[Henkka]

Ive run my old E6600 (2.4 stock or whatever, should have spent the extra for the Q) at 3.2 after the first boot to get to bios... This box is getting old though, almost 3 years i guess now, but nothing worth my time playing/doing needs more juice atm. Plus upgrading now would be buying into old tech.

[desertT1]

Oh you guys. At home I run a P4 @3GHz, 1.5Gb RAM, NVidia 128Mb PCI card for Pro. Works just fine. I pulled the card for a 16Mb Matrox that would allow me two monitors and models took forever to rotate... put the 128Mb card back in. One day I'll upgrade, but it does all I need it to. Can't argue with it being $50 from work either, minus 512Mb RAM and the video card.

[M98custom1212]

what are you running on it though

[y0da900]

Originally Posted by paintballa8224

Good, cause I have 2011 on my computer and I went to hand in my first assignment today for my CAD class and my professor told me they're not compatible. I guess he doesnt know what he's talking about?

I have 2011 on my machine at work, and 2010 at home, and the models work just fine jumping back and forth.

Autodesk seems to update the format roughly every 3 releases. There was a 2000 format .dwg, 2004 format, 2007, and 2010. 2010 will be able to open all files until probably version 2013.

Barring any portion of the model created entirely with new tools and features, those may not open properly.

[Leafy]

Holy ****, this is the first thing I've done in cad in forever. Its a 4 bar linkage designed to lift a wheel chair into the back seat of a chevy truck. I need to work on the end manipulator and actually come up with a finished designed instead of a "hey look my linkage makes the proper range of motion".

[Spitlebug]

Originally Posted by y0da900

I have 2011 on my machine at work, and 2010 at home, and the models work just fine jumping back and forth.

Autodesk seems to update the format roughly every 3 releases. There was a 2000 format .dwg, 2004 format, 2007, and 2010. 2010 will be able to open all files until probably version 2013.

Barring any portion of the model created entirely with new tools and features, those may not open properly.

2000 format is still the standard for most 2D DWGs. I really like the 2007 format though. Much more compact file size and handles 3D much better too.

[y0da900]

Compression ratio seems to be the big thing between versions aside for support for newer features.

The only time we use 2000 format is to send to a subcontractor or client who is using something older than 2004. Even for 2D, when you have tens of thousands of drawings, the superior compression you get in later versions is noticeable.

[Spitlebug]

Originally Posted by y0da900

Compression ratio seems to be the big thing between versions aside for support for newer features.

The only time we use 2000 format is to send to a subcontractor or client who is using something older than 2004. Even for 2D, when you have tens of thousands of drawings, the superior compression you get in later versions is noticeable.

Is it actually a compression format change or is it that they basically restructured the file system entirely instead of a cobbled together system?

[y0da900]

I would imagine that it is compression because we have done a handful of tests in zipping a "large" 2000 format DWG and saving the identical CAD file as a 2007 and 2010 format, and they end up being incredibly close in size. Zipping a 2007 file also tends to not reduce the size much if at all.

[Spitlebug]

That doesn't make sense at all. I think the reason that zipping the smaller file results in less compression because there is less binary data in the first place to compress.

[y0da900]

No, the 2007 and 2010 format by themselves are almost the same exact size as a zipped 2000 format file. Even taking a good sized 2007 file (~15MB) resulted in little to no reduction in file size when zipping.

[desertT1]

Originally Posted by M98custom1212

what are you running on it though

Pro/E Wildfire 3.0. I'm sure I could make it bog, but for paintball marker projects I've never had a problem. I've got a double barreled Sniper/Cocker that I'll have made eventually. I only modeled the parts I need made or modified (and barrels for some sort of scale reference) but I'll post those up soon to actually contribute some images.

[Spitlebug]

Originally Posted by y0da900

No, the 2007 and 2010 format by themselves are almost the same exact size as a zipped 2000 format file. Even taking a good sized 2007 file (~15MB) resulted in little to no reduction in file size when zipping.

Interesting. Why would they implement a built in compression algorithm?

[desertT1]

Originally Posted by Spitlebug

Interesting. Why would they implement a built in compression algorithm?

They gotta do something with those subscription fees

[Spitlebug]

Ouch.

[desertT1]

We just went from 05 to 2010 with AutoCAD and we just use the basic functions of the program, so I was asking why we did that since the old one did just fine for us. I guess we did it to get with the new program and not much else. I had prior experience with the new GUI, so I told them about it before we even started testing. It's nice that you can go back to classic view, but not sure why we got a new version. It isn't used on 99% of new stuff anyways, so it was a little odd. But, I just get stuff done, so the year of the program doesn't really bother me that much.

No burning meant on the comments though :p

[L_x]

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/09/06...ble-perso.html

$1500 3D printer, possibly big enough for a frame/body etc?

wannnnntttttt

[Leafy]

Wow a fully assembled one for 1500 That beats the Diy ones for 1500.

[Henkka]

140 x 140mm that is like 5.5" square... Pretty sure a cocker frame is smaller than that. Even my modified CCM RIP frame could be done on that.

[L_x]

Nice. Now I have to sell my other kidney. I am running out of body parts to auction off.

[Spitlebug]

That's basically a RepRap machine. You can buy RepRap kits for cheaper than that. Way cheaper.

http://reprap.org/wiki/Main_Page