less completion of existing undercooked features, and longer waits until bugs and other problems get fixed. This, in exchange for no benefit whatsoever to those users. In fact, the decoupling of Windows-specific calls and the likely introduction of extra bugs would probably make AutoCAD for Windows work less well than it otherwise would. AutoCAD for Mac would be bad for Autodesk Autodesk is currently trying to save money by closing down offices, dropping products, cutting down on expenses and sacking employees (some of whom were long-termers; irreplaceable sources of information about use of the product and why certain things were done the way they were). In such an environment, does it make sense to start up a new project with high resource requirements and limited potential benefits? Especially when it is just a repetition of a previous project that was a complete failure? So, in addition to costing Autodesk a lot of money and harming the quality of its core product, a failed AutoCAD for Mac would leave behind more Autodesk haters and be rather embarrassing.
I must admit that a lot of this is based on guesswork, but it’s educated guesswork. I’ve been educated by history, if nothing else. Autodesk’s corporate consciousness has an occasional habit of ignoring the lessons of history and repeating old mistakes. I hope AutoCAD for Mac – The Sequel isn’t one of those occasions. I understand why MAC users who use AutoCAD would want it on a MAC. That’s obvious.
If I owned a MAC I would probably want it to. I’m not a MAC user so maybe I’m biased. I don’t buy MAC’s because everything I do is in Windows. I would agree with Steve in saying that AutoCAD for MAC would be a bad idea.
Autodesk made more cuts last week, so that means less people to work on AutoCAD. People working on AutoCAD for MAC would mean less people working on AutoCAD. No need to repeat Steve’s post on his own blog, but he’s right. I think we may be looking at this all wrong: If AutoCAD for MAC was made and it did fail (which it probably would) perhaps that would help hasten ACAD’s overall demise!!! (Sorry CAD Users) Then we could rejoice: the AutoCAD is dead long live the BIM.
П™‚ Yes, I know there will be CAD drafting in AEC for a while longer, just like there are still hand-drafters but those niches and people are (mostly?) going to retire soon and in a generation or two most AEC people will only know of ACAD as a historical figure. As I mentioned on Shaan’s initial post in April, I think it’s a bad idea as well. Scratch that – AutoCAD on a Mac would be a complete disaster. In the final analysis, it simply would never generate the additional licenses required to pay for its development. While I would love to have an OS choice in what I would like to run AutoCAD on, Windows simply doesn’t suck as bad as some would believe. Windows 7 is absolutely going to be a huge success compared to Vista, and will nail the coffin shut on XP. And, if I was a person who felt that the OS always comes first, the fact is that I could get by on a Mac by using Parallels or other VM solution to “dumb down” the machine to run AutoCAD.
Then, factor in the hardware side of things. Mac runs only on Apple hardware, which are hardly considered bargains. You can install upgrades, but Apple’s high-end machine lineup is sorely lacking in the high-end stuff required to run AutoCAD and 3D apps well – particularly on laptops (the most popular form factor out there). And even though much of the core hardware is the same, if you do configure a high-end Mac workstation specifically for AutoCAD, you will be paying many more dollars compared to what you can get in a similar Windows box.
However, it will look a lot sexier. And in these tough economic times, I think it’s lunacy for Autodesk to think about dumping huge development dollars into the rabbit hole.
Those dollars have to come from somewhere, and it would have to come from the budgets of other development teams and/or higher product prices. AutoCAD for Mac would suck Not exactly, you would have a point if you believed that Microsoft API ‘s are the most efficient way to do things.
However, Microsoft’s API’s appear to be bloated and not very efficient. I agree with one point, Autodesk is entrenched in Microsoft and it will take a lot of work to get out from under it and return to platform independent code. They should have remained independent.
It would be interesting to see what lead to the decision to change. I’m not so sure it was a market-share driven decision rather than an alliance with Microsoft decision. In the end we, the customer, were left with no choice of OS to run their products on. Returning to platform independence will require Autodesk to develop their own libraries rather than using Microsoft libraries that are not specific to their needs. This could translate into better code and innovation across all of their products. Have you considered that they could use code from platform independent products they already have like Maya, that runs on Windows, OS X and Linux?
What appears to be happing, judging by the questions and news I have seen, Autodesk appears to be creating AutoCAD for OS X as a different product all together. This is not a good idea at all. They will be left with two sets of code to deal with.
They should move to platform independence. AutoCAD for Mac would be bad for Windows users Do you believe that Autodesk’s business model is to generate a new release of Autocad every 12 months that includes features to entice you to upgrade? Are you a subscription customer? Then you will upgrade no matter what they produce even if it is not on the AUGI Top Ten List. Or do you think that Autodesk’s business model is to include bells and whistles (ie: the Ribbon) to compete with others in the market and generate new customers and keep them on subscription? It is apparent with their new pricing structure that they intend to move people to subscription and generate new customers.
If you plan to buy Autocad and stay off subscription so that you can skip releases then you will paying the same price as buying Autocad when you upgrade. AutoCAD for Mac would be bad for Autodesk No, AutoCAD on Mac would be bad for Microsoft. Our company would certainly leave Microsoft and NEVER return. Basically, due to the amount of man-hours and money we have wasted dealing with Microsoft problems. You can’t quantify the total cost of ownership.
The jokes about a Microsoft car are funny because it’s true; take a minute to think, if any of you produced a project with the same track record as Windows would you still have a job or clients? Maybe it’s worth playing the lunatic-conspiracy theorist for a second. Let’s suppose Autodesk successfully ports AutoCAD over to the Mac.
And it KILLS. I mean it absolutely blows away AutoCAD’s performance on the Wintel platform in every area – launching speed, 3D modeling and rendering, memory usage, and so on. Furthermore, user testing reveals certain ancillary OS-specific things that make OS X a more robust, easier to use platform for AutoCAD than Windows. All of this would directly point to Windows being the root cause of poor AutoCAD performance. I don’t think that would go over too well with Microsoft. As a long time Mac user, and Autodesk customer, I was sad when development of appliations for the Mac ceased, and have always wished (especially since the advent of OS X) that Autodesk would come back to the Mac.
But many of the comments in the post are likely correct and irrelevant! I already run all Autodesk’s products on my Mac using virtualization (VM-Ware, Parellels, etc). With enough resources (Cores, RAM, Graphics Card), it’s viurtualy (no pun intended) the same as running the product on a PC. It’s the best of both worlds for a modest additional investment (a copy of Windows and some virtualization software). Perhaps Autodesk should be spending hard-won treasure on making their products run in these virtual environs more effectively. As a PC & Mac user (currently very happy with my Macbook Pro), I still teach AutoCAD.
I started to use it less and less. Frankly, I don’t see it happening.
If they really wanted it, it would have been here (again) for quite some time. That said, I would volunteer for beta-testing, as AutoCAD could use a new-generation makeover (not purely cosmetic).
They would not do bad following the approach of McNeel: release many pre-release versions for existing users (or even free) and only release it when it’s done. If AutoCAD for Mac would not be on the same level as AutoCAD on Windows (which seems likely from the survey), I don’t think they have a chance. Maye they are better off buying TurboCAD for Mac or something similar. Frankly, without 3D, scripting and programming and the potential of the verticals, they should better not do it.
I could live without the command line (maybe) if they revise their workflow. ArchiCAD works nice without command line yet still has good control over accuracy. Do not release a half-baked product. Steve, your point is a lot less loony than mine and probably valid. But I’m still banking that mine is true as well.
Recent Mep Part For Mac Pro
Basically, I was thinking that Autodesk possibly already HAS a Mac compatible version of AutoCAD in development, and that it totally rocks. A hugely successful port could have a lot of people scared and upset quite a few apple carts (pun quite unintended but kinda funny nonetheless). A successful Mac port would not only tell Autodesk’s suffering customers that they don’t have to stick it out with Windows.
Worse, it would tell other developers that their Windows-only products could be ported over to OS X and performance would improve. Developers might see this as reason enough to make the costly investment. Such a game-changing situation could potentially endanger Autodesk’s long-standing close relationship with Microsoft. This could also have longer-reaching consequences for hardware companies like Dell and HP, who make a lot of their profit in upselling workstation class hardware to design firms. I think creating a mac version is a good thing. I doubt that there will that much performance boost.
It is all intel hardware. Mental Ray (rendering engine) is already cross platform. I am not aware that there is that much difference between the maya versions. Addressing the resources to port autocad, if I remember right John Walker (autodesk’s founder) claims he ported autocad’s core in two days to Mac (Motorola). Seriously, the Mac people on here haven’t started a Mac verses PC war, but it does appear that the opposition to porting autocad are being less than honest and are really MIcrosoft fanboys. There are plenty of products that exist on both platforms and do not suffer from it. Namely Adobe products, Vectorworks, Maya, Archicad, etc.