Any Microstation/Geopak Users?

Chopping_Broccoli, post: 442434, member: 9083 wrote: Having learned my trade at a company that specialized in DOT projects, all my CADD experience has been Microstation with the addition of either Eaglepoint, Inroads, or Geopak.

It is WAAAAY overkill for what I do now as a solo praticioner, but it's what I know. I can run it blindfolded. All my previous work is in it, my cell libraries, sheet borders, line codes and custom line styles, and on and on. Migrating to a new platform seems very daunting.

I have heard that the latest version of Carlson will work with DGNs "natively". Anybody have any experience with that?

Any recommendations for a less powerful (read less expensive) drafting and modeling package that would be an easy transition from MS/Geopak?

Thanks

Well, I am also a diehard ustation guy. A few questions for you: you stated looking for a cheaper software? As I understood it, after the initial cost, select subscription is approx. The same as C3D yearly. Did I misunderstand that? I am hesitant, based on prior experiences converting dgn's with C3D, I would not attempt it. Better to stay in Ustation, the price you end up paying may be a lot more IMNSHO.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Somehow I knew Jawja would be one of the first with a reply to this thread, a formidable maker of maps in the micrustation realm he is!

have a look at PowerSurvey from Bentley ... not that expensive and will write both, dgn & dwg.

Strong Microstation/InRoads user here. I also use Carlson TakeOff with AutoCAD. I prefer using Microstation 95% of the time. If you are a Mstation power user, with the proper configurations of fonts, cell libraries, feature tables, styles, and preferences, then you will be very disappointed with Carlson Survey. Microstation is best for those that want to customize their workspace, create unique drawings or their own liking. Carlson is best for those not wanting to customize, they just want a canned set of working CAD standards that work right of the gate.

That said I like using both. Some routines are much better and quicker in one over the other, so I am constantly bouncing back and forth between platforms with the same DWG. Although Carlson is much less stable, so save often. Microstation auto save is awesome,. You'll find it really sucks in AutoCAD when it crashes and you did not save for the past 50 minutes. If you enable AutoSave in AutoCAD it will lock up your PC for short time when saving, creating more frustation.

Microstation handles true DWG formats effortlessly. AutoCAD and IntelliCAD do NOT play well with DGN files.

christ lambrecht, post: 442510, member: 284 wrote: have a look at PowerSurvey from Bentley ... not that expensive and will write both, dgn & dwg.

But... according to my sales rep, the power products are no longer available for purchase because of Open Roads. You have access to use them as a select subscriber but otherwise cannot get.

YES, Randy, you know how I feel about AwefulCAD.

Bentley now has a select subscription for $1500 every three months rather than the $10k upfront and $2100 A year renewal. They also have subscription that you give them $5k in advance and each month that you use Ustation for a chargeable period (the chargeable period is explained on their site, kind of complicated) then they charge you $500 that month. No use, no charge. They charge against deposit and let you know when you need to refill.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

leegreen, post: 442519, member: 2332 wrote: Strong Microstation/InRoads user here.... If you are a Mstation power user, with the proper configurations of fonts, cell libraries, feature tables, styles, and preferences, then you will be very disappointed with Carlson Survey. Microstation is best for those that want to customize their workspace, create unique drawings or their own liking. Carlson is best for those not wanting to customize, they just want a canned set of working CAD standards that work right of the gate.

Wow, that does not fill me with hope. I am about to start a CADD course using Carlson. I really like custom maps over canned all look the same maps. I guess it is the artist part of me.

leegreen, post: 442519, member: 2332 wrote: Microstation auto save is awesome,. You'll find it really sucks in AutoCAD when it crashes and you did not save for the past 50 minutes. If you enable AutoSave in AutoCAD it will lock up your PC for short time when saving, creating more frustation.

NOW THIS I AGREE TO! I love that my DGN saves automatically.

leegreen, post: 442519, member: 2332 wrote: Microstation handles true DWG formats effortlessly. AutoCAD and IntelliCAD do NOT play well with DGN files.

That was my fear. I will give AwefulCAD props for one thing: processing LiDAR data is much easier in C3D than Openroads in my experience. I did not have to do it often but I did have to do it. I would process in C3D and export area out as XML to import into Ustation.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Thanks guys for the update. I have my MS totally customized. It and Geopak work flawlessly. Rarely if ever crashes and I know it backwards and forwards. I know I would not be happy with generic looking drawings, instability, and loss of data.

It's Microstation for me. I guess it is just the price of doing business. I need to resign myself to it and quit dreaming of some low cost alternative.

After using AutoCad, C3D, etc for the past 30+ years, I now find myself in a position using Microstation V8i and Geopak ss4.

I not quite sure what the fanfare is with these programs. They're cumbersome at best..... but the guys here who have used them for 20+ years swear by them.... maybe I'll catch on in 20+ years...

I'm a longtime LDT/C3d user. 20 years now. C&G for 7 years before that. Over time I've been exposed to MicroStation/Inroads enough that I could make a few minor edits to a drawing if I needed to, and I have created alignments and surfaces in it.

My general impression is that it is less user friendly than C3d (which hardly seems possible) but that once ones fingers became fully attuned to the ins and outs of it - after some years use - it would be ......about the same.

I still miss C&G for boundary maps. Not so much for topo.