Knowing what you know now, which version would you suggest I
purchase for a new biz?
Will likely be doing mostly boundary work(tentatively in a SPC projection every job)
I may take on some staking jobs, which would require handling
the latest and greatest $10K per/seat CAD drawing files sent over from the engineers.
Will the Embedded make up the cost difference in stability and versatility?
Is there a difference in the routines, or is the CAD platform unrelated
to the Carlson command menus?
Thanks friends
I use the IntelliCad. I love it. I started a few years ago doing mainly boundary and construction staking. I have never had an issue opening an architects or engineers file. It acts like and smells like AutoCAD but some to the key strokes are a little different. I came from LDD and had little learning curve.
We've been using Icad version for several months now. I came from Carlson with Acad 2002. Early release was a little buggy. We could still function, but it took a little patience. Revisions have been fast and furious and the current version seems to be very solid.
It opens up to 2010 version drawings directly. Realistically, even when I was running 2002, I could still use free software from Autodesk to save down drawings sent from engineers and architects that were more current. I wouldn't get too hung up on the version compatibility. I've not had any issues with actual dwg file compatibility when we've sent them to others.
Survey with Icad does everything we need, and I would say we're pretty progressive with our deliverables. Handles aerial images easily, topographic mapping is nifty, very capable least squares adjustments, field to finish is powerful, export/import Google Earth files, and I can generally use the same keyboard commands I was using with 2002.
I did copy a few hatch patterns over from my old software because they looked better than the Icad version.
> Will the Embedded make up the cost difference in stability .....?
Yes, I think it will. If you choose to go the Intellicad route save often and be prepared to experience crashes a couple times a day. Granted, my experience was coupled to a rather patched together network. Your mileage may differ. But if you are relying on this to put bread on the table, I think you err on the side of quality.
> Is there a difference in the routines, or is the CAD platform unrelated
> to the Carlson command menus?
You will see little or no difference in the specifically Carlson functions.
Go the embedded route.
I tried ICAD years ago, and almost convinced myself that I liked it. There were just too many bugs and I switched to embedded. It would take a lot to make me try ICAD again.
I use the ICAD version with the full civil suite. Works very well for me doing a wide variety of survey and civil projects.
But why believe me, go get the free 30 day demo. Find out for your self.
I actually downloaded the 30 day trial with IntelliCAD and like it.
I'm big on using GIS data and aerial photographs.
I haven't figured out how to convert the GIS data and photographs between coordinate systems and for some reason the photos do not come in in color.
I'm pretty sure through the GIS extension in IntelliCAD you can convert/transform coordinate systems I just haven't figured it out yet. As for the photos not being in color, I'm not sure what the problem is.
Overall I like the IntelliCAD route especially from a cost perspective. You could always upgrade to embedded when pockets are fat or at the end of year, instead of giving it to the Govt.
I have Icad .
If you go with it do as Norman said - "save often" .
IntelliCAD or Embedded Carlson 2013
> ...You could always upgrade to embedded when pockets are fat ...
Carlson, the company, is really cool this way. Full credit on upgrades. No BS.
