![]() |
| CAD, CAM, CAE, design, technical drawing, drafting, delineation, visualization, manufacturing | ISSN 1442-2255 : 5/17/2008 - 2:23:45 AM |
|
DataCAD vs. AutoCAD in Academia: is it David vs. Goliath?"There is a debate taking place over DataCAD versus AutoCAD. Doubtlessly there are many others teaching DataCAD in academia. Why do you chose to teach DataCAD and what is your view about the architectural functionality of both programs?"
In the summer of 1999, another colleague of mine asked me this question and inspired me to put my response in writing. As many readers may already know, I have been involved with setting up CADD instruction at 9 colleges as well as several training centers. For programs with 18-year-old type students who need to go out there and get a job - I HAVE to teach them AutoCAD at least somewhere along the way. Not to do so would be irresponsible, and either they, their parents, or the administration would eventually come screaming back saying we taught them "the wrong" software. Similarly, though, pick any of 6 or 7 flavors of AutoCAD and you will have the same problem...even a supposedly up-to-date training center teaching AutoCAD 14 is going to have former students bewildered when they find themselves in any of the vast majority of AutoCAD 12 offices, or ones using AutoArchitect or ArchT (which many long term users still call "Ketiv") or ArchiBus, or, after a hiatus, are lost trying to use, say Architectural Desktop on top of ACAD 2001 or somesuch. For the schools, choosing to teach only one CADD program is a losing proposition. Regardless of what they teach it will be superseded by other software or future versions, and, as we all know, the vast majority of real offices actually lag behind a version or two (or three). My approach to this problem is not to teach one program (which makes the student entrench, and start looking at a limited scope of job prospects), but to teach at least three - always. Three, because human nature, people, always reluctant to learn the second one, will primarily just find faults (and hate) the second one. Having taught this stuff for now some 15 years and started students with every combination and then gone to every other combination this attitude is universal (and yes you do know AutoCAD users who "tried" DataCAD and hated it). Once the students get to their 3rd CADD package, again, almost universally, their attitudes change, mainly for the positive, about all three products, though they usually have preferences. About 5% will actually prefer AutoCAD, about 25% will prefer ArchiCAD, and, usually some 70% will like DataCAD the best - and yes I do surveys all the time. I personally find that when I can start a class with DataCAD first, then expose them to several weeks of AutoCAD and then finally a third program (like ArchiCAD, VectorWorks, etc.) that those classes learn the fastest, go the furthest, pick up what they need of AutoCAD faster, and write better reviews of the courses. High schools, colleges, and training centers are all confronted by the nightmarish black hole of costs. Every computer system in their labs MUST be replaced at minimum every 3.5 years and when fighting for funds with other departments, the cost of upgrading, maintaining, or switching CADD software is an added burden. Administrators and potential instructors like inexpensive CADD software license fees, since it is feasible (without a special meeting of the Board) and, because it HAS a COST, someone must be accountable and be hired to teach it - i.e. software that comes in free is frequently ignored -- an instant shelfware. I find that the best process is when a company (such as DataCAD LLC) finds an advocate willing to teach and an amenable school is to, at least officially, call it a Grant or Fellowship, consisting of special training for the potential faculty and the software, all of which makes the faculty happy and look good, makes the administration happy and look good, and so on. Thus you are not lowering the cost, you are not giving it away, you are awarding Grants to schools who have demonstrated that it will be taught properly - everyone wins.
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| All rights reserved © 1996-2007 Digital Business Media Pty Ltd | home : editorial archive : contact : legal |