« Journalists and Bloggers-- Old School Meets New School | Main | Bloggers -- Kids in the Candy Store »

February 13, 2008



A core modelling and draughting system should be the base of a good CAD vendor’s product into which specialized ‘vertical’ applications

R.Paul Waddington

The name of the product is irrelevant in fact it is what it can do as a modeller that is important. MDT is just AutoCAD if you take the ‘nuts and bolts library’ out and if the word Mechanical is taken out of its name more Architects may have been able to take advantage of its modelling capabilities sooner.
A core modelling and draughting system should be the base of a good CAD vendor’s product into which specialized ‘vertical’ applications can be added as per individual customer requirements: vertical products have divided the market and worse still have condemned users and companies, who have to work in a multi-disciplinary environments to waste much money and made it more difficult, for some companies, to fill staff positions because of the polarization of individuals to use particular packages.
Your side issue: to say ‘MDT lost’ is to admit so did those who used it? That’s cool so long as it was not you or your money eh!


Kevin E.

Mr. Waddington, just keep using MDT. Let the rest of us dumb users keep using Inventor or Solidworks or whatever. It's over, MDT lost.


R.Paul Waddington

I have long argued Autodesk failed to see the true value of MDT’s abilities – for the entire design industry - because they were too busy looking for the next step to increase their revenue and over their shoulder instead of concentrating on their customers needs and revenue with more effort than lip service.

This ridiculously late and inaccurate statement, “why not use the best tools for the job? Certainly, all the really cool new building designs are curvaceous -- a stretch for traditional AEC applications but very possible with MCAD tools.” Demonstrates Autodesk still do not understand the ‘discipline’ of design documentation and still have an understanding to shape that is rooted in the relative complexity of a sphere or shoe box.

CAD vendors live in a bubble of belief that CAD is required to design and manufacture: they need to lose this perception and move their egos back to the plane they belong on as tool suppliers. They need to stop trying to steer and control design and start servicing it!

R.Paul Waddington

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)