# Autodesk Fusion 360 or other free software?



## Kestrel1998 (Sep 5, 2020)

I've been using Inventor on a student license for a few years now, however will be graduating university in 2021 so this will no longer be valid.

What free or low-cost software does everyone use? Fusion 360 seems popular with model engineers and I imagine will be quite similar to Inventor. Is this my best bet going forward or is there anything else I should consider?

Sorry if this is a question that comes up a lot.

Cheers,

Calum


----------



## RM-MN (Sep 5, 2020)

I found Fusion 360 to be pretty complete but I didn't want to be harnessed to Autodesk and their changing policy regarding how the account can be used, expecting them to let me get "hooked" on their free version, then begin charging for its use.  Therefor, I switched to FreeCAD.  It wasn't a bad choice for me but I am not in the same age group as you and with different education.


----------



## BaronJ (Sep 5, 2020)

I've been using Qcad pro for quite some time now !  It does everything that I want.


----------



## JCSteam (Sep 5, 2020)

I've been using fusion, no background education in it. (36year old), I've found it quite intuitive, I've still loads to find out about how to use it but so far I've been happy. Not having any CNC capable machines I've not learned any of the toolpaths functions ect. It can be used as a free version and most of the features can be used. As far as I know exporting files is not available, but I need to look into it more, as it may be it needs to be in a certain completed state to be able to export. 
Regards
Jon


----------



## Charles Lamont (Sep 5, 2020)

I have been using Onshape for nearly 5 years now, starting while it was still in beta. I had a look at Fusion, but I think Onshape has a cleaner and more modern user interface. Lots of help and tutorials available.

I have a complete model petrol engine model modeled in Onshape, including all the cast shapes.  I am also using it to help with finalising later aspects of the design of a full size project and in some instances to model parts of it, often blacksmithing work, that were made by eye without a drawing.

You don't say what you are graduating in, but if an engineering discipline, you can even imort parts direct from Onshape into Simscale, the cloud-based FEA and CFD tool that is also free to use (within limits, obviously).


----------



## firebird (Sep 6, 2020)

Hi Calum
I was a big fan of CorelDraw (Which I owned with a serial No.) for many years. When I bought a new computer the programme would not re-install. CorelDraw then started to demand ridiculous amounts of money to "upgrade me". A quick search on the internet revealed an awful lot of people being treated the same way by CorelDraw. Also the upgraded version was not backward compatible and would not open any of my saved work!!!
I told them to shove it.
Another search led me to a programme called Inkscape.  Its free and open source. I have found it to do everything I need.
Cheers

Rich


----------



## xpylonracer (Sep 6, 2020)

I am using Fusion 360 as a hobby user so at present this is free to use. I am a bit old in the tooth  so taken a while to get things working as needed but now do the drawing, convert to model and then produce the G code program for the machine, either milling or turning.
There is a very good help section on the Autodesk site plus numerous How to videos on youtube.
I am more familiar with Alibre having used it for several years so sometimes do the model in Alibre and export the step file to Fusion, this is my quickest route to a cnc program for use with Mach, Linux or whatever machine control system you use.


----------



## Charles Lamont (Sep 6, 2020)

firebird said:


> I was a big fan of CorelDraw (Which I owned with a serial No.) for many years. When I bought a new computer the programme would not re-install. CorelDraw then started to demand ridiculous amounts of money to "upgrade me". A quick search on the internet revealed an awful lot of people being treated the same way by CorelDraw. Also the upgraded version was not backward compatible and would not open any of my saved work!!!
> I told them to shove it.
> Another search led me to a programme called Inkscape.  Its free and open source. I have found it to do everything I need.


These are just drawing programs, missing much of the valuable functionality of even simple 2D cad programs, such as the now sadly defunct Autosketch, which I am still using after 20 years.


----------



## mnay (Sep 6, 2020)

I love Autosketch and still use it at work for quick 2d stuff.  We use Fusion 360 for modeling etc.  I also use it for my hobby 3d printing. 
Mike


----------



## awake (Sep 6, 2020)

LibreCAD for 2d and FreeCAD for 3d. Neither has all of the bells and whistles of AutoCAD/Fusion, but both are more than capable enough for my needs.


----------



## TSutrina (Sep 6, 2020)

freeCAD is trying to be a complete product.  It has work benches for many different tasks from architecture, mechanical 3D  a tech drawing package,  finite element both fluid and stress, and a cnc package.   None are as easy to use as the commercial products but I have used it for years now.  Surface modeling is one area that I miss.  Some exist but not robust.   

 It will continue to grow.  cnc cookbook 2015 survey portion of the market: Soildworks 22.7%, AutoCAD 9.8%, Autodesk Inventor 8.8%, Alibre/Geomagic 8.2%, Draftsight 6.9%, fusion360 6.7%, Rhino 3D 5.3%, Google SketchUp 4.7%, Unigraphics NX 2.9%, BobCAD 2.2%, FreeCAD 2.0%, Pro/Engineering 2.0%, TurboCAD 2.0%, Ironcad 1.2%, OneCNC 1.2% CoCreate 1.0% SolidEdge 1.0% V iaCAD 1.0%   I am sure things have change.


----------



## Monster_Robotics (Sep 6, 2020)

xpylonracer said:


> I am using Fusion 360 as a hobby user so at present this is free to use. I am a bit old in the tooth  so taken a while to get things working as needed but now do the drawing, convert to model and then produce the G code program for the machine, either milling or turning.
> There is a very good help section on the Autodesk site plus numerous How to videos on youtube.
> I am more familiar with Alibre having used it for several years so sometimes do the model in Alibre and export the step file to Fusion, this is my quickest route to a cnc program for use with Mach, Linux or whatever machine control system you use.


Agree - Fusion 360 ‘Hobby’ edition is a good all around including the features of Manufacturing.   I love everything about this version except it does not let users share files.   Difficult if you’re trying to get help or collaborate with another user.


----------



## comstock-friend (Sep 6, 2020)

Fusion 360, as retired hobbiest (free). Use for tool paths for my Tormach PCNC mill...
John


----------



## Monster_Robotics (Sep 6, 2020)

I use it for a Tormach and a Router running on Mach 4


----------



## Chriske (Sep 7, 2020)

I use Autodesk Inventor, a very old one. I have a personal license from my old employer.
But that does the job for me, in fact it has a zillion times more functions on board then I'll ever need. *Very* powerfull..! When I was still working at school I drew and built a complete scale-model railway and Stirling Engines (even a two cylinder) with this software. As matter of fact, I ran two locs and 50 wagons as one unit on that track.
Now I draw (and build) telescopes and model rockets with it.(mostly 3D printed)


----------



## grahamgollar (Sep 7, 2020)

I find that DraftSight by Dassault Systems is the nearest freecad to AutoCad. It's comprehensive, has most of the functions needed by mechanical engineers, an extensive help file and there are many on line forums dealing with users queries and nuances of the software.


----------



## Kestrel1998 (Sep 7, 2020)

Thanks guys, lots of options to consider there. I've been playing around with Fusion and liking it so far mainly due to how similar it is to Inventor. As others have said though, I wouldn't be surprised if Autodesk stopped offering the hobbyist license for free at some point, so I'll maybe try out some of the other recommendations before I commit.

Looking forward to sharing some of my future projects on here!


----------



## comstock-friend (Sep 7, 2020)

DraftSight was free, but they blew that away this year. For just quicky CAD I'm using nanoCAD 5 (of course that means the Russians probably have all my computer mapped out but...)
John


----------



## johnwm (Sep 7, 2020)

For a full 3D CAD package try the free version of OnShape (Free Plan | Onshape). It's comprehensive and very easy to learn and will output drawings to DXF for CNC milling/plasma as well as STL for £D printing. Only limitation is that all your work is automatically public - great for sharing stuff, but not so good for stuff you might want to sell. You need the paid version for commercial stuff.


----------



## Henry K (Sep 7, 2020)

Hi John,
  Depending on your needs, you may like DoubleCAD XT by Turbocad. It is "like" Draftsight". A very good 2D drawing program that is still free, as of 9/7/2020. It generates reasonable recent versions of AutoCAD DWG files. You can share files with AutoCad and Draftsight users.


----------



## Henry K (Sep 7, 2020)

John,
  Make that DoubleCAD XT5
Henty


----------



## TSutrina (Sep 7, 2020)

I have been using free or nearly free cad software for decades.  I have at work used the 2D drafting software developed by Boeing.  AutoCAD 2D is junk in comparison.  That was first on grouped work stations running as terminals off a main frame computer.  Before PCs.  I have an elbow drafting machine that I created drawing on velum in those days, E size.

Marched may way through ProE, Solid Works UG. at work.   Free software started with Granite which was discontinued.  Creo is also a free ProE 3D software, both had limit on size and export format.  Tried a few others with my requirement of accepting STEP or IGES format and have a 2D capacity.  That left out all the budget packages except one.  Which I purchase and about two years later when belly up.  

For the last few years ~ 3 to 4, I am using FreeCAD.  It has improved significantly from version 13.  Version 15 had a technical drafting package.  The Atlas F model lathe on GrabCAD has hundreds of parts all created on version 15 or 16, no limits.  Downward compatibility existed to version 16.  A new overall structure change occurred with 17 with capability to bring in with some work models from earlier version.  Compatibility continues within later version 18.  And it has the widest breath of work benches and connections to other modeling software.  NO COMMERCIAL employer I have worked for had licenses for the width of capacity. 

The capacity of commercial packages are better.  Both in surface model building and drafting need work.  But one can build almost anything and create 2D drawing that are usable.  Every commercial package have problems also but people have learned how to work around them.  The ability to find out from others how to get around a problem is lost with you being a lone user at home.   I would put the problems of FreeCAD in solid 3D modeling different then those in ProE or UG but requiring just as much effort to work around their problems.  Have not used Solid Works enough to really find out the problems. 

 The software is totally free and is up in the top group of software used  A CNC survey I found done in 2015 said it has about 2% of the market which is the same portion as ProE.  BobCAD, Rino, and Google sketch had greater market share.  The last two are not 3D technical design software packages.  I think freeCAD is going to stay around and continue to get better.

Understand that Autodesk Fusion 360 and the other free software packages all have a goal of moving you towards licensing on a yearly bases, profit stream.   The reduced packages are pure profit once the commercial thousands of dollar package are developed.   Granite was purchased to end competition and simple enough to offer free so ProE could get a taste.  Creo part of ProE stopped the free packages and has as Fusion 360 is doing a low budget license.   Expect only the student version will remain free in the future and you will get hurt to much.


----------



## awake (Sep 7, 2020)

FreeCAD is definitely improving at a rapid pace. I am currently using 0.18.4, eagerly awaiting for 0.19 - I've played with the development releases a bit, but prefer to stick with a stable release as my main workhorse.

By all accounts, Fusion360 is the cat's meow ... but I am reluctant to invest time in an ecosystem that could at any time become fee-only. And as I said above, I can do everything I need to do, and more, with FreeCAD.


----------



## bikr7549 (Sep 7, 2020)

I've been using Onshape for almost 2 years and am very pleased with it. It is parametric/solids and works pretty well, and is free. The company was bought up by PTC (the Pro/Engineer/Creo company) about 1 year ago and while my previous experiences with them were not the best so far all is ok. Many free tutorials and Home Shop Machinist ran a recent series on getting started with it. I used Free CAD for a bit and it worked ok but is not nearly as refined to use as Onshape in my opinion.


----------



## Richard Hed (Sep 8, 2020)

Chriske said:


> I use Autodesk Inventor, a very old one. I have a personal license from my old employer.
> But that does the job for me, in fact it has a zillion times more functions on board then I'll ever need. *Very* powerfull..! When I was still working at school I drew and built a complete scale-model railway and Stirling Engines (even a two cylinder) with this software. As matter of fact, I ran two locs and 50 wagons as one unit on that track.
> Now I draw (and build) telescopes and model rockets with it.(mostly 3D printed)


Oh oh,oh!  a fellow telescopist!  I too am building telescopes.  I have one in the Philippines that I am trying to get the last polishing done but just can't quite get it right.  Here, in USA, I haven't started a 6" (an 8" is after that), as I am working 13-14 hrs to have $$ for all these hobbies.  Looks like it will be a fall/winter hobby this year.  Do you use your telescopes to view the nebulae or are you selling them?


----------



## Richard Hed (Sep 8, 2020)

Kestrel1998 said:


> Thanks guys, lots of options to consider there. I've been playing around with Fusion and liking it so far mainly due to how similar it is to Inventor. As others have said though, I wouldn't be surprised if Autodesk stopped offering the hobbyist license for free at some point, so I'll maybe try out some of the other recommendations before I commit.
> 
> Looking forward to sharing some of my future projects on here!


That's the way of many software companies:  get you hookt on the software, then start charging for it.  they would probably make more $$ if they were more sensible, that is, charge a small fee, say $20 for a year instead of offering "free" software.  They could give you a couple months to try it, and if you continue with it, then charge for a year.  But NO, they foolishly "give it to you" (up the what?), then take it back and want a stupendous fee.  I have Inventor 6, and it is very nice but I understand the newer versions are circles, squares and triangles faster and easier.  I also have AutoCAD 2004i Architectural which is what I use most for mechanical stuff.  It is 3D but much more difficult than 3D which is written from the get go (the start) to be 3D.  Many more buttons to press and operations to get 3D but still, it is quite adequate and powerful.  The place it really falls flat is the 2D flat layouts, plans, views which is a mess to deal with.


----------



## TSutrina (Sep 8, 2020)

bikr7549 said:


> I've been using Onshape for almost 2 years and am very pleased with it. It is parametric/solids and works pretty well, and is free. The company was bought up by PTC (the Pro/Engineer/Creo company) about 1 year ago and while my previous experiences with them were not the best so far all is ok. Many free tutorials and Home Shop Machinist ran a recent series on getting started with it. I used Free CAD for a bit and it worked ok but is not nearly as refined to use as Onshape in my opinion.


----------



## Richard Hed (Sep 8, 2020)

bikr7549 said:


> I've been using Onshape for almost 2 years and am very pleased with it. It is parametric/solids and works pretty well, and is free. The company was bought up by PTC (the Pro/Engineer/Creo company) about 1 year ago and while my previous experiences with them were not the best so far all is ok. Many free tutorials and Home Shop Machinist ran a recent series on getting started with it. I used Free CAD for a bit and it worked ok but is not nearly as refined to use as Onshape in my opinion.


I was going to check out Onshape on your recommend, but the moment I found it was "cloudspace", forget it, will not do it.


----------



## TSutrina (Sep 8, 2020)

Granite, Creo, and now Onshape.   If PTC is following the normal approach your aloud to import many formats but very few export formats.  Typically one STL  which is useless as an import to another 3D modeling software.  

Creo if I remember had a number of parts limit.     Now if you do not have much experience with designing parts then I would start with programs like Creo or Onshape because the platform is easier to use then FreeCAD.  But if you want to have a model that you can provide someone else then you need to store the model in step or IGUS. 

Now you will have to tell me.  Creo once saved, shut down the program, and then start Creo import the model  the parametric information is lost.  This is an option on UG.    For big models with dozens of steps I know from experience that the loss of history of the building of the model is a good thing because it is near impossible to go back dozens of step in an effort to repair the model.     So tell me what type of software is Onshape.  Full history stored model like ProE or something like a step saved model like Creo.


----------



## Richard Hed (Sep 8, 2020)

awake said:


> FreeCAD is definitely improving at a rapid pace. I am currently using 0.18.4, eagerly awaiting for 0.19 - I've played with the development releases a bit, but prefer to stick with a stable release as my main workhorse.
> 
> By all accounts, Fusion360 is the cat's meow ... but I am reluctant to invest time in an ecosystem that could at any time become fee-only. And as I said above, I can do everything I need to do, and more, with FreeCAD.


Just out of curiosity, does anyone here contribute to the "Free"Cads?  It helps them stay in business and you can decide how much you are willing to contribute.  I doesn't like contributing to the commercial people but the "free" peeps I occassionally contribut to.


----------



## TSutrina (Sep 8, 2020)

Richard Hed said:


> Just out of curiosity, does anyone here contribute to the "Free"Cads?  It helps them stay in business and you can decide how much you are willing to contribute.  I doesn't like contributing to the commercial people but the "free" peeps I occassionally contribut to.


  If you start looking at discussions of FreeCAD and who is making work benchs and modules you will find China has many users.   It is also popular in other cultures that have developed Lenix.   I am sure there is an approach to fund the web site for the people using their skills to develop the software.   I expect to see a commercial version with expanded features appear on the market.


----------



## MrMetric (Sep 8, 2020)

When evaluating a "free" tool, there is one thing that I think we should all be considering.  Most of the products out there require continual 'upping' of the license and/or a constant connection to a license server on the internet.  This is important because you never really know how long it will be before the rug is pulled out from under you.  An example of this is DraftSight.  It was free for years, people got used to it, and then wham! Now you need to pay a yearly subscription fee. Fusion360 could *easily* go down the same road.  NanoCAD v5 requires a license tied to your computer (non-transportable) which makes it very suspect too.  What happens when you want to upgrade your computer?  Will you still be able to register that version?

Because software developers really only listen to the market (full disclosure... that is my profession), more people that complain about yearly licenses are the only way that there is a (remote) possibility that companies will move away from the subscription model.  Subscriptions are *not* good things.  They are expensive and you are at the whim of a company either going out of business or ceasing to support a product.  With a traditional license key, you'd be able to continue using the program on your computer even though it wasn't supported by the vendor.

I'm going to look at the DoubleCAD product to see if it can manage as a DraftSight substitute.  I bought QCAD, which has a permanent license, but I've had mixed results with it, frankly.  On the one side, I am extremely grateful to have *something*, but I do prefer DraftSight.  Sadly, many of my drawing elements did strange things when imported into QCAD too, which gives me some pause.... NanaCAD 5, the free version, imported old drawings very well, but I'm *very* concerned by the restrictive binding to a single computer with the license file.  That reeks of something that could cause problems in the future.

Anyhow, just my 2 cents on things to think about when investing (your time) in a "free" product.


----------



## Chriske (Sep 9, 2020)

Do not use online CAD software. After a while they will charge you.
You can download a Autodesk Inventor student version. It's free but it has a few restrictions. But nothing to worry about.
As I said before : *VERY* power full.


----------



## Chriske (Sep 9, 2020)

@ Richard, it's a hobby.
Building a 20" this very moment.


----------



## lohring (Sep 9, 2020)

As an old time draftsman, I graduated directly from a K&E drafting machine to Fusion 360.  It's a very new experience.  There are lots of great tutorials on YouTube.  Of course Autodesk can probably eliminate the free version.  In addition, they have captured your files in their cloud storage.  My friends who use Solidworks on a limited basis have pirated versions.  Maybe Autodesk thinks the help from new, inexperienced users uncovering bugs outweighs the loss of revenue.  I'm on my third year on the free version.  It's been great for elaborate engine designs as well as simpler designs for 3D printing.  We'll see how long it lasts.

Lohring Miller


----------



## L98fiero (Sep 10, 2020)

lohring said:


> As an old time draftsman, I graduated directly from a K&E drafting machine to Fusion 360.  It's a very new experience.  There are lots of great tutorials on YouTube.  Of course Autodesk can probably eliminate the free version.  In addition, they have captured your files in their cloud storage.  My friends who use Solidworks on a limited basis have pirated versions.  Maybe Autodesk thinks the help from new, inexperienced users uncovering bugs outweighs the loss of revenue.  I'm on my third year on the free version.  It's been great for elaborate engine designs as well as simpler designs for 3D printing.  We'll see how long it lasts.
> 
> Lohring Miller


If you think about it, Autodesk got to where it is because of the pirated versions of Autocad, all the people that learned on the pirated versions bought the product when they graduated to the point where they needed a legitimate CAD package as they already knew the product.
Personally, I never used Autocad, even the free/pirated versions that I did have, I never was good on the keyboard but instead found an inexpensive program that ran on my Atari ST. Can't recall the name but it was remarkably similar to the newer packages in layout, a lot like my copy of TurboCAD V16 but 10 years earlier. That led to investigating Solidworks, again with a 'free' copy but ended up with Alibre, largely because it's 1/3 of the base price of Solidworks for the Expert version. In talking with CAD professionals that have used many different high end CAD what I've learned is that they are pretty much equivalent in functionality, they all have quirks and they all have strengths and weaknesses, a lot of what you like and use depends on what you learn on.


----------



## MrMetric (Sep 10, 2020)

You are absolutely right.... The dirty secret is that pirated software is what helped develop the industry into the powerhouse that is today.  The SPA doesn't really like to admit that, but it is absolutely true.  And, yes, AutoCAD benefited from that too.  You get a bunch of people used to the product and when the work for a company, they go legit.  So, when the SPA talks about 'lost revenue', it really isn't very accurate because only a small portion of those folks would have purchased the product, and many of the people who ended up buying the product might *not* have done so if they hadn't been introduced to it through less than legit ways.

I used to work for a  large company that produces a consumer software product that is used yearly.  Before I got there, the story was that a manager wanted to 'secure' the product and went to lengths to ensure this occurred.  Unfortunately, sales plummeted that year and holy hell broke loose. Why?  Because people couldn't buy the product and give it to their friends.  The company ended up taking an ad out in the paper to effectively apologize (in the political way that companies do) for what really amounted to enforcing licensing of the product.  I heard different rumors about what happened to the manager.

Marketing, sales, and enforcement are all a triad that companies look at very carefully..... And, by the way, this is why subscriptions are so attractive to companies now.  They lower the cost of entry to hopefully get the otherwise pirate revenue, and have a consistent benefit of income.  Personally, however, I'm NOT a fan of subscriptions.  I like to own something with a single payment.  I own my house, my cars, my computers, etc.  I'm old school... If I can't afford it, I don't purchase it.... So when I have to lease a piece of software, then I feel like I'm leasing a car, and I won't do that.  This is why I purchased QCAD.  I'd have purchased NanoCAD or Draftsight but they are subscription based.

Regarding the comment about not using online products.... I agree, but I also have to say that subscriptions are not that much different.  You are still at the pricing mercy of the company.  If they decide to raise the price or they go out of business, you are still up the proverbial creek.  You may have the files, but you don't have a way to access them

By the way, this is a good reason to persist your files in non-native (or older) formats, if possible too.  I milestoned my DWG files as DXF periodically, just because I wasn't sure how transportable DraftSight's implementation of DWG was.  It turns out that this was a good idea.  QCAD only did a moderate job of reading the DWG file... Not horrible, but not as clean as I'd have liked.


----------



## Chriske (Sep 11, 2020)

The best way to secure your drawings is to export them all in STP or STEP format.
Not to be used as your standard files of course.
If you do not own CAD software or for whatever reason you are forced or need to switch to other CAD software, well, STEP / STEP can be imported in all existing CAD software. Even in some 3D modelling software like 3DS, Maya,..


----------



## Joseph Comunale (Sep 11, 2020)

Kestrel1998 said:


> I've been using Inventor on a student license for a few years now, however will be graduating university in 2021 so this will no longer be valid.
> 
> What free or low-cost software does everyone use? Fusion 360 seems popular with model engineers and I imagine will be quite similar to Inventor. Is this my best bet going forward or is there anything else I should consider?
> 
> ...


Calum- AutoDesk is very generous to students - and will provide you with at least one (generally several) student version license.
- If you are a student at a Community College - and have an educational email address - they will accept that and let you use their student software for free.
- It's a great way to keep current with their software - and a BRILLIANT way to get their software embedded into the work place.  Good Marketing Practice Autodesk!

Joe


----------



## popnrattle (Sep 11, 2020)

L98fiero said:


> If you think about it, Autodesk got to where it is because of the pirated versions of Autocad, all the people that learned on the pirated versions bought the product when they graduated to the point where they needed a legitimate CAD package as they already knew the product.
> Personally, I never used Autocad, even the free/pirated versions that I did have, I never was good on the keyboard but instead found an inexpensive program that ran on my Atari ST. Can't recall the name but it was remarkably similar to the newer packages in layout, a lot like my copy of TurboCAD V16 but 10 years earlier. That led to investigating Solidworks, again with a 'free' copy but ended up with Alibre, largely because it's 1/3 of the base price of Solidworks for the Expert version. In talking with CAD professionals that have used many different high end CAD what I've learned is that they are pretty much equivalent in functionality, they all have quirks and they all have strengths and weaknesses, a lot of what you like and use depends on what you learn on.


I like your post and agree. The problems I have is when they replace some features that suited me at the time and have to take extra laps to use the new feature. But sometimes after a some negative responses from users they offer that old command with the word "classic". I suppose they gotta justify a new yearly version.


----------



## MrMetric (Sep 11, 2020)

AutoDesk rocks, IMHO, with its support of the hobbyist and small business community.  This does *not* mean that I am comfortable with the product though.  I've been around long enough to know that the DRaftSight/Alibre model of "hook 'em and then X%@#$ them" can happen anywhere, even AutoDesk.  My hope is that they are big enough that they can see the value of the noise (us) and realize that hooking them may mean sales in the future. Let's face it, sales through conversation of goodwill (such as here) are also directly related to their current practices.

However, not all big companies think that way.  DraftSight is developed by Solidworks, which was bought by Dassault Systemes.  Their yearly revenue is 3.2 billion dollars which is effectively the same as AutoDesk's 3.3 billion dollars.  There is a very real possibility that AutoDesk may pull the plug at any time, which is why I've continually looked for products I can buy, not rent, or which are freeware.  QCAD is definitely an interesting play.  I suspect it will do 95% of what most people want to do here, but it is not 3D.  I've not had great luck with FreeCAD or other parametric solid applications.

I generally try not to fall in love with things like Fusion 360 for the above reasons.  Usually this is a "must..... resist...." thing though because I think F360 is very very very cool.  And it beats the socks off Solidworks because I can use all of those cool features for free.  I have a yearly license for SW (through a membership to an organization), but a fairly limited set of modules, so I don't really use it much.  A lot of that has to do with my distrust of Dassault after the DraftSight debacle.  So far, AutoDesk has been far more friendly to hobbyists.


----------



## RonGinger (Sep 16, 2020)

I always expected Autodesk would cut off the free version, and today I see they have severely restricted what works in the free version. No more dxf output, several CAM features removed, lots of other restrictions.

All the old sayings- No free lunch, you get what you pay for, etc.

Damn, I think I will go back to Alibre, at least it is a price I can afford for hobby use.


----------



## JCSteam (Sep 17, 2020)

RonGinger said:


> I always expected Autodesk would cut off the free version, and today I see they have severely restricted what works in the free version. No more dxf output, several CAM features removed, lots of other restrictions.
> 
> All the old sayings- No free lunch, you get what you pay for, etc.
> 
> Damn, I think I will go back to Alibre, at least it is a price I can afford for hobby use.


Can you elaborate for the lesser knowing, what do you need dxf for, is it for printing, laser cutting, or just to export an entire model with all parameters, dimensions included. 

I still finding my way through Fusion 360, and CAD in general, and I have a free licence for personal, not for profit hobby use.

Regards
Jon


----------



## xpylonracer (Sep 17, 2020)

RonGinger said:


> I always expected Autodesk would cut off the free version, and today I see they have severely restricted what works in the free version. No more dxf output, several CAM features removed, lots of other restrictions.
> 
> All the old sayings- No free lunch, you get what you pay for, etc.
> 
> Damn, I think I will go back to Alibre, at least it is a price I can afford for hobby use.



Hi Ron
Only problem I have with your plan is the Alibre package I use has no CAM feature and when I last researched it the price was OTT for my hobby use, have you found a reasonable priced CAM/Post processor to export your files to ?

xpylonracer


----------



## coulsea (Sep 17, 2020)

I have the free personal licence and can export to DXF. fusion 360 is the first 3D program that i have used and find it really easy to use but i would really like something that i can load onto my computer and not work in a cloud


----------



## OllyM (Sep 17, 2020)

I've *just* (as in yesterday) started trying CamBam for generating g-code for a little desktop milling machine I've just finished building. So far so good! Not as pretty as Fusion, but pretty easy to pick up. Evaluation version (which I'm using) gives you 40 free sessions until it limits the amount of g-code it will generate, and costs £93 to buy a license. Also, doesn't appear to use the cloud in any way, so no net connection required. I have no affiliation, just like what I've seen so far and like to support little independent businesses.

Cheers,

Oliver


----------



## xpylonracer (Sep 17, 2020)

Hi Oliver

Looks impressive except for not supporting G91 Incremental moves, will have a deeper look and trial the program to see if it suits me as well as my machines, does it output post processor for mill and lathe using Mach 3 ?

xpylonracer


----------



## BaronJ (Sep 17, 2020)

JCSteam said:


> Can you elaborate for the lesser knowing, what do you need dxf for, is it for printing, laser cutting, or just to export an entire model with all parameters, dimensions included.
> 
> I still finding my way through Fusion 360, and CAD in general, and I have a free licence for personal, not for profit hobby use.
> 
> ...



Hi Jon,

I use Qcad, having originally used Autocad !  I've used Qcad for a few years as the free community edition and bought a license for the things that the professional version offers.

DXF is drawing exchange format and besides allowing you to export your drawing for almost any manufacturing purpose also allows you to import the files into almost any drafting software.

You can freely share your work using DXF where Autocad's DRW format isn't always readable.


----------



## stanstocker (Sep 17, 2020)

Hi Folks,

As for Fusion 360, well... anyone remember 123D?

Alibre has been mentioned.  I played with Atom 3D, and like the application itself as an affordable 3D CAD package.  Very clean, quick, flows well in use.  It just feels good, very few awkward bumps while making a widget.

It all sounds good until you dig into the licensing:

 "You own it, no cloud" is their pitch.  Yeh, right, OK, how come it has to call home every month to stay active?  If you OWN it, why do you need Alibres permission to use it after the sale?  Want updates?  Buy maintenance.  Can't have it on more than one machine unless you go online and move the license... Wonder what happens when they decide to take down the license server.  It isn't like Alibre hasn't boned their customers before. Darn shame, it's actually a very nice package to use. 

I bought the full Vectric VCarve several years ago.  They don't require you to pay maintenance.  They provided several upgrades for free, and I've only purchsed one upgrade over the years, for around $90 USD.  It's on several machines in several of my shop buildings, obviously working alone only one copy is in use at any time.  Vectric doesn't call home to mommy to get permission to run, with or without a network, it just runs.  Somehow they make money and sell well regarded software.  I wish they had a 3D cad module, you know for $300 or so I'd buy it if it works as well as their other apps.  Quite often I just use the 2D drawing tools in Vcarve to get things done.

Guess it's FreeCAD, seems OK but it just feels awkward in places.  I keep having issues with either not being able to fully constrain or ending up over constrained.  Probably me being dense, it will likely fall into place after a week or so of beating it into my head.  At least it runs pretty well on linux and windoze, can't comment on the Mac version.

Blender is great for organic shape sorts of stuff, but it's always seemed too different from CAD for mechanical "drafting" sorts of uses, and their constraints seem all or mostly related to objects and actions on objects rather than to the relationships between line segments and such.  I may go play a bit and see if it makes more sense this time around, it's been at least a year since I last played with Blender.

Best to all,
Stan


----------



## dsage (Sep 17, 2020)

Have a look in the news. There will be big changes to the  "free" Fusion 360 as of October 1. If you use the Gcode machining features they will be severely crippled. No rapid moves no tool changes. Maybe I have it wrong. Read the whole announcement.

Changes to Fusion 360 for personal use | Fusion 360 | Autodesk Knowledge Network


----------



## kquiggle (Sep 17, 2020)

I'm going to put in another plug for OnShape which also has a free version. 

I looked at Fusion 360 but they stopped offering a Linux version so not an option for me. Now they are cutting back further on their free version. I have no inside information, but if I was going to bet I would bet that further restrictions on free use will be coming. Possibly free use will be eliminated altogether. My guess is that Fusion 360 is either moving to a strictly corporate customer base, or possibly selling the company or merging with another company. I can't see them making a move like this unless it was part of a larger plan. 

A few additional comments :

I have no financial connection to OnShape; I'm just a satisfied (free) customer. Free tutorials are also available.

OnShape is cloud based and works on Linux, Mac, and Windows.

The only real limitation on the free version that am aware of is that al of your files must be public. As a hobbyist I always put my work in the public domain anyway, so this is not a limitation for me. A further clarification: Making your files public does not automatically put them in the public domain, but of course it does give access to the world.

OnShape does not currently have a CAM output option, so anyone needing this would have to export STL to another program.

There is of course no guarantee that OnShape will not put further restrictions on free use in the future, or revoke free use altogether, just as Fusion 360 is doing.

There are numerous import and output formats with OnShape :

OnShape exports parts, Part Studios, Assemblies, Drawings, and tabs containing other imported CAD files to these CAD formats.

*Parts and Part Studios*

Parasolid B-rep (.x_t or .x_b) from v25 to v33
Parasolid mesh (.xmt_txt or .xmt_bin) from v28 to v29
ACIS (.sat) R21
STEP (.step) AP214 (geometry only)
STEP 3D AP242 E2
IGES (.igs or .iges) 5.3
SOLIDWORKS (.sldprt) 2004
STL
GLTF
Rhino (.3dm)
Collada (.dae) 1.4.1 without joints data (with meters as default units)
*Assemblies*

Parasolid B-rep (.x_t or .x_b) from v25 to v33
ACIS (.sat) R21
STEP (.step) AP214 (geometry only)
IGES (.igs or .iges) 5.3
STL
GLTF
Collada (.dae) 1.4.1 without joints data (with meters as default units)
*Drawings*

DXF (.dxf) Release 11-14, 2000, 2004, 2007, 2010, 2013, 2018
AutoCAD (.dwg) Release 11-14, 2000, 2004, 2007, 2010, 2013, 2018
DWT Template (.dwt) 2013, 2018
PDF


----------



## MrMetric (Sep 17, 2020)

Wow.  Did I call it on Fusion360 or what!  Frankly, I'm happier buying a lower end product and dealing with oddities, I think. Get something you *own* and not any of this subscription BS.  I steadfastly refuse to become a party to monthly fees. And, no... I don't have cable TV.  I grudgingly DO have a cell phone, but I don't subscribe to AppleTV, NetFlix or any of the other subscriptions.  I add up how much they'll cost over the year and 9.5/10 times I quickly decide I don't want to pay that much.  I'm cheap.

I'm happy with 2.5D on my CNC.  I was looking forward to tinkering with 3D, but it isn't that important to me.  CamBam is probably where I'm heading next.  I've looked at them in the past with interest.  I've not been super thrilled with the output from QCAD.  The gcode it produces is *very* primitive, which makes it difficult to read/check.  Pecking for drills is literally a separate call for each up and down versus letting the control do it.  But... it does work.

I think I'd still like to use Fusion360 but the big problem there is that I simply don't trust AutoDesk.  I don't think they are selling the company, or the product; I think they are just trying to capitalize on the installed base now that people have gotten used to it. They put out a sparkly lure with nice bait... let it sit in the water, people bit, and now they are reeling it in to see what flops in the boat.  OK, that is their right, I get it.... Just as it is my right to say, "no... I want to *own* a product, not lease it"


----------



## Cogsy (Sep 17, 2020)

MrMetric said:


> I steadfastly refuse to become a party to monthly fees. And, no... I don't have cable TV.  I grudgingly DO have a cell phone, but I don't subscribe to AppleTV, NetFlix or any of the other subscriptions.  I add up how much they'll cost over the year and 9.5/10 times I quickly decide I don't want to pay that much.  I'm cheap.



I don't know what free-to-air TV is like in your area but where I live it's terrible, so I do have cable and Netflix as well. Cable supplies my sports and some other general interest stuff, and Netflix lets me watch a movie or TV series when I want to. I just had a quick look at 'buying' a couple of shows on DVD, Trailer Park Boys (which I watch) and Friends (for the wife). Complete box sets of them both would run me around $220 but for my $15 this month I can binge watch the whole lot while the kids are watching something else on their personal devices (if I had the time and inclination anyway). 

I think subscriptions have their place, especially when you're getting frequent valuable updates and access to support which happens on some of the software that I use. Some of the products that virtually every one of us uses are subscription based and we just take it for granted (insurance, electricity, drivers and vehicle licenses, etc.). It's a business model that works and provides the companies incentive to continue supporting and improving their product to remain competitive in their fields. We're all extremely lucky we get provided as much as we do for free - imagine having to pay for your internet browser or subscribe to a search engine service!


----------



## MrMetric (Sep 17, 2020)

All true, Cogsy.... I can't disagree with you.... And yet, my parents didn't have any of this stuff and they were extremely happy.  They were also, in many ways, better off financially.  We are bled in so many ways that we often forget.  It is one of the reasons that so few people really save for retirement.  But, no problem there... The government will always take care of us.

OK, that last bit was punchy... But I can't fault companies for wanting subscriptions.  I just think people should push back on it. It is not, in general, a good idea for consumers.  The software companies I've worked for wish they had more subscriptions.  I remember a very interesting conversation with some people from Adobe.  It was roughly the same size as my employer.  But, Adobe had very little subscription based products and we had quite a few.  They were trying to figure out how to migrate to our model.  Needless to say, they were successful in the endeavor.  Adobe now forces subscriptions on most of their products and have a constant stream of revenue.  Of course, there is also a pretty strong crack market that has developed as a result.

I love machining and I hope to continue to do it for the rest of my life.  That said, it *is* a hobby.  When the cost gets prohibitive, I'll drop it long before I drop my medical coverage. Subscriptions encroach on people entering this hobby all the time by virtue of an added cost of access.  I suspect that as time goes on, the trend of the younger generation becoming engaged in model making will continue to drop, which is unfortunate for all of us. I am a firm believer that things like subscriptions are an impediment towards growing the model making, and other, hobbies.

I do put my money where my mouth is.  This is why I bought QCAD.  I hope to grow its base; it is my own little protest against the growing market model.


----------



## SmithDoor (Sep 18, 2020)

I use AutoCAD 2000lt on my Windows 10 64 bit.
It works great better than when I use on Windows ME.
I see AutoCAD 2000LT come up on ebay for low cost.

Dave



Kestrel1998 said:


> I've been using Inventor on a student license for a few years now, however will be graduating university in 2021 so this will no longer be valid.
> 
> What free or low-cost software does everyone use? Fusion 360 seems popular with model engineers and I imagine will be quite similar to Inventor. Is this my best bet going forward or is there anything else I should consider?
> 
> ...


----------



## Oldiron (Sep 18, 2020)

The only problem is Autocad won’t activate anything 2000 or older 
even though you “own it”. I tried to reinstall 2000LT on my computer after a reformat and was told by Autocad, your out of luck. This was a full, paid for version too.


----------



## KellisRJ (Sep 18, 2020)

Sorry if I missed any earlier comment. 
Anyone have experience with DeltaCAD? 2D, it is limited to DWG, .DXF, and .DXB files, but is also "stand-alone" based on a licensed personal copy of the application. They do mention "True 32 bit program for improved performance." so obviously not 64. Sadly no Linux version.

Delta Cad - World's easiest CAD program, CAD software

Ron


----------



## MrMetric (Sep 18, 2020)

Kellis... I'm glad you brought up DeltaCAD.  That is inexpensive, indeed.  Heck, I am going to buy it just to throw the developer a bone so that he is encouraged to continue developing the program.  And it supports Macs to boot.  I do wish that it had a CAM module that could plug in though.  Anyhow thank you for bring it up!

Smith... Those eBay ones are almost certainly illegal. There is a great deal of debate/shunning regarding sources such as this on the forum. Frankly, I think it is a personal decision that everyone needs to make for themselves, the same way it is as to how fast you drive down the street. When making that decision, however, there is another component that you should probably consider. Because the software likely comes from dubious origins, it is entirely possible that it could have added Trojans and viruses in it. I think I'd be more than a little concerned running it on a computer that wasn't sandboxed in its own space (not on the private network), etc.  I personally have elected to go down other routes (QCAD, NanoCAD, and researching low cost CAM.... with a Fusion360 in there for tinkering).

Oldiron... That is a problem with the "modern" software approach, and something that I hate. You are absolutely correct... Even if you own something, it doesn't mean that you can activate it again.  The years of license keys are over with, sadly.  Now it is all about leasing and activations.  But you brought up a good point.  In my diatribe against subscriptions, I did neglect to express my angst against activation processes.  I used to own ACad Rel 19, I think it was (so long ago I forgot!).  I should have kept it because it probably would be something worthwhile to have now.  It would be ancient compared to modern versions but you know what? It worked; it worked consistently, and there as none of this activations/subscriptions stuff that exists now.

Kestrel... I've said it before, but I'll do so again... There are two programs I'd look at.  One is QCAD. I can't say I'm 100% thrilled with it, but you can own it for a reasonable price and it does work pretty well.  Sadly, it is *not* ACAD-like command structured though.  That is my biggest frustration point with the software.  Beyond that, check out the free version of NanoCAD (v5, I believe).  Sadly, it *is* activation enabled so God only knows how long you can actually get it.  And, it is no longer developed; plus, the new versions of NanoCAD are, yep, subscription based and pretty expensive.  So, I personally would approach the free version with a little concern.  Fusion360 is an excellent product that you'll fall right into if you are used to Inventor.  However, if you have followed this thread, you'll see that AutoDesk is in the midst of changing the free version on it right now.  Frankly, Fusion still has a LOT to offer. The big elephant in the room, however, is how long that will be the case.  ADesk is definitely a bait and switch company, so you can probably expect to have to pay a subscription within a few years, or sooner.  I personally don't want to fall more in love with Fusion than I already have, so I am kind of moving off the platform.  Oh, I'll still use it, but I won't depend on it.

There are also some organizations that have low cost license agreements with SolidWorks. Those may be a little more stable than Fusion and AutoDesk.  That said, the modules you get are generally pretty limited.


----------



## L98fiero (Sep 18, 2020)

KellisRJ said:


> Anyone have experience with DeltaCAD?


For $40 it's pretty close to Drafix 2D cad I had on an Atari ST in the late 80s but it was more complete and a lot more polished. Learning DeltaCAD should be fairly easy and it opens dxfs that LibreCAD won't.


----------



## OllyM (Sep 19, 2020)

I use Rhino3D for my CAD modelling. Originally got it for designing model planes and drones, it's curved surface tools are superb. Mainly use it for mechanical design now and like it alot. Costs a bit under £1,000 for a perpetual license key. You can buy a CAM plugin, but it costs more than Rhino itself which is why I'm exploring Cambam. I've also used OpenSCAD for generating gear and timing pulley profiles for 3d printing.

Cheers,

Oliver


----------



## Mago (Sep 19, 2020)

I use Delta Cad with DFX format and Layers.
Sheetcam to generate G code.
Sheetcam file into Mach3.

Worked for me for 10 years.
Low cost and no cloud.

Worth a try.

Mago


----------



## KellisRJ (Sep 19, 2020)

L98fiero said:


> For $40 it's pretty close to Drafix 2D cad I had on an Atari ST in the late 80s but it was more complete and a lot more polished. Learning DeltaCAD should be fairly easy and it opens dxfs that LibreCAD won't.


Thanks. I hate learning new GUI and simply won't make time to learn what to me are non-intutive. This looks pretty straight forward. Appreciate the insight. I tried one thing in LibreCad then just knocked it out in Draw. Too many other things on my plate.


----------



## KellisRJ (Sep 19, 2020)

Mago said:


> Low cost and no cloud.
> Worth a try.
> 
> Mago


Thanks!

Ron


----------



## kquiggle (Sep 19, 2020)

Makers Muse has a good video on youtube discussing the changes with Fusion 360 and the implications - worth a watch if you are using or thinking of using F360.

TLDR : The changes won't make a difference to most people, unless you are doing CAM.


----------



## MrMetric (Sep 19, 2020)

Unfortunately for them, I think that more and more people are doing multi axis CAM though.  Get a few steppers together plus a trunnion table and you'll have 5 axis pretty quickly for not much money...  It may not be as still as a Fanuc/Hass/Matsuura/etc, but it will definitely allow you to do an awful lot.  But, it will also be impossible for you to now program.  Most of the lower cost CAM systems are 2.5D only, although some will do 3 simultaneous axis  But, I guess that is a good topic for question...  What low cost/free CAM systems out there will do four or five axis g-code? 

I'm also very curious about CAMBAM.  Part of my problem with it is that I've never gotten the feeling that it is very well supported.  I mean, it was at version 0.9.8 for years, I think.  They finally came out with 1.0.0, but the length of development time caused me some concern.  I do have to laugh about that though. Having updates every 6 months to 'justify' a subscription is something I rail about, and now no updates bother me too... I guess I'm not capable of being pleased!  LOL.

I'd really like to hear peoples thoughts about CamBam.  Is it stable? Do you feel like it is going to be around for a while?  How many axis does it support (I'm sure I could get that from the internet, I know)? Does it really generate good g-code? Are the posts well targeted to a controller (QCAD's for instance, generates massive files when built-in procedures on some controls would do the trick in very few lines)? Frankly, is it suited for a full size CNC?  Fundamentally, are you happy with it?

I have to say that I'm really happy with the way this thread has progressed.  Sure, people have strong opinions (myself included regarding subscriptions), but there has been some great information here regarding different systems.  Kudos to all.


----------



## OllyM (Sep 20, 2020)

I can't comment on the quality of gcode I've gotten out of Cambam so far, but as a software engineer in my day job I would much rather use mature software that is fairly static and I can download and keep. The problem with subscription, cloud based solutions is that you are totally at the whim of the vendor, as folks are seeing with the Fusion 360 license changes. From reading the release notes for Cambam it looks to me like it's being actively developed by a very small team who are steadily making small improvements but it's core functionality seems stable. There appears to be a 5 axis plugin, but it's 3 axis natively. I should be able to comment on the gcode quality more as I get the hang of it (I'm a lathe guy at heart, this is my first time with a CNC mill). It also looks like it has good Mach 3 support, but again not tried that.

Cheers,

Oliver


----------



## MrMetric (Sep 20, 2020)

Same profession, and same feeling. I actually *almost* worked for AutoDesk once, and I know a fair number of people that have done so.  It is a quality organization, and I have a lot of respect for their development team.  Management? Not so much so. That includes product management too.  As an industry trend, I completely understand why companies *want* subscriptions.  Let us not forget, however, that there are two sides to the equation with customers being the balancing half.  And, yes, even though we haven't been paying for the product, we are *absolutely* customers.  I've sat in enough meetings to know that (plus, it is just common sense).

So, yes, I agree.... I would rather learn to use a lower cost alternative that I can *own* than a really cool product (that has tons of features I really don't need but are super neat) that I *lease*.  As I said before, I (personally) don't lease cars.  If I can't afford it, I don't buy it (and I've halted a lot of 'purchases' for just that reason). To that end, I am shopping for a new CAD/CAM solution. CamBam is probably at the top of my list. F360 is quickly becoming irrelevant to me the same way AutoCAD did when their updates became so expensive (transferred my *legal* copy and have never looked back...)

Thank you for the feedback on CamBam, Oliver.  And, based on your last sentence, it sounds like CamBam does have lathe support.  I've never really understood why CAM vendors charge so much for that.  For simple (non live tooling) lathe CAM, it always struck me as super simple versus the 5 axis mill.  Yet vendors charge a boatload for lathe CAM... but, I'm an engineer, not a sales guy (and like most engineers, I don't have a whole lot of love for sales people... probably shouldn't stir that pot though).


----------



## L98fiero (Sep 20, 2020)

MrMetric said:


> Same profession, and same feeling. I actually *almost* worked for AutoDesk once, and I know a fair number of people that have done so.  It is a quality organization, and I have a lot of respect for their development team.  Management? Not so much so. That includes product management too.  As an industry trend, I completely understand why companies *want* subscriptions.  Let us not forget, however, that there are two sides to the equation with customers being the balancing half.  And, yes, even though we haven't been paying for the product, we are *absolutely* customers.  I've sat in enough meetings to know that (plus, it is just common sense).
> 
> So, yes, I agree.... I would rather learn to use a lower cost alternative that I can *own* than a really cool product (that has tons of features I really don't need but are super neat) that I *lease*.  As I said before, I (personally) don't lease cars.  If I can't afford it, I don't buy it (and I've halted a lot of 'purchases' for just that reason). To that end, I am shopping for a new CAD/CAM solution. CamBam is probably at the top of my list. F360 is quickly becoming irrelevant to me the same way AutoCAD did when their updates became so expensive (transferred my *legal* copy and have never looked back...)
> 
> Thank you for the feedback on CamBam, Oliver.  And, based on your last sentence, it sounds like CamBam does have lathe support.  I've never really understood why CAM vendors charge so much for that.  For simple (non live tooling) lathe CAM, it always struck me as super simple versus the 5 axis mill.  Yet vendors charge a boatload for lathe CAM... but, I'm an engineer, not a sales guy (and like most engineers, I don't have a whole lot of love for sales people... probably shouldn't stir that pot though).


Lathe CAM just speeds things up  bit, it's super easy to program right at the machine in G code, with all the canned cycles, there's not a lot lathe CAM has to add. Even my old FANUC 6T-B control can be programmed at the machine with little effort.


----------



## MrMetric (Sep 20, 2020)

Actually, that is a very good point (but, ironically, adds further question as to why Lathe CAM is so expensive).  Thanks for your input and comments....  

FWIW, you need not even do it at the machine (which I often find a bit un-ergonomic).  With modern simulators, you can program at your desk and test your creativity on through simulation, then download...


----------



## L98fiero (Sep 20, 2020)

MrMetric said:


> FWIW, you need not even do it at the machine (which I often find a bit un-ergonomic).  With modern simulators, you can program at your desk and test your creativity on through simulation, then download...


I'll agree that the old controls like mine were not ergonomically designed and I usually do write the programs on the pc and download but even though I have the lathe module, I seldom use CAM for the lathe.


----------



## xpylonracer (Sep 25, 2020)

Just seen the latest video from Lars and the Fusion 360 chief explaining some of the reasons for changes, also announced exporting step files is to be allowed which is a big bonus. Tool changes will have to be edited within any program sent from the post processor and feed rates will need tweeking within the program if required.
Link to a short video from Lars:


----------



## SmithDoor (Sep 25, 2020)

I have both Autocad 95 and Autocad 2000LT on my Windows 10 64 bit computer. 

Autodesk does not want any using older software. Autodesk want you rent new software. 

I can email the installer to you and you backup and running. 

Dave 




Oldiron said:


> The only problem is Autocad won’t activate anything 2000 or older
> even though you “own it”. I tried to reinstall 2000LT on my computer after a reformat and was told by Autocad, your out of luck. This was a full, paid for version too.


----------



## SmithDoor (Sep 25, 2020)

You also download the installer that works on most software written from 1995 to 2003. They a 16bit installer but the programs are 32-bit that works on todays Windows 10 64-bit computers. 





__





						CAD Blocks Hatch Patterns and Linesl & Windows information - RC Groups
					

Download CAD Blocks Hatch Patterns and Linesl & Windows information CAD/CAM




					www.rcgroups.com
				




Dave




Oldiron said:


> The only problem is Autocad won’t activate anything 2000 or older
> even though you “own it”. I tried to reinstall 2000LT on my computer after a reformat and was told by Autocad, your out of luck. This was a full, paid for version too.


----------



## SmithDoor (Sep 25, 2020)

I uploaded all files need to install Autocad 95 to 2000LT 
In the download thread here.
It includes  print drivers need  for Autocad 2000LT 



			https://www.homemodelenginemachinist.com/threads/installing-program-per-2001-like-autocad-95-2000.32529/
		


Dave



Oldiron said:


> The only problem is Autocad won’t activate anything 2000 or older
> even though you “own it”. I tried to reinstall 2000LT on my computer after a reformat and was told by Autocad, your out of luck. This was a full, paid for version too.


----------



## MrMetric (Sep 26, 2020)

One of the problems with the axis limitations is that 4, 5 or even 6 axis machines are not all that uncommon in the shop now.  You can buy trunion tables with rotary tables on them, and that makes 5 axis right there.  How many LinuxCNC videos exist on YouTube of people milling a constantly changing turbine blade? A ton.  Or, you can buy a hexapod and play with that for only a few hundred bucks.  That is 6 axis.... The same is true for tool changer machines.  You don't have to have a massively expensive machine to have a tool changer on it.  It is not uncommon for someone to retrofit LinuxCNC onto "old iron."  When you do that, you frequently end up with 4 axis and a tool changer.  None of that will work with Fusion 360 now (well, you can add the tool changer easily enough... but maybe it is even easier to use a non-neutered CAM system that you *own*


----------



## Preston Engebretson (Sep 26, 2020)

I looked at it like this...

I have spent a good deal of time learning F360 and I spend a good deal of money on tooling
and machines...the couple of hundred dollars to have All of F360's functionality is a small price
to pay in this hobby...


----------



## xpylonracer (Sep 26, 2020)

Preston Engebretson said:


> I looked at it like this...
> 
> I have spent a good deal of time learning F360 and I spend a good deal of money on tooling
> and machines...the couple of hundred dollars to have All of F360's functionality is a small price
> to pay in this hobby...



I see where you are coming from but the *annual fee* does not allow you to use all of the functions available in Fusion 360, there are many so called "add on" functions which are chargeable for limited time use.


----------



## Preston Engebretson (Sep 26, 2020)

xpylonracer...from what I can see of using the Paid Version for the past week, all of the Functionallity 
that I had as a Student Version or Hobby version is still here...FEA,  only the Generative design technology requires
one to purchase Extra Cloud time...even the 4 and 5 axis programming works just like before and simulations, ect.

What has it Not allowed you to do that you could before this change?

Best Regards,

Preston


----------



## xpylonracer (Sep 26, 2020)

Preston Engebretson said:


> xpylonracer...from what I can see of using the Paid Version for the past week, all of the Functionallity
> that I had as a Student Version or Hobby version is still here...FEA,  only the Generative design technology requires
> one to purchase Extra Cloud time...even the 4 and 5 axis programming works just like before and simulations, ect.
> 
> ...


Hi Preston

As stated earlier tool changes within the program and no rapid moves. 
Both of these functions will have to be inserted in the file sent from the post processor, I am not an industrial user but do have some milling programs with up to 7 different tools so it is more a PITA than a catastrophy.

With regard the loss of rapid feedrate before and after or between cutting moves will slow everything down as some of my G1 maximum feeds may be as little as 100mm/min so this will be the max program feedrate without tweeking the program code.

After viewing the video I feel confident that the hobby user is being considered and that the team at Fusion 360 are well aware of the general feeling of non industrial users, their change of decision on now allowing step files to be exported shows good intent and is very welcome, I will continue to use the program as a hobby user.


----------



## Preston Engebretson (Sep 26, 2020)

xpylonracer, the loss of Rapids and Tool Changing ability is restored with the Paid Version...as I am using both
of those now...and one could just edit the G-code in the Unpaid Version if one wanted to also...

I spoke with the VP of Marketing the other day before paying and he confirmed that all of the Functionality
that we had as a Student/Hobby version is in the paid version.

Best Regards,

Preston


----------



## MrMetric (Sep 26, 2020)

It is, ultimately, a choice each of us must make. I personally am moving away from the platform for most of my stuff.  Sure, I'll still keep the hobby license, and I may use it once in a while.  But, by and large, I don't want to be part of the ecosystem anymore.


----------



## nealeb (Sep 27, 2020)

If a 3D CAD/CAM package like that currently being offered as the F360 hobby licence became available tomorrow and at the same price - free - how many people would hail it as a great achievement? The problem is that we had something even better and now someone has taken the toys away...

Actually, I'm pretty disappointed (to put it mildly) at the loss of rapid feed (my CNC router rapids at a modest 5m/min, but that's a whole lot faster than having it limited to, say, 200mm/min if I happen to be cutting steel), and to a lesser extent lack of tool-change support. Even though I change tools manually, having everything in a single gcode file and being prompted for tool change is a time-saver and simplifies the job. But it's still a better overall package than almost anything else available at the price. 

"But we're still in the hands of a commercial organisation and they might pull the plug at any minute!" In the meantime, though, we get the benefits of a commercially-supported package. Open source is great - but just how much faith can you put in a low-volume "product" being supported indefinitely by a bunch of volunteers? There are some open-source offerings where there is enough critical mass to keep them going - like LinuxCNC - but these, I would suggest, are relatively rare. There are some great open-source offerings and I don't want to criticise them in any way and I congratulate and thank those who have developed and support them, but the guarantee of long-term support and survivability is as questionable as that of F360 "hobby mode." I am going to sorely miss G0 and M6, but for the time being at least I don't see anything better out there without paying more than I can reasonably afford for what is a hobby.


----------



## MrMetric (Sep 27, 2020)

I had never considered OnShape because you couldn't have private files, while Fusion could.  However, over the last 3 weeks, I've really become to question whether I care.  I mean, I truly am *not* using this for profit things.  I'm literally making bits and pieces for my own fun.  So, the fact that there are some files out there which probably wouldn't make any sense to someone is, well, kind of irrelevant.  So, given that, I may ditch Fusion 360 entirely.  I bought QCAD for my drawings that I want to keep, probably buy CamBam for some things, and do the rest of the noise on OnShape.... This may be a plan.  I'd love to get away from the (proven) direction that AutoDesk is going.  Sure, OnShape may go down that route (further) too, but I don't really intend to use them for a whole lot of stuff.  CamBam will be my primary platform, I think.  QCAD and NanoCAD 5 for 2D, and that is that.  I'm like Nealab.... I think the CAM limitations of F360 are more than what I really want to use, and without export capabilities, the platform just isn't attractive anymore.

Nealab... There is open source and low cost paid.  I suspect that MeshCAM (which I really do not know, so this is just a hunch) would probably do what most of us want.  Hobby needs are generally pretty modest.  With that, then, comes the question of how much most hobbyists use all the features of Fusion.  Don't get me wrong.  I *love* Fusion.  It breaks my heart to be moving away from it.  I just think that most of us could do very well with low/free alternatives, and, more importantly, ones that will *remain* low and free (or, at the very least, things you *own, not lease*).  I wouldn't trust F360 posts without validation, the same way I wouldn't trust any other vendors, so I'm fine with using something that isn't as polished as F360


----------



## xpylonracer (Sep 27, 2020)

Mr Metric

You will still be able to export stp and other file types from Fusion 360, see the video from Lars and the chief posted earlier.


----------



## MrMetric (Sep 27, 2020)

Thank you pylon.  I know there was confusion on that point.  I think AutoDesk probably back pedaled on that, which is good.  However, I'm still not getting warm fuzzy feelings about any of this. What the heck... I am not against seeing how OnShape works.  I think it is worth a try.  I suspect there is a great chance that it will remain free (because it is, in many way, more restrictive than Fusion) than there is that AutoDesk won't continue to shift the foundation.  I really think in a few years they'll just curtail more.  I have a LONG LONG LONG history with AutoDesk.  I owned AutoCAD way back in the days when it was running on a CP/M computer


----------



## kinggt4 (Sep 28, 2020)

MrMetric,

Just looked for OnShape and Sourceforge says there is a free version but I can't find anything about it except $2100 for professional.


----------



## johnwm (Sep 28, 2020)

Sign up | Onshape Cloud Product Development Software and look for Onshape for Makers


----------



## kinggt4 (Sep 28, 2020)

John,

Thank you for this tip.  I signed up and began the tutorials.

George


----------



## bikr7549 (Sep 28, 2020)

I've been using Onshape for awhile and the public aspect of my files has not been an issue in anyway for me. Other users can copy but not modify your files, and by doing a search on a particular item I've been able to find a number of pre-existing files that have saved me some real headaches. 
Another benefit is that I can log onto my account from anywhere and I have access to everything-this came in handy a few times while travelling, when we used to be able to do that sort of thing. If I had something proprietary to work on that is something else, but if doing that it would likely be for a business, in which case the company would buy a pro version of Onshape an the files would be private.


----------



## MrMetric (Sep 28, 2020)

bikr.  That is exactly the point. Now, I have to admit that I don't know that I like having my modeled parts out there in the world, but I am trying to do some introspection here.  I have a feeling that there really isn't a solid reason for this, frankly.  So what if someone gets an adapter plate for an indexer head.  In fact.... Great!  I'm happy to share.

So... Yeah, I think that OnShape may very well be a platform I can get behind.  Besides, I kind of like the idea of giving some competition to AutoDesk.  I'll tell you this too.  If you are creative, there are some 100% legal ways you can get SolidWorks as an amateur.  Check out some of your favorite organizations because some of them have non-commercial licenses available.


----------



## ajoeiam (Sep 29, 2020)

bikr7549 said:


> If I had something proprietary to work on that is something else, but if doing that it would likely be for a business, in which case the company would buy a pro version of Onshape an the files would be private.


Respectfully - - - - I disagree. 
I have been working for more than a few hours on the design for a particular product. 
Its similar to some existing commercial stuff but I am putting things together in a somewhat unusual fashion and I think I'm pushing the capabilities in a number of areas. Actually building this item is not hugely difficult and many of the 'interesting' models I see here are likely at a similar level of precision. What is different is that I'm extending that precision to over 2 m (think 6'6") in only one of the operating dimensions. Its also operating equipment so there are some challenges that aren't part of static models. Dunno if I will actually manufacture any past my experimental model but if I used something like Onshape - - - - - well Onshape (or its like) now according to patent law owns the design - - - - why would I want to give away hundreds of hours of work. I can't afford any serious CADD or CAM software and couldn't run it if I did. I also refuse to allow Microsoft access to my work through their key stroke logger. Somehow I would like to have my privacy and at least some security. 
The idea that businesses can just magically afford everything to do anything is a very interesting concept. 
Too bad that in real life there isn't much truth in it! 
In business I try to by tools that help me make money and good tools help me make it relatively easily.
Software on the other hand is priced to make the vendor money and seldom is it easy to 'make money' with the product. 
Most often there is a tremendous input of time needed and then the software is changed so that you can start over with the newer supposedly improved version. 
That is all assuming that the software actually does what its supposed to do in the first place (most often an erroneous assumption in my experience).


----------



## bikr7549 (Sep 29, 2020)

ajoeiam said:


> well Onshape (or its like) now according to patent law owns the design - - - - why would I want to give away hundreds of hours of work.




I was not aware of the ownership issue, I would be interested to see what is the legal basis of this statement. Certainly if I invent something using my employers tools then the idea belongs to them, but I don't think this is what you mean here regarding Onshape.

Resources are always limited, you buy (as you say) tools and things that make you money, or to reduce your costs, which is the same thing. If a business cannot buy a particular tool they pay a price in lower productivity. If they buy the tool there is a learning curve to get it up to speed and working, which takes time and money, as well as the risk that it may not actually quite work the way intended. The software vendor is a business and they are in business to make money. Using their product to make money is a choice that requires serious deliberation and its success depends a lot on how you make use of it.

I agree that it takes a lot to get going with a new package-going from the drawing board to a 2D CAD package years ago was a huge undertaking and productivity loss for awhile. Then the next step of moving from 2D to solids was yet another. But in the long run all were well worth the effort, I would not want to go back to either of the older methods, for the type work that I do. Fortunately the companies that I was working for in these transitions had the depth to absorb the costs, and the vision to want to do this, tho a few took some arm twisting. 

Over the years I've used 7 CAD packages, and while there was often little in common (besides basic concept) from one to the other I have not run into drastic changes within one package that left me not being able to do my job well. There were sometimes updates that caused the use of lots of bad words, but it still worked.

edit, the cost of Onshape for professional use is from my perspective fairly low at $1500 per year for a single seat. That is less than $1 per hour for a full work year. I use it for hobby use, so am on the free 'hobby' version. How long it will stay free is always a question, especially now that they are owned by a big corporation, but this works for what I am doing, for now. Keeping my fingers crossed.


----------



## MrMetric (Sep 29, 2020)

There are many dimensions, ajoeiam, to your statement.  First, I would say that (to me), the time you put into the drawing is really academic.  If you don't intend on producing the part, then give that time to the community.  Frankly, many people are giving their experiences to others here on this forum for free.  I guess that is the way I look at it. 

Second, if you plan on producing the part commercially, then I would have to say that you really are not using the product as a hobbyist and, therefore, should probably be using a paid license.  Granted, this is a bit stickier because until you sell it, you can easily consider it all a hobby (ethically).  After all, how many businesses have started off as hobby operations?  Quite a few, I imagine.  Using OnShape in that scenario would be an utter disaster (you've released your art so you couldn't patent anything).  To that end, I'd recommend either Fusion's start-up license (lookie here... I'm actually *supporting* Fusion in this case where I otherwise strongly shy away from it).  I think it is good for 2 years.

The part about all this that gives me a great deal of pause about OnShape is the whole reassignment of ownership.  As I mentioned, I know nothing about OnShape right now, but I am planning on moving to it if everything looks OK.  Reassigning *ownership* however, is a huge wrinkle in that plan. I don't mind releasing something to the public domain, but I would never use OnShape for something that was remotely marketable (say, plans for an engine, not that they have a ton of value in today's diminishing world of the hobby. ). Simple plates or fixtures?  Sure... But anything that had real intellectual value?  No way.


----------



## awake (Sep 29, 2020)

In the context of this forum, there are many who work up new designs for model engines, then sell plans for a modest amount. It would be interesting to know what the law would say about such an endeavor. Is such a person really pursuing a business, or is it a hobby, even when selling plans for $25 each? I would suspect that, if run as a business, the business would show a loss every year - if any reasonable value is given for the time invested, you'd have to sell way more plans that I think is typical. Note that the IRS tends to consider "businesses" that never show a profit _not_ businesses, but hobbies - thus to keep people from using tax write-offs for what really isn't a business.


----------



## kquiggle (Sep 29, 2020)

Regarding OnShape having "ownership" of your work, I do not think ajoeiam is correct on this point. If you use the free version of OnShape you must make all of your work publicly accessible, but this is not the same as putting your work in the public domain nor does it assign "ownership" to OnShape.

There is of course a completely separate issue that if you used free OnShape to create something valuable, any other OnShape use could easily copy it.


----------



## cadsculptor (Sep 29, 2020)

By the way, Onshape is now owned by PTC, the ProEngineer/Creo company.


----------



## SomeSailor (Sep 30, 2020)

If you're looking at CAM and particularly need Rapids, ATC and 4th Axis support, Fusion is still the best game in town.  I use it everyday all day.


----------



## ajoeiam (Sep 30, 2020)

kquiggle said:


> Regarding OnShape having "ownership" of your work, I do not think ajoeiam is correct on this point. If you use the free version of OnShape you must make all of your work publicly accessible, but this is not the same as putting your work in the public domain nor does it assign "ownership" to OnShape.
> 
> There is of course a completely separate issue that if you used free OnShape to create something valuable, any other OnShape use could easily copy it.



ONshape's current documents do not have that exact wording. 
When I first looked at this 'stuff' that was the sense that I got from the male bovine excremental drivel called a EULA. 
IMO when you are forced to place your document anywhere but under your personal control - - - - well - - - - you do not have the rights to said document which means, by extension, that you do not own it. 
Most of the EULAs that I read are studies in how you the user have almost no rights except for to be required payment of - - - if the 'stuff' doesn't work the EULA basically say - - - - tough luck buddy - - - - better luck next time. Oh yes its more polite than that but that is the intent.  

If Onshape makes me do something - - - - well then de facto they are expressing ownership rights - - - - which also means that I no longer have those rights. 
Sorry - - - - my sweat - - -  my stuff. If you want it - - - - then come negotiate with me - - - - don't just take it. What's so wonderful is that so much of this stuff isn't near as wonderful as it would seem from reading the promotional literature! 

I am not a lawyer but I've read enough weasel text over the years and the amount included in a EULA seems to be expanding at almost a solar nova rate - - - - somehow I'm supposed to believe this kind of drivel - - - hasn't happened yet!


----------



## SmithDoor (Sep 30, 2020)

I glad to here
Microsoft is also redoing Office too.

Dave 



MrMetric said:


> Thank you pylon.  I know there was confusion on that point.  I think AutoDesk probably back pedaled on that, which is good.  However, I'm still not getting warm fuzzy feelings about any of this. What the heck... I am not against seeing how OnShape works.  I think it is worth a try.  I suspect there is a great chance that it will remain free (because it is, in many way, more restrictive than Fusion) than there is that AutoDesk won't continue to shift the foundation.  I really think in a few years they'll just curtail more.  I have a LONG LONG LONG history with AutoDesk.  I owned AutoCAD way back in the days when it was running on a CP/M computer


----------



## SomeSailor (Sep 30, 2020)

Onshape is good software for what it is.  If you're just looking for CAD I quite like it. They DO poke around in your account though.  I was contacted by a sales rep who said he noticed some of what I was working on looked commercial.  He was good about it and seemed more intent on following up on a sales lead than messing with me.  It's quite intuitive and works well.


----------



## MrMetric (Sep 30, 2020)

cadsculptor... I don't think you'll have any complaints about Fusion's capabilities within this forum.  However, I'm not sure I agree, respectfully, that it remains the best game in town after today though.  I've started to check into OnShape and it seems like it could be a nice fit for what many of us want.  No, it isn't the panacea but, frankly, neither is Fusion.  And I can do stuff with OnShape that I'll no longer be able to do with Fusion.... Let me say that again.... OnShape will have more (CNC) capabilities than Fusion.  That is a statement that I'm sure AutoDesk would rather not have widely discussed, but it is the reality of the free customer after tonight!

I must say that I'm wondering a bit how AutoDesk is  going to handle the ATC thing.  If they don't allow you to setup different tools, then that would be a major crippling of the application, I think (to the point where I might even argue, after trying it out to confirm, that the product isn't even functional).  But if you simply have a place where you can easily (manually) insert a tool change macro into the G-code, then that seems like it just an inconvenience.  Maybe that is the extent of what AutoDesk is attempting to accomplish; a business wants to have seamless flow, but hobbyists will always find a way around a problem....  I'll see how it all works over the weekend, I suppose, because I am **not** leasing Fusion...  Rapids could be manually inserted too, I guess, although that would be ugly and probably a whole lot more dangerous. 

I'm still looking at CamBam as my go to solution as I move away from Fusion.  And, maybe this will encourage developers to make FreeCAD a better product.  If we can get a decent 3D modeling application that is truly, and forever, free, then that would be good.  I don't need all of the bells and whistles of Fusion for a hobby, and I can certainly put that perpetual $400 fee for Fusion each year to good use.  And I really want to play with 5 axis someday.  That would be an interesting tinker thing.  If AutoDesk thinks this makes me a professional then they should go check out all of the forums and past KickStarter campaigns.  They've been littered with people making cheap 3, 4, 5, and 6 axis machines.


----------



## SomeSailor (Sep 30, 2020)

I use both and I dont think there's really any serious comparison beyond CAD.  You're saying CNC and onshape, but how are you gonna use Onshape for CAM?  I have an ATC, 4th Axis and like my Rapids so I went ahead and upgraded from my free StartUp license just because the 40% was too good to pass on.  $21 / month is no different than Netflix from a cost perspective.  There sure is a lot of bitterness over what was never intended to be a free program and never promised to be forever.


----------



## MrMetric (Oct 1, 2020)

True on Netflix, although I don't have that.  One of the few subscriptions I keep is Amazon Prime.  I really don't believe in many others.  I don't even have cable TV.

Bitterness?  Perhaps, although I don't know that I would completely agree with the word.  I fully understand that AutoDesk has the *right* to charge for their product.  They own it, they manage it.  I prefer to avoid being a pawn in their chess game, however.  Fusion360 is successful *because* of the installed base provided by the free product.  They had the right to change that, but so do the people who feel abandoned when they are the reason the product became great.  As I've said in the past, even a user that pays nothing has significant value for a company... and I mean monetary value.

I like the ATC and rapids too.  And there are plenty of products that can be *purchased* not rented which will allow you access to this.  Most hobbyist needs are really quite moderate.  We tend to gravitate towards all the bells and whistles, but the reality is that we can do with far less.  To that end, Fusion is far more than most require.  If you get used to something like CamBam, for less than one year's rental fee from AutoDesk, you'll have something that you can use for life (or until *you* choose to update it).  I personally find that as an attractive alternative.  But all of these are a personal decision.  If you find the value in renting AutoDesk's software then for roughly a dollar a day, then that is great.  By all means, I encourage you and everyone who feels the same to purchase the product.  AutoDesk makes wonderful products and I hope they have a long and prosperous future.

There is another thing at play here too.... You are happy saving 40%. Good.  But you are also just kicking the can down the road a bit.  I look at it as, I may be saving 40% today but the real price *starts* at AutoDesk's non-sale today because in 1 or 3 years, that is likely what it will be.  More accurately, that is what it will be as a *minimum*.  So, the real question is, "Are you prepared to pay $500 a year or $1350 for a 3 year license?"  I'd hasten to say that Fusion360 would be the single largest expense (on average) in your shop.  I am not prepared to have CAD/CAM be that.  You may say, "no, what about the machinery...."  Well, I *buy* my machines (generally broken and I fix them), I don't rent them. With pricing increases, you could easily be paying 8K to 13K for your Fusion license.  That is a lot of machinery.  Even BobCAD/CAM is looking more attractive than Fusion360 right now (if you can buy it and suffer through its oddities).

OnShape does have CAM through FreeMill.  However, it is limited, I believe.  I haven't done much research about OnShape yet because it hasn't been on my radar.  CAM may well be the sticking point because I don't really know if the free MecSoft product is going to do what I want.  I really am thinking that CamBam is the route I want to go.  But that gets back to the CAD side of things and whether or not I can export a format that CamBam can use.  I really love the parametric capabilities of newer CAD, so I'd like to stick with that. Some of the open source products have progressed quite a bit, but I've also heard that they are still quite buggy.  For 2D work, the free version of NanoCAD or QCAD are more than adequate.  Those are perfect examples of products that work more than well enough as alternatives to AutoCAD, by the way.  Are they as capable? No.  But they are fine for our hobby (my opinion).  I'm simply looking for the same conceptual thing for parametric CAD (specifically, alternatives to Fusion/SolidWorks)


----------



## SomeSailor (Oct 1, 2020)

Well... I guess we perceive value differently.  With my license I will have access to the most current version of their software, for  less than 75¢ a day.  I pay that much for the extra shot in my coffee each day.  

You talk about the cost going up in three years, that may be true, but I have no more visibility of that than you do.  If you want to use the free version of OnShape, there is no CAM, just CAD.   If you want to make a dollar with you CAD, then you have to be OK with everyone who wants it being able to take your work AND you have to agree to their creative commons approach.  Plus... the paid version is $1500/yr... and still no CAM

I spent $801 for the next 3 years... didn't have to as I'm on a StartUp license.  See ya in three.


----------



## MrMetric (Oct 1, 2020)

I'm lucky if I can get into the shop for 4 hours a week right now.... and that is shop time.  By the time I look at CAD time, I'd be paying $15 each time I logged on.  The problem with AutoDesk's pricing structure, IMHO, is that it doesn't have room for the amateur that has more advanced needs than the basic (currently free) plan.  I neither need, nor can afford, the full license version.  And, frankly, its cost/value matrix really isn't applicable to me and most in the hobby (my belief).

I did get a chuckle about the coffee shot though.  I was a late bloomer to coffee, and it started with some trips to Starbucks.  I was appalled at the cost it was adding up to, however, (yeah, I'm sure you are laughing now... I agree) so I knew I had to stop.  I ended up buying an espresso machine to solve the problem... Yes, I *own* it.

Ironically, I wouldn't mind buying Fusion360 as a perpetual *hobby* license for just about $800.  That would be my maximum and I'd pucker for sure.  I'm not sure I would "do it," but it would be a coin flip for sure.  I just can't even come close to justifying it every 3 years. But... I respect both your decision and your ability to afford the purchase.  I do wish you well Sailor, and any others, who have made that choice... When you see that poor slob out in the rain as you work in your warm houses on the computer, that would be me (OK, maybe not quite that bad....)

The commercial version of OnShape is never going to happen for me.  Frankly, I don't know why anyone would want to buy it if it doesn't have CAM or any of the other feature of Fusion... unless it were a perpetual license.  I can see how it might be worth it for some (not me) at that price.

Sadly, no... You likely will not see me in three.... I'll be using something like CamBam probably.  Oh, I'll still keep the Fusion product around for some stuff, I suppose.  But I will try to make a *conscious* decision not to rely on it.

Just to poke the bear a bit....  Maybe we (CamBam/FreeMill/whatever) will see *you* in 3 years if AutoDesk raises their prices!  (OK, that was intended to be a friendly joke... I hope it was taken as such).


----------



## SomeSailor (Oct 1, 2020)

I'll give ya another example.   I have owned EVERY version of Corel Draw from Version 1 to 2022 (22 versions now).  I think on average they've gotta $295 or so for each "upgrade".  I know I paid less for some, but also bought companion programs along the way.   Do the math and I'm well over $5,000 in software that I "own"  I have a closet full of it.  

I run  a business.  I just spent around $40K on a mill and I have another $100K or so of other hardware and investments.   This cost is just part of doing business.  I'll wrap it in to my costs and write it off as an expense.  I enjoy Fusion 360 and what it offers.


----------



## MrMetric (Oct 1, 2020)

Ah! That explains quite a bit then.  I run no business where I can write Fusion off.  Frankly, if you were using the free version (now or previously), you were likely violating the license terms because it precluded any commercial use (think there was a caveat there, but you get the idea).  When I write a check for $801, I have to justify it to my wife.  I have to explain why we can't go to dinner X times.  Why the kids can't get that nice bicycle, etc, etc.  I cannot explain it off as an offset against income that I'll derive from my work.

If I were a commercial entity, I would buy Fusion in a heartbeat.  But my usage of Fusion is absolutely not-for-profit.  I suspect that is the case for 90% of the people on this forum or, for that matter, those that had/have the hobby license.

We've pretty well beaten the whole license thing to death.  And, in the end, AutoDesk really doesn't care.  I can yell and scream into the wind, but I'm clearly not a customer they wish to placate.  And, I'm not vain enough to believe otherwise.  I'll adapt, and figure out a product that works better for me.  I'll miss Fusion but, let's face the other reality... It is just software. It is good but it isn't the only thing that fits the bill.  It isn't unique and it, like most everything else, is replaceable.


----------



## coulsea (Oct 2, 2020)

I hope that this thread doesn't put people off trying Fusion 360. I am sure that the people doing CNC have lost something important but for me it seems that it will still be a fantastic programme. I have only recently started using fusion but I am amazed at what it does compared to 2D. I am currently using it to design a part and print it on a 3D plastic printer to get an idea of look and scale before making it in metal, I also want to make patterns to cast some bits in the future,and can still do these things. It is difficult for a company like autodesk because the old free product would enable you to supply data to run a small scale factory and I wonder how many of the ebay hit and miss engines were made that way (maybe governments have had a hand in the changes).


----------



## SomeSailor (Oct 2, 2020)

MrMetric said:


> ...you were likely violating the license terms because it precluded any commercial use (think there was a caveat there, but you get the idea).



Nothing illegal about mine.   I was an approved Startup.  I only jumped from there was to lock the 40% discount.


----------



## MrMetric (Oct 2, 2020)

coulsea... I suspect that there will be a good number of people, such as myself, that move away from Fusion if they are interested in CNC.  I think AutoDesk went too far in the restrictions there to make the product useful, compared to other options that are reasonable in price (owned, not rented, or free).  People that are just using the CAD side are less impacted.  As far as terminated licenses, my guess is that AutoDesk will see virtually none.  But that doesn't mean the product will be used as much.

Whatever the case, I don't think it is going to die.  As for it being difficult for AutoDesk... Ah, I don't think so.  AutoDesk is a massive company with an extremely profitable portfolio.  Fusion is a rounding error.  And, of that, I think it would be everyone's dream in this hobby that AutoDesk's decision was based on pirated use of people designing engines (aka a commercial venture) and selling those on eBay!  Why? Because that would mean that the hobby was thriving and a powerhouse of interest.  The reality, however, is that we are dying a not so slow death. Every vendor I've talked to that sells castings has said that their business has dropped precipitously over the last decade.  It is not a good sign.  Ironically, this is part of the reason why I find AutoDesk's new licensing scheme to be frustrating.  I think it serves to discourage people from this hobby because it increases costs significantly (again, this is more of a CNC thing).  F360 has likely become one the single largest expenses we may have.  Ironically, you don't even use CAD/CAM that much, which means that per hour expense of the product is even greater.

So, sadly (tongue in cheek), I think it highly unlikely that illegal use of the product for model engine production was even on the radar for the product team at AutoDesk, let alone the corporate folks there.    No.  This was about capitalizing on an installed base derived from providing the product for free, plain and simple... But... This is also what all businesses aspire to do, so there really isn't anything "wrong" with that.... Nor is there anything wrong for me saying that I don't believe the product is worth renting for $1335USD every three years.

SomeSailor... actually, I am not surprised.  Based on your presentation, it seemed like you were licensing the product in a fashion consistent with your usage. And, given your ability to use the product in a business environment (and write it off on your taxes), it makes absolute sense that you purchase the license. I would too if I could figure out a way to do the same.  But until that time, the money for the purchase competes with car repairs, food, soap, clothes, (ever increasing) medical expenses, and everything else that is truly required but never generates a dime for me.  I'm married with kids... If I want to buy something like this, I have to run it by SWMBO... As my son, who has perfect grammar, likes to say, "That ain't happening, dad!"


----------



## SomeSailor (Oct 2, 2020)

MrMetric said:


> I think AutoDesk went too far in the restrictions there to make the product useful, compared to other options that are reasonable in price (owned, not rented, or free).



What have you personally really lost other than time (No Rapids)?   Do you have an ATC or 4th Axis?



MrMetric said:


> Nor is there anything wrong for me saying that I don't believe the product is worth renting for $1335USD every three years.



It's not.  It's $801 for three years,  $267 a year,  73¢  a day.  And you're not "renting" it.  You own the license rights to use it.  Much different and you imply you have no equity, but you do.



MrMetric said:


> F360 has likely become one the single largest expenses we may have.  Ironically, you don't even use CAD/CAM that much, which means that per hour expense of the product is even greater.



I spend more on coffee or carbide.  



MrMetric said:


> SomeSailor... actually, I am not surprised.  Based on your presentation, it seemed like you were licensing the product in a fashion consistent with your usage.



I started with the personal license to see if I liked the product.  Applied for and was granted a Startup License and saw the value of the deep discounts purchased a commercial three year license for the value it represents.

Every tool I own has value... or it goes in the bin.   I have used tools others owned to see if they would suit my needs and this is no different.   If you want to do CAM, and you want to do it well, there are only so many programs out there and frankly ALL CAM was out of my price range 10-15 years ago.   It's amazing I can have a 4 axis mill in my garage shop at all.  We live in amazing times.   I have no calories to expend complaining about choices outside my control.  Life is too short.


----------



## Jasonb (Oct 2, 2020)

Maybe it's all these people cutting their engines from solid on their CNC machines that is seeing the casting set side of the hobby shrinking plus the loss of small foundries and people wanting to make something different rather than the same old subjects. Since getting my CNC I've found myself doing even more engines where it would have been very time consuming but not impossible to carve from solid or even even engines where I would have fabricated everything except a flywheel which would have been a bought in casting I can now cut a fancy spoked flywheel from a billet of iron or steel so no longer limited to available flywheel castings..

I draw in Alibre so only use F360s CAM, don't have quick change tooling let along an auto changer so that won't affect me and my rapids are not set that fast so don't really mind if it takes a bit longer for something to run as I can be doing something else at the same time and still way faster than manually machining the same part. Having Steep & Shallow already moved to Extensions is the main downer but I'll see how I go before rushing into anything.


----------



## MrMetric (Oct 2, 2020)

Jason, whatever you are doing (castings, from stock, etc)... Good for you.  And show your kids, neighbors, or anyone how it works so that we can ensure the future health of the hobby.

Sailor, Yes... I have an ATC and I'm just finishing up on a fourth axis.  I resurrected a small industrial VMC (Dyna DM4400m).  It was literally given to me for the cost of moving it out of the old shop (and moving two other machines into the newly vacated space).  It has some problems, but nothing too horrible, and it is the perfect size for the garage.  It actually came with an SMW indexer for which I've made an adapter plate and mounted an AC servo.  Because this is a Mitsubishi control, it is rather picky about amplifiers, so that was a challenge to get working.

Anyhow, the ATC and fourth axis are my pain points with the new Fusion licensing...  And I beg to differ.  The normal pricing is $1335, so that is what is appropriate to use as the baseline for the license, not $801 which is a temporary 40% discount.  And, I contend that it is renting, not ownership.  Just as with an apartment, I rent the right to use something for a period of time.  There is no equity in either the apartment or the Fusion license.  If I had a perpetual license then that would be equity.

You are clearly able to afford and justify Fusion.  You are lucky that you are able to do so.  I do OK, but this expense puts me 'over the top' of reasonable hobby expenses on a perpetual basis (i.e. not an perpetual license but a rental).  Am I frustrated with AutoDesk.  Yes.  Do they have the right? Yes.  All is good there. It is all opinions and I agree about expending calories over this.  AutoDesk isn't going to change their mind; in fact, I fully expect that in 3 years the price for Fusion will be $1500, not $1335, and so on.  I've made my peace on it all... But I'm not going to congratulate AutoDesk on it's decision either.


----------



## MrMetric (Oct 2, 2020)

Jasonb said:


> I draw in Alibre so only use F360s CAM, don't have quick change tooling let along an auto changer so that won't affect me and my rapids are not set that fast so don't really mind if it takes a bit longer for something to run as I can be doing something else at the same time and still way faster than manually machining the same part. Having Steep & Shallow already moved to Extensions is the main downer but I'll see how I go before rushing into anything.



To change the topic a little....  I've been looking at Alibre as an alternative to Fusion.  You can buy their hobby version (buy == perpetual license), I think, for a reasonable price.  What I don't know is whether or not it is very functional.  So, I guess I have a few questions for you.  First, why are you not using F360 for your CAD work?  It is quite capable, so using Alibre (which costs money, which F360 used to be free) is an interesting choice and I'm very curious what the rationale was for that.  Second, have you been happy with Alibre?  And, third, which version are you using?


----------



## Mike Henry (Oct 2, 2020)

MrMetric said:


> To change the topic a little....  I've been looking at Alibre as an alternative to Fusion.  You can buy their hobby version (buy == perpetual license), I think, for a reasonable price.  What I don't know is whether or not it is very functional.  So, I guess I have a few questions for you.



Alibre's Atom 3D is $199 and there is a free 30-day trial so why not try it out?






						Alibre Atom 3D | 3D CAD Drawing Software
					

Alibre's Atom 3D software is the best 3D design tool for hobbyists interested in 3D printing, CNC, robotics, and more! Learn more about Atom 3D.




					www.alibre.com
				




Here's a comparison chart between the two upper tiers of Alibre and Atom 3D if you want to see what each version gets you.


----------



## Jasonb (Oct 2, 2020)

Having been using it for about 10years now I had a lot of things already drawn and knew my way around it so why change. Yes happy with it, it does all that I really need. I started with their "PE" (personal edition) which would be similar to what the current Atom3D gives now being a cut down version of the more expensive one and ran that as a one off payment with no updates or support. When the latest team took it over and started updating and supporting it more I upgraded to their Professional level which is still not the top option but does have a few things that the basic Atom does not and I'm paying the yearly cost for support and current updates..

You can use their free trial for a few weeks to try it out.


----------



## MrMetric (Oct 2, 2020)

Jasonb said:


> Having been using it for about 10years now I had a lot of things already drawn and knew my way around it so why change. Yes happy with it, it does all that I really need. I started with their "PE" (personal edition) which would be similar to what the current Atom3D gives now being a cut down version of the more expensive one and ran that as a one off payment with no updates or support. When the latest team took it over and started updating and supporting it more I upgraded to their Professional level which is still not the top option but does have a few things that the basic Atom does not and I'm paying the yearly cost for support and current updates..
> 
> You can use their free trial for a few weeks to try it out.


So... I looked at Alibre and I talked with their sales guy.  He said they are getting a lot of traction from the F360 licensing change (no giant surprise).  And, yes, they have real, honest to God, perpetual licenses.  That is something that is a differentiating factor from F360.  It actually looks pretty decent.  The Atmo3D version is very inexpensive too. AND, they are coming out with a cooperative relationship with MeshCAM that will apparently give you 3D... Oh, with tool change and rapids.  Sadly, no 4th axis.  Pricing was not something he could give, but that will be published next week.

All in all, this is becoming the front runner for me.  I have concerns about OnShape.  You can also apply any purchase price to an upgrade at Alibre.  This means that if they come out with a good deal, I can think about going to their pro version and get a perpetual license there.

To me, I think having the knowledge that I have some security in *ownership* is a huge piece of mind. Even if I bought Fusion today at 40% off, in 1/3 years, I have to assume it will be full price and that is just waaaay too much.  Plus, why get more invested in a platform that is obviously changing to something more monetized.  So, yes, I think I am going to give Alibre some serious thought.  Thank you Jason and Mike for the head's up.  I had completely forgotten about them.

If anyone has ever gotten this far in the thread, you're probably interested in alternatives to F360, so check out Alibre and MeshCam.


----------



## SomeSailor (Oct 2, 2020)

If you find an attractive CAM alternative with posts for Tormach ...  Lemme know.


----------



## MrMetric (Oct 2, 2020)

I'm actually a little baffled there, Sailor... As you obviously have F360, you have access to the non-neutered CAM capabilities.  Is there a deficiency in that which is causing you to seek an alternative?

Tormach is a fairly common machine now, so I would expect most people to have posts for it. That might not be true for the really expensive CAM system, though, because I doubt many owners of Tormach are buying those.  The really expensive CAD/CAM clients are using far larger machines, some of which are really really interesting (take a look at DMG machines... very cool).  The other thing is that Tormach's later generation controls are built off of LinuxCNC.  As such, I would think that you can modify posts for that, of which you generally can find something suitable.  If you are talking about their older controls, then that is a different beast that I know very little about.

Anyhow, the hunt is definitely on... I don't know how much success I'll have though.  The kicker is the 4th axis.  Finding 3 axis has gotten a lot easier over the last few years, but that rotary guy is causing some grief.  That said, for ages I was using an old Hurco.  Ironically, it was all conversational, so my g-code skills are actually fairly weak.  But the thing I learned is that there haven't been *that* many times when I've really felt a huge need for 3 axis.  2.5D is generally fine for most of what I want to do.  That is good too because I have a nice selection of small flat endmills, but I have very few ball endmills.  The latter can be pricey and, well, you know how I like to spend money! (see, I can poke fun at myself).  I think the salient point here is that for over 100 years people were making things on manual mills and lathes. We don't *have* to have CNC to survive, and 3D is not generally mandatory.  I've seldom seen a model motor here for instance that required it.  Fortunately, finding 2.5D CAM is *much* easier.  I had hoped to build a hexapod and try that sometime for fun, but my days of doing that are completely gone now (the whole topic of the last 40 messages).


----------



## Cogsy (Oct 2, 2020)

MrMetric said:


> Sailor, Yes... I have an ATC and I'm just finishing up on a fourth axis.  I resurrected a small industrial VMC (Dyna DM4400m).  It was literally given to me for the cost of moving it out of the old shop (and moving two other machines into the newly vacated space).  It has some problems, but nothing too horrible, and it is the perfect size for the garage.  It actually came with an SMW indexer for which I've made an adapter plate and mounted an AC servo.  Because this is a Mitsubishi control, it is rather picky about amplifiers, so that was a challenge to get working.
> 
> Anyhow, the ATC and fourth axis are my pain points with the new Fusion licensing...



This is interesting - you have an industrial machine and you want to run it at industrial rates (rapids), so what would stop you producing commercial parts at commercial rates? I believe this is exactly what the Fusion license restrictions are for. Now you might be a hobby user and never going to make a cent with it but if the capability exists to generate parts at commercial rates with a free license then why would the 'shadier' commercial companies (especially prevalent in some countries) invest in a paid license at all?

A technical point but I don't believe we actually 'own' any software, no matter what the pricing structure. We certainly can't access the source code (which is irrelevant for most) but how many on here have complained/commented on struggling to keep 15+ year-old computers alive so they can keep using their legacy products - and when they finally have to upgrade they find they've been missing out on 15 years of innovation and improvement and wish they'd updated years ago? 

I understand you don't want to use Fusion any more but honestly I can't see what they've done wrong as a company. If you manually add your tool changes (from my understanding) all you're really losing is rapids which is just time. As hobbyists, and especially with 1-off parts, the time shouldn't be much of a concern to us so I don't see the big deal. I wonder how much of the 'traction' that Alibre is getting is from small commercial shops who actually need the industrial capabilities and have been getting by with a free Fusion license. The ones making money from the product should certainly be paying for its development in my book.


----------



## SomeSailor (Oct 2, 2020)

MrMetric said:


> I'm actually a little baffled there, Sailor... As you obviously have F360, you have access to the non-neutered CAM capabilities.  Is there a deficiency in that which is causing you to seek an alternative?



No, I'm good.  

I really plan to use the 4th axis mostly for fluting rifle bolts,  and making some RC car parts.  Continuous 3D and 3+1 ops will all be rather simple ones.  The ATC option is super nice as I can touch off everything in the carousel and automatically at the beginning of an op to verify tool integrity and excessive wear.


----------



## MrMetric (Oct 2, 2020)

Cogsy... I've never understood people's perspective that AutoDesk is trying to address "industrial machine." It is, frankly, irrelevant.  What matters is whether or not you are a commercial entity, not the capabilities of the machine.  That my machine is *capable* of being used commercial doesn't mean that it *is* being used that way.  And, frankly, it really isn't viable anymore, if that is what concerns you.  The machine is from the 1990s, and by an measure of standards today, it is old and not that accurate.  If you wanted to do small stuff, a Sherline is probably more accurate.

As for owning software.  I feel like you are splitting hairs here.  *Technically* you are both right and wrong.  In historical terms of use, you are granted the right to use the software (in perpetuity) but not the right to copy the software, (often) resell it, or reverse engineer it.  There are generally other terms too, but those are the right ones.  You seem to be trying to connect this to a the modern subscription paradigm as being the same thing. Fine.  Historically you rent the software in perpetuity, if that makes you feel better.

And, finally, where have I ever said that commercial entities that are making money from Fusion should *ever* have been able to use the free version. I steadfastly *agree* with you that this is not consistent with their licensing....  But, I *am* entitled to an opinion.  I *do* feel that AutoDesk dropped the ball on the same community that helped grow the product to the point where it is today. To that end, I feel they failed us.  This doesn't, by any stretch of the imagination, mean that they don't have the right to make that decision.  They have the right to terminate all licenses and deactivate all usage of the product.  Frankly, I am not too sure I really care if they do.  OK, that is an exaggeration.  I do care, primarily because I think it would hurt a lot of people. I don't think AutoDesk really cares though.  They've exercised their right to care about dollars and cents.  Again... my opinions which, the last I check, I am free to have.

To address your comment about manually adding tool changes.  Yes, that is probably pretty easy to deal with.  The bigger concern I have, however, is manually editing files.  I have a healthy concern about doing that, particularly the feeds part.  But editing in a tool change isn't that big a deal, I agree.

The real reason I'm likely to move away from Fusion is that I don't trust AutoDesk.  They've already shown that this is a product that they want to move into larger income generating role within the company's portfolio.  I don't believe for a second that the $1335/3 yr license is going to stay that price.  And, even if I did, I cannot justify that amount of money.  I *could* justify a one-time purchase of the product for about $800, but that is pretty much the top of what I can afford.  You can do more?  Great!  You are a lucky man.  Be generous and pay more taxes.  In the grand scheme of things, however, that is all I can do.  So, yes, a less capable product, but one that I can own (OK... rent in perpetuity) is a better use of those funds, IMHO.

Oh, and I still have Windows XT on a laptop for some applications which work well.... No problem there... And probably 80% of the machines in people's garages are over a decade old.  Software doesn't magically become useless just because it is old.... But if it stops working because the developer added that into the licensing, that is another matter.

SomeSailor... Ah, now I understand.  It sounds like your usage is similar to what I was talking about. In many ways, 2.5D is probably what you also are using.  So, if you do decide that you want to see what other things exist, I'd start with MeshCAM and CamBam.  But I don't really know why you would. Fusion is going to be a better fit.  You are clearly OK with the subscription rental scheme, so I would suggest that you just stick with that.  If it were not for the money thing, that is what I'd do, frankly.


----------



## MrMetric (Oct 2, 2020)

I think we've probably beaten this to death.  Although we have differing opinions on the *value* of Fusion 360, or whether or not they have made a good move or bad, the simple reality is that AutoDesk really doesn't care what we think. They are not reading this forum and even if they did, it would not sway their course in the slightest.  So, we have to agree to disagree and move forward with what works best for each of us.

The simple reality is that I enjoy working on machinery.  I enjoy learning techniques and sharing ideas.  That is what makes HMEM great, not bickering over some piece of software.  To that end, I want to go back to what I enjoy.  I welcome ideas on alternatives to Fusion 360 and CAM, but I don't think it makes sense to continue beating the same horse.

This is a wonderful website and I think all that contribute here should be appreciated.  We need to grow this hobby and welcome new people.  So, let's get back to that business.


----------



## Jasonb (Oct 3, 2020)

I don't think much of that traffic will be from commercial shops that don't want to spend much as Alibre for them would work out more expensive, they would really want Pro level and then there is the add in CAM that adds about £500GBP so not a lot cheaper than F360 if you allowed for wanting to update every few years. More likely knee jerk reaction form hobby users wanting a low cast CAD wrongly thinking they will not be able to do much with F360CAD.


----------



## mu38&Bg# (Oct 3, 2020)

If you didn't see the free license as a way of Autodesk obtaining a huge number of people to do bug testing, improvement suggestions, etc., that would one day come to an end, you were mistaken. CADCAM has real value in the marketplace, especially anything involving a rotary axis. Even long established CAM companies charge quite a bit for rotary add-ons.

To think that now you have to pay to get valuable features....

And that's the thing about virtually any hobby. If you want a full featured industrial machine like lets say a twin turret twin spindle lathe with 24 stations of live tooling, you won't get it at craigslist prices. All those ancient clapped out Southbends, that have no value in a modern machine shop, get passed around garage shops for pennies. CAD CAM has real value. Once an investment is making money, the math is very different, but you still have to make enough to keep the doors open.


----------



## bdrmachine (Oct 3, 2020)

dieselpilot said:


> If you didn't see the free license as a way of Autodesk obtaining a huge number of people to do bug testing, improvement suggestions, etc., that would one day come to an end, you were mistaken. CADCAM has real value in the marketplace, especially anything involving a rotary axis. Even long established CAM companies charge quite a bit for rotary add-ons.
> 
> To think that now you have to pay to get valuable features....
> 
> And that's the thing about virtually any hobby. If you want a full featured industrial machine like lets say a twin turret twin spindle lathe with 24 stations of live tooling, you won't get it at craigslist prices. All those ancient clapped out Southbends, that have no value in a modern machine shop, get passed around garage shops for pennies. CAD CAM has real value. Once an investment is making money, the math is very different, but you still have to make enough to keep the doors open.


I hope you guys don't find this message out of context but here are my thoughts on Fusion 360.  I renew my license yearly.  Currently, Autodesk is offering a discounted subscription price of $297.00/yr.  That's pretty cheap compared to the alternatives.  MasterCam gist quoted me $14500.00 That being said Fusion is cheaper than MasterCam's annual maintenance fees.  Yes, Autodesk is continually upgrading and sometimes introducing bugs into their code but bugs are rare and usually quickly corrected.  With a program this complex there is a learning curve to manage.  Anytime I have issues Autodesk ALWAYs has had someone on the other end of the phone to quickly explain/help me thru them.


----------



## Foozer (Oct 3, 2020)

Fusion - I don't really make things, just like to do things. Getting a fundamental working knowledge of Fusion is a 'Do Thing'  This new do thing is PCB. First bite was with Eagle, then noticed Fusion has PCB functionality and coupled with it's ability to G-Code, Hey, another bucket list 'Do Thing' in work. Always wanted to make a PCB, No reason why, just a thing to do and Fusion works fine for it.

Surprise to me was that my home grown stone axe and flint knife mill actually returned a decent end . . .


----------



## nealeb (Oct 3, 2020)

Anyone actually used the new hobby version of F360? I "upgraded" a couple of days ago and have generated a few gcode files with it for testing.

1. You can export to .stp/.step. At least, the option exists although I have not actually tried it, not having anything to read it. Autodesk did back down on that one so some variant of "industry standard" export is possible.

2. Can't try 4th axis - never used it and have no models to use it with, but no reason to suppose that it is not disabled as per new features.

3. Rapids. Only rapid moves within a toolpath are converted into G1 and max feed speed. There is still an initial G0 to the start of the toolpath. This did concern me as I use a 1500x750mm router and a slow feed to the start of a cut half-way down the bed would be painfully slow. It does not look like an easy job to pick out the G1 commands within a toolpath that could be replaced by a G0, and the effects of getting one of those wrong would mean a broken tool at the very least.

4. Removal of ATC support. This is an interesting one. As far as I can see, all that has happened is that if you try to post-process multiple toolpaths, it complains and tells you to pay more money. If you PP each toolpath separately, it produces something that looks very like the previous output, complete with comment identifying the toolpath, and with an initial TxxM6 command. There is then the usual header and footer "stuff". Looks to me as if it's a simple editing job to just stick all the separate tool path files into a single file, trim out the redundant header and footer lines (easily identified) and you are back as you were. No, you wouldn't want to do this commercially, but for my limited hobby use it looks OK. I don't have an ATC but it's still convenient to have the embedded M6 commands that trigger a manual toolchange sequence on my machine.

5. No "drawing output to PDF" Well, that's a bit misleading. What has happened is that you can no longer use the "Output to PDF" button to create PDF versions of drawings directly. So, what you do is use the "Print" command (via the File menu) and then select a PDF "virtual printer." Yes, this does work as I have tested it myself. Created a drawing from an existing component, added a few random dimensions plus an isometric view, then went through the File->Print->Adobe PDF process. The resulting output file looks exactly like the version I would have obtained via the "Output to PDF" button. Yes, you need a few more mouse clicks but in practice - no real loss of functionality.

I wonder if one reason for the removal of "commercial" features is less to do with the odd model engineer earning a few quid/bucks on the side via eBay and more to do with small commercial outfits using the hobby licence for genuine commercial purposes. Could understand Autodesk being a bit upset about that.


----------



## xpylonracer (Oct 4, 2020)

Even with the recent restrictions Fusion 360 is by far still the best game in town for the truly hobby user.

xpylonracer


----------



## awake (Oct 4, 2020)

With respect to CAM and 4th axis - FreeCAD v.19 has added some "preliminary 4th-axis" features to its CAM capabilities. I'm not sure what that means, since I don't have a 4th axis, and indeed don't have a CNC mill. But just a word of encouragement that FreeCAD might be, now or in the near future, a viable alternative.


----------



## Muzzer (Oct 5, 2020)

Deskproto is another option for 4th axis - DeskProto offers CNC machining for non-machinists

Not got round to looking into it in any detail yet myself but I suspect it's likely to be less buggy than the FreeCAD, which is a WIP. Not free (248 Euros for multi axis hobby users) but you actually get to own it.


----------



## MrMetric (Oct 6, 2020)

Neal.  Thanks for the update....  I have concerns about hand editing too much.  It seems like a good way to have a crash.  The tool change isn't the hardest thing in the world, but a changer is generally pretty far away from the part being machined.  So now you will slllllloooooowwwwwwly go to that location, change the tool, and then sllllooooooowwwwwwwlllllllly return.  That is painful.  The other looming issue is that I don't really believe that this is the end of AutoDesk's changes.  In a few years, I'm pretty sure the hobby license will be further curtailed or removed.  Although I suspect that the commercial people using a hobby license was a concern, the bigger consideration for AutoDesk was probably the pure monetization of the product.  If correct, that sets a trend that will never end.

awake... thank you for the information.  I didn't realize FreeCAD was moving into 4th axis world.  Frankly, I don't need to make pretty pictures with threads, etc.  I'm not trying to make reference documentation, only parts.  So, if I can get decent interference checking with FreeCAD, I'm completely fine with using that over Fusion.  But.... I do have to say that I'm a little nervous about FreeCAD right now.

muzzer.... I'll look at DeskProto too.  Thanks

Alibre hasn't, to the best of my knowledge, announced any pricing on their MeshCAM integration.  That is something that interests me very much.  Both of those products are perpetual licenses, not time-based subscriptions (rentals).

I was also looking at Dolphin.  That is far more primitive than parametric modeling, but it might be worth looking at.  Dolphin, like Alibre, is a perpetual license.


----------



## nealeb (Oct 6, 2020)

MrMetric said:


> Neal.  Thanks for the update....  I have concerns about hand editing too much.  It seems like a good way to have a crash.  The tool change isn't the hardest thing in the world, but a changer is generally pretty far away from the part being machined.  So now you will slllllloooooowwwwwwly go to that location, change the tool, and then sllllooooooowwwwwwwlllllllly return.  That is painful.  The other looming issue is that I don't really believe that this is the end of AutoDesk's changes.  In a few years, I'm pretty sure the hobby license will be further curtailed or removed.  Although I suspect that the commercial people using a hobby license was a concern, the bigger consideration for AutoDesk was probably the pure monetization of the product.  If correct, that sets a trend that will never end.


I should have added that the code generated for each individual toolpath includes both the initial G0 to move it to the start of the cut and finishes with a G28 which will bring the tool back to (usually) the toolchange position. At least, that's the way my G28 position is defined and I think it's a common choice. As each toolpath includes that G0/G28 at top/bottom, just putting them end to end in a single file (and removing a few clearly identified header/trailer lines) will avoid those slow moves except during the toolpath execution itself. A long way from ideal but an equally long way from being unusable.


----------



## SomeSailor (Oct 7, 2020)

For $23 a month I'm not doing any gcode editing.  The time I'll save in rapids alone will pay for that.  

I guess that begs to ask what you value your time at, even as a hobbyist?   I terms of dollars / hour?


----------



## nealeb (Oct 7, 2020)

It's an interesting question - reminds me of that old one that goes something like, "At your usual hourly rate, what's the smallest denomination note/bill/coin it's worth bending down to pick up?" 

As a model engineer, I'm not sure that I can value my time in any objective sense. I make things that would be cheaper and quicker to buy just because it gives me more satisfaction that way. I don't like wasting time but I recognise that my time/money trade-off is a whole lot different now I am retired than when I was working.

The new F360 constraints around rapid speed are not going to make much difference to me. I stress "to me" because everyone's situation is different. I use a home-built CNC router for everything from plastic to steel. I often create (well, created) gcode files with multiple toolpaths with embedded M6 toolchange codes, but I do not have an ATC. So, the process used to be rapid feed to start of cut, cut, end of toolpath, rapid to toolchange position, then a couple of minutes to change tools, maybe with change of collet as well, reset tool height/Z zero. Hit start then next toolpath starts. I could edit together a half-dozen toolpaths in less time that it takes me to change a tool. Or maybe I don't need to bother - I just select the next toolpath file in the series. I'll try it and see.

Similarly, I doubt if the lack of rapid feed during a toolpath execution will make much difference for the kinds of toolpaths I typically use. None of the other restrictions will affect me much either, from what I can see.

So, $23 is about £15 - that's about 50% more than minimum hourly rate in UK. Very rough approximations here - I'm an engineer! I can't see the file edit or file switching, whichever way I go, adding more than 30mins to my monthly tasks. A subscription (and I'm thinking of what it will cost, not the special offer price) isn't worth it TO ME - I stress that this is a very personal decision. Yes, it's not what it was and they've taken some of my toys away. Does it suit me better than anything else around? You bet it does!


----------



## SomeSailor (Oct 7, 2020)

I think too many times, people have or take no real time to value their time.   It's the one no one can give you more of.   As they say "Time is the most valuable thing a man can spend" so if you truly value your time then assign a value to it and make your decision.  I work all day at in aerospace R&D... I have very little time to contribute to my machine business but I do use it all to it's fullest.   Anything I can do to increase my efficiency, conserve my time or my bottom line... I'll invest in.


----------



## awake (Oct 7, 2020)

SomeSailor said:


> I think too many times, people have or take no real time to value their time.   It's the one no one can give you more of.   As they say "Time is the most valuable thing a man can spend" so if you truly value your time then assign a value to it and make your decision.  I work all day at in aerospace R&D... I have very little time to contribute to my machine business but I do use it all to it's fullest.   Anything I can do to increase my efficiency, conserve my time or my bottom line... I'll invest in.



So here's the flip side: putting a value on the time I spend in a hobby (intended to be relaxation) seems like an excellent way to turn it into work (and therefore stress)!


----------



## nealeb (Oct 7, 2020)

Difference between hobby and business? Closest I get to "earning" from my hobby is helping a friend with something and getting a bottle or two of decent wine as payment! Common payment method in this part of the world...

I doubt that any of the "making" things I do would earn me anything like a decent hourly rate. Fortunately, they don't have to!


----------



## awake (Oct 7, 2020)

A long-ago seminar on managing stress suggested that most human beings need a certain amount of relaxation time to counter the stress of work. Unfortunately, most of us tend to turn our "relaxation" into work.

According to the seminar, work is characterized by schedules, goals, and assessment. So, if we go fishing in order to relax, but we spend most of our time seeking to catch a certain number or type of fish by a certain time, and assessing whether or not we succeeded, we have turned fishing into work.

There is a danger in a hobby that has inherent goals - to finish a working model - that it may not truly provide relaxation for us. The key for me is to make sure I enjoy the journey, that I value the journey as much or more than the end product. I don't always do that, of course ... but I can tell when I am starting to turn this hobby into work, by the way it begins to stress me out that I have to make more progress, speed up, etc.

I should note that all of this is framed in terms of "most" humans - but of course, all of us are wired differently.

If you are a natural workaholic, someone who genuinely enjoys working constantly, the above may not apply.

On the other hand, as my brother once said to me, "If you enjoy wasting time, is it truly wasted?"


----------



## Apprentice707 (Oct 8, 2020)

The old adage, "We are cash rich and time poor", comes to mind. We can always earn more cash, but time is finite and unknown. I also value my time more as I get older since it is an ever decreasing commodity.

Just select something you like and have a go at it. Oh, and get a big scrap bin you will need it. The bar stock idea seems a good one, castings are expensive.

Good Luck.

B


----------



## SomeSailor (Oct 8, 2020)

awake said:


> So here's the flip side: putting a value on the time I spend in a hobby (intended to be relaxation) ...



If you find it relaxing then the lack of rapids will just add more time for relaxation.


----------



## MrMetric (Oct 8, 2020)

I do get a chuckle that we can complain about the cost of castings, but find the recurrent cost of Fusion to be perfectly fine.  Hmmm, but that is OK.  We each have our own way of looking at things.  For what it is worth, I prefer bar stock too.  If I screw something up, I am not searching for a (likely obsolete) replacement casting.  That said, I think that castings have a certain charm that is fun too.  Plus, it is an additional skill, and in the end, all of this is about stretching our minds.

I decided to buy SolidWorks.  It is only $8750 and it is a perpetual license.  I'm dropping another 2500 on a CAM system.  Money is, after all, irrelevant.


----------



## SomeSailor (Oct 8, 2020)

I have played with a bit of casting before I got my mill.    Glad to see you settled on something.   I haven't used SolidWorks in forever.   I'm sure its even better than when I played with it.


----------



## MrMetric (Oct 8, 2020)

SomeSailor said:


> I have played with a bit of casting before I got my mill.    Glad to see you settled on something.   I haven't used SolidWorks in forever.   I'm sure its even better than when I played with it.



LOL... I was yanking your guys' chains because you all seem to care very little about expenses.  Clearly you have more disposable budget than I do.  But, that is all good.  We are who we are.  I'm better off than some, apparently but quite a bit behind others.

FWIW, though.  I think that SolidWorks beats the pants off Fusion.  HOWEVER, it is far more difficult to learn.  It is really geared more to the larger organization. Not diss'ing Fusion, but it isn't perfect for every situation.


----------



## awake (Oct 8, 2020)

SomeSailor said:


> If you find it relaxing then the lack of rapids will just add more time for relaxation.



Since I do not have a CNC, nothing I do is very rapid!


----------



## SomeSailor (Oct 9, 2020)

I watch my 83 year old father struggle with just day to day things.  His dexterity is gone, his attention span diminished and his general interest in learning new things has tapered away.   He would argue those things, but I see it and chose not to worry about small things like owning or renting my software.  If time is a commodity I can control by buying a license, I'm in.


----------



## SomeSailor (Oct 9, 2020)

awake said:


> Since I do not have a CNC, nothing I do is very rapid!



I do and I'm still run slow as molassis.


----------



## nealeb (Oct 9, 2020)

I've just installed the free version of SolidEdge 3D. Be interesting to see what it's like compared to F360.


----------



## MrMetric (Oct 9, 2020)

Neal... Can you give a little more information about that?  Specifically, is it time based [edit: doesn't expire], license locked to a computer, or activation based?  And, does it have CAM or is it capable of generating STEP files?

edit: Pretty sure it doesn't have CAM.  I plan on trying this one out though.  If it can output STEP then I can buy MeshCAM, Dolphin, or something else.  Because I really am an amateur, I don't care if I have a watermark on the plans or if I cannot open the drawing in the commercial version (although I would have thought that they have some service to convert a plan if someone's hobby is changed to a business).


----------



## nealeb (Oct 9, 2020)

Haven't actually done anything with it yet but as far as I can there is no licence expiry date (i.e. it is unlimited time) and I don't think that it is locked to a specific machine. I have the "Community" edition as I struggled to see differences between two or three offerings. But given that it is free, I'm not sure why it would be machine-specific. I'll update as I discover things but don't hold your breath - I have to get a couple of things done in F360 first.


----------



## MrMetric (Oct 11, 2020)

Being free is, sadly, irrelevant to licensing. The primary intent of locking to a machine is that it helps reduce illicit usage of the product outside the scope of the license.  That would be commercial use on a hobby license.  If they've neutered the functionality significantly, they may not do that.  The primary intent of time basing something is, in my opinion and most of those I know, is to perform a marketing bait and switch.  Get people used to the product and grow your market base, then eventually stop issuing the licenses; this is the reason I tend to shy away from free time based time based license. 

If the community edition of solidworks looks like it is highly functional and either has CAM or STP output, then that could be very attractive.  There wouldn't be the risk implicit to F360 of the owner deciding to charge for all licenses (my assumption of where AutoDesk is going).  And you can always use a full featured CAM product that doesn't have the unacceptable (my opinion) hand editing required in F360.  MeshCAM or perhaps Dolphin might work there.  I don't need something as fancy as F360 CAM.  I just need something that I own (free or paid... just not rented) so that it is reliably available.

Good find, Neal.  Thank you for your information. I'm doing a solar installation right now so I'm really tied up with that and haven't been able to research any of this.  I hope to finish up the install next weekend and that will hopefully give me some more time (although I really need to go through the Android programming guide as I am looking at a new employer who uses that)... So many things... So little time.


----------



## kquiggle (Oct 11, 2020)

OnShape free use :

There was some discussion here recently about whether using the free version of OnShape puts your work in the public domain or not. This has not been a concern to me as I put all my hobbyist work in the public domain anyway, but I thought I would research it a bit further. Below is the relevant paragraph in the OnShape Terms of Use.

I interpret the paragraph to mean that any _document_ you create will be in the public domain, but not necessarily the "invention" itself. For example, if I invent an anti-gravity machine and draw up plans for it in OnShape Free, then anyone could copy and distribute those plans legally but I could still patent my invention. Of course this would be a stupid thing to do, but that's a different question. It all turns around what constitutes the actual "intellectual property" in the document - the drawing itself or the idea encompassed by the drawing.

For any Public Document owned by a Free Plan User created on or after August 7, 2018, or any Public Document created prior to that date without a LICENSE tab, Customer grants a worldwide, royalty free and non-exclusive license to any End User or third party accessing the Public Document to use the intellectual property contained in Customer’s Public Document without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Document, and to permit persons to whom the Document is made available to do the same.​​But we don't need to get into the legal maze. As a practical matter, if you are developing work for commercial purposes then OnShape Free is not for you. If you are a hobbyist who does not want to share their work then OnShape Free is not for you (also - What is wrong with you!?).


----------



## Cogsy (Oct 11, 2020)

Here in Australia, once your 'invention'  has been publicly shared, no matter how restricted, then the invention is no longer eligible to be patented. In practice, this means if you tell your best friend all about a fancy new idea you've had for the worlds' best mousetrap, you've shared the invention and can no longer lodge a patent on it. So you need to get anyone you share your ideas with to sign formal non-disclosure agreements - having your designs publicly available on the OnShape platform would invalidate any possibly claim to those intellectual rights (at least according to Australian patent law).


----------



## MrMetric (Oct 11, 2020)

That same caveat exists in the US too... So, although you may own the invention, you cannot patent it... Which, of course, makes me question whether or not you really own it, after all.  But, I agree that we don't really want to got down this rat hole. Frankly, I think the thread has morphed into alternatives to F360, which is far more useful for those that are interested in what exists beyond the sphere of AutoDesk.  OnShape is an integral part of that offering, and I think the concern about how drawings are managed is something that is well documented (the interpretation is subject to the user).


----------



## TSutrina (Oct 12, 2020)

MrMetric said:


> LOL... I was yanking your guys' chains because you all seem to care very little about expenses.  Clearly you have more disposable budget than I do.  But, that is all good.  We are who we are.  I'm better off than some, apparently but quite a bit behind others.
> 
> FWIW, though.  I think that SolidWorks beats the pants off Fusion.  HOWEVER, it is far more difficult to learn.  It is really geared more to the larger organization. Not diss'ing Fusion, but it isn't perfect for every situation.


I have used Pro E and Siemens UG-NX both for engineering firms.   And have had some experience with Solidworks.  I have used the free cad programs of Granite, Creo, and freeCAD plus evaluated a few others.   EVERY CAD PROGRAM HAS ADVANTAGES AND PROBLEMS.  Building a model seems to take the same amount of time independent of the program.  The big advantage of CAD is that changes and drawing are faster.  That is a big savings for companies.  The general approach of all successful cad programs basics are the same so using one program is not that difficult then another.  The layering of getting to features has to be learned but that just takes practice as does the approaches to get around the particular problem in each cad program.  Cad program divide into two groups: those that retain a history of the steps taken.  So each time a model is open the computer goes threw the history file to build the model.  To alter the model or fix a crash requires going back in the history to make changes.  This becomes almost impossible for huge models such as for a casting, metal or plastic of a housing.  Often large sections of a build are thrown out.   The other group has a file that is the end result like a step or Igus file, you have parameter for many features of the model which can be changed, and your model could crash so undue capacity is required.  It typically is created when the model is saved so a working history exist between saving the model.  Thus to change the model the person cuts away and then build the replacement if needed.  The model does not crash the same.  Usually a feature can not be done so a work around feature of features is made.


----------



## SomeSailor (Oct 12, 2020)

I have been awarded a couple of design and utility patents and a few trade secrets along the way.   If you work fr a company that can and will afford the money to defend them... go for it... otherwise keep the idea to yourself.  If you're working on something on your own and hope to make a few bucks in the market... don't use OnShape.


----------



## MrMetric (Oct 12, 2020)

SomeSailor.... Sounds like you are probably, or were, a Boeing employee. They defend patent and trademark usage with 'vigor. Even ancient things that have been brought into their portfolio through acquisition, such as "P51 Mustang".  It is amazing how much the company owns now.

I do agree with your basic sentiments about OnShape though.  As time has progressed, I've become far less interested in it... In the end, everything has a balance. We've discussed, ad nauseam, my concerns about F360, but I am not 100% comfortable with OnShape either.  I actually think they went too far with their restrictions, and it is clear that others feel the same. In the end, all of these companies _want_ hobbyists to use the program because a certain percentage of those will transition to commercial usage. So it is a balance for them to allow low end users while preventing license abuse.  OnShape, in my opinion, went too far. However, if you are 75 years old, have zero interest in ever taking a widget and making a business of it, and are really just interested in sharing with the world what you are designing, then OnShape is probably fine for you. But that person is, by that description, never going to transition to a commercial usage, so OnShape will never get an up-sell.


----------



## SomeSailor (Oct 12, 2020)

Yes, I'm a System Engineer / Program Manager with Boeing.  I work in Product Development (mostly R&D around connectivity and cyber), but you're right, large corporations spend a TON on IP.   They're very supportive in bring invention disclosures and trade protection ideas forward.   They even pay a small reward for each and provide nice plaques when awarded (and ya get a cool tee inventor shirt every year).  

    I really like Onshape and used it almost exclusively before I got my mill.  The lack of CAM pulled me over to Fusion.  Ironically, the CEO of OnShape is Jon Hirschtick who founded SolidWorks.   Who knows if they'll glom on some CAM natively to OnShape, but for now I think VisualCamc is the only CAM extension specifically for Onshape? I haven't tried it though. Maybe it's not as crippled as Fusion is?


----------



## Mike Henry (Oct 12, 2020)

SomeSailor said:


> I really like Onshape and used it almost exclusively before I got my mill.  The lack of CAM pulled me over to Fusion.  Ironically, the CEO of OnShape is Jon Hirschtick who founded SolidWorks.   Who knows if they'll glom on some CAM natively to OnShape, but for now I think VisualCamc is the only CAM extension specifically for Onshape? I haven't tried it though. Maybe it's not as crippled as Fusion is?



Onshape also supports SprutCAM through an add-on though I rarely use that.  They support several other CAM products the same way as well as Kiri:Moto.






						App Store - Onshape
					

With Onshape's App Store, modern CAD users can choose to add specialty engineering software such as simulation, CAM, or rendering to their cloud workspace




					appstore.onshape.com


----------



## lee webster (May 10, 2021)

I am starting to get to know Design spark mechanical version 5. It's better than I thought and has some usefull features that I dont have in FreeCAD. To produce an oval shaped nameplate with text on a curved path I first created a drawing in Inkscape, a free programme. I then saved the drawing as an SVG and imported it into FreeCAD, another free programme. I then used FreeCAD to save the file as a STEP file to import into Design spark 5, another... Yep, free. There's a pattern here. In Design spark I can extrude the text and then add draft to it. There is a limitation to the amount of draft a shape will take. I can then save the file as an STL for 3D printing. I would rather use Solidworks, but even the student licence is a bit steep. I do have ViaCAD version 10 that I have bought (£50 from Germany, legal) but it is not too user friendly.


----------



## MrMetric (May 10, 2021)

There are some legal ways you can get some stripped versions of SolidWorks through professional organizations, often for the cost of the membership itself.  That can often be a good way to go.


----------



## stanstocker (May 10, 2021)

lee webster said:


> <snipped> I would rather use Solidworks, but even the student licence is a bit steep. I do have ViaCAD version 10 that I have bought (£50 from Germany, legal) but it is not too user friendly.


If you join the EAA (Experimental Aircraft Association) for $40 / yr Solidworks is included for personal use.  It's real solidworks, not some watered down weasel version.





__





						SOLIDWORKS Resource Center | EAA
					





					www.eaa.org
				




Cheers,
Stan


----------



## SmithDoor (May 10, 2021)

awake said:


> With respect to CAM and 4th axis - FreeCAD v.19 has added some "preliminary 4th-axis" features to its CAM capabilities. I'm not sure what that means, since I don't have a 4th axis, and indeed don't have a CNC mill. But just a word of encouragement that FreeCAD might be, now or in the near future, a viable alternative.


The 4th axis is used for rotary table or dividing head. 

Dave


----------



## SmithDoor (May 10, 2021)

lee webster said:


> I am starting to get to know Design spark mechanical version 5. It's better than I thought and has some usefull features that I dont have in FreeCAD. To produce an oval shaped nameplate with text on a curved path I first created a drawing in Inkscape, a free programme. I then saved the drawing as an SVG and imported it into FreeCAD, another free programme. I then used FreeCAD to save the file as a STEP file to import into Design spark 5, another... Yep, free. There's a pattern here. In Design spark I can extrude the text and then add draft to it. There is a limitation to the amount of draft a shape will take. I can then save the file as an STL for 3D printing. I would rather use Solidworks, but even the student licence is a bit steep. I do have ViaCAD version 10 that I have bought (£50 from Germany, legal) but it is not too user friendly.


You buy Autocad 2000 on eBay. 
It does need 32 bit installer.
 I have up load the installer to this site.
You may look Autocad 95 it works great on Windows 10 64 bit. 

Dave


----------



## ddmckee54 (May 13, 2021)

Dave:

You are going WAYYYY back with those two versions.  They're only a a few years newer than the Autocad 10 that I started out on 30 years ago.  On Ebay, If you aren't getting the original disks there's a good chance that you could be getting a pirated copy.

I'm not even sure if those versions of Autocad are 3D capable or not.  Even if they are, their version of 3D cad will be a completely different animal than F360's version.  Which may not be a bad thing, I've got a friend that used the 3D cad on full blown Autocad 2019, and didn't have any problems wiith it.  But both he and I had problems with F360.  This is highly subjective, but to us F360 just didn't feel right.  To paraphrase the Clancey Brothers, "It baffled the hell out of us!"

Also both of those old Autocad versions are just drawing packages with none of the, at one time, built in goodies that the free version of F360 had.  (Losing the goodies is kinda what this thread was about.)

Don


----------



## SmithDoor (May 13, 2021)

My copy I purchased in 2000 new 
I also have Autocad 95. 97 & 98 too.
After 2000 I stop up dates as 2000 works Great.

 I would send drawing in DFX  format for CNC work. There at subcontractor simple program to use on there CNC machine.

Dave 



ddmckee54 said:


> Dave:
> 
> You are going WAYYYY back with those two versions.  They're only a a few years newer than the Autocad 10 that I started out on 30 years ago.  On Ebay, If you aren't getting the original disks there's a good chance that you could be getting a pirated copy.
> 
> ...


----------



## Jasonb (May 13, 2021)

DXF is not going to be much use for Lee's 3D printing or any 3D CNC work for that matter.


----------



## ddmckee54 (May 13, 2021)

You're right about the 3D printing, all the slicers I know of need an STL file.

As far as the other 3D CNC work goes...  That depends on how much BS you're willing to put up with.  On another forum a guy is building a 1:3 scale Mercedes-Benz W165 Grand Prix engine with some amazily complex CNC machined parts.  It's my understanding that the code for those parts was pieced together from code generated by 2.5D software.  My 2.5D Ventric software uses DXF files.

I don't know what the 3D version of Ventric needs, but you're right a DXF probably wouldn't be much good there.  You need something that separates the solids from the air a little better than just by defining lines and points in a wireframe.  I haven't tried looking at the DXF's that my 3D cad generates, maybe theres something in there that defines the solids?

Don


----------



## Jasonb (May 14, 2021)

Mike (Vixen) stacks up a load of DXF files and produces the G-code for each layer which is a long winded way to do it as he has not updated his software for some time and therefore only has 2D CAD and non 3D CAM so his parts are really just a stack of individual contours.

3D CAD/CAM will work it all out for you and do in minutes what can take Mike several days to do and also likely to cut the job quicker and need less hand finishing afterwards. A lot will depend on what you are drawing and machining, less complex items will be OK in 2 or 2.5D but once you start getting compound curves meeting other similar curves and fillets at the intersection it's hard enough to draw those let alone cut them working out all the offsets manually.


----------



## ddmckee54 (May 14, 2021)

Jason:

It is definitely the long winded way to do it, that's why the comment about how much BS you're willing to put up with.  I'm not advocating to only use the 2.5D, I'm just saying that if it's what you've got - you can still do some pretty amazing stuff with it.

When I saw all the contour lines that made up the interior of Vixen's W165 oil sump, and realized he did it with 2.5D, all I could think was "Holy Moly". (Or something like that.)  I wonder how he generated those lines, I'll have to ask.

Don


----------



## lee webster (May 28, 2021)

I recently downloaded Solid edge for hobbyists. It is free and I have installed it on both of my Windows 10 computers, one of them is not connected to the internet and didn't complain. I also tried to install it on my Windows 7 computer, my cad computer, and it wouldn't run. Solid edge did flag a warning before the installation started. The tutorials I have watched on youtube so far show it to be very similar to Solidworks. Anything free is well worth trying!


----------



## Zeb (May 28, 2021)

For engine/steam type stuff F360 is my ticket for one-offs, since I can still produce parts. I've thought about joining EAA for Solidworks. I've signed off dozens of experimental aircraft/rotorcraft, so it wouldn't quite be cheating. I've been to a few of their local meets and Oshkosh a few times. 



> Blender is great for organic shape sorts of stuff, but it's always seemed too different from CAD for mechanical "drafting" sorts of uses, and their constraints seem all or mostly related to objects and actions on objects rather than to the relationships between line segments and such.



Agreed. And with Boxcutter/Hardops, you can work parametrically and constrain vertices/edges with empties. But Blender is pretty steep on the learning curve. As a Blender fanboy, I'm not saying it works for everyone. Lacks CAM support too, but it can export just about any format.

Here's an organic-ish cyclic using sculpting tools, constrained booleans, and references. The fit on the 1" steel tube was snug.






This is a series of non-destructive parametric models that I did to test Blender. You can select empties and drag parametrically (or assign an accurate XYZ location). You can also bool any cutaway that you want. The workflows can be clunky to setup, but fine once things are moving. The "modifier stack" essentially becomes the history you'd find in CAD. I just work in standard Blender units, as imperial is already "metricized" in thousandths of an inch. Models can be scaled later to suit.






Some more of my projects using ref planes...steam yarder and loco.


----------



## Zeb (Sep 24, 2021)

Some thoughts going into next year...
I've been learning Rhino 3D in the last few weeks and have been very impressed. I can drop clean Subdiv meshes from Blender, convert them to bsurfaces (complex topology, but CNC-able), and constrain dimensions (in a hacky way).




Rhino also has a ton of control for surfaces (if you're nerdy enough). I was able to solve 2 fillets that Fusion 360 couldn't handle (in example below). You can also rebuild crummy auto-F360 topology with new custom topology. You do lose a lot of model history functions, but for the model below it is complex enough that large changes often require a rebuild anyway.




What I like the most is being able to support a company that allows me to "own" my tools. I cringe at dropping $1K for Rhino or Zbrush, but I get to keep them for my hobbies and one-off commissions stress free. I was one of those guys that frantically backed up all my F360 models only to get the "Psyche! we changed our mind and won't delete your models." If I had a business and was making revenue then I'd definitely go Solidworks/F360, so not dissing on them (I use NX at work). Mid-level options work for casting/3D printing I do. I'm also not keen to like CNC'd engines lacking that delicious casting grain we're coming to miss. hehe To each their own.


----------



## lee webster (Sep 25, 2021)

Very impressive work. I suppose if we are going to spend many thousands of £ or $ on machinery to make our models, then $1K for the software to help do it is reasonable. I wouldn't spend that much on software I didn't own. No matter how good it was.


----------



## SmithDoor (Sep 25, 2021)

I still use Autocad I purchased new in 2000.
It works great on Windows 10 64bit today. 

Dave



lee webster said:


> Very impressive work. I suppose if we are going to spend many thousands of £ or $ on machinery to make our models, then $1K for the software to help do it is reasonable. I wouldn't spend that much on software I didn't own. No matter how good it was.


----------



## MrMetric (Nov 29, 2021)

I'll add IntelliCAD CMS (Compatible CAD Software for .DWG files - CMS IntelliCAD - Products) into the mix.  They have a gazillion flavors (too many, really) of the application available.  They have frequent sales of up to 50% off, but the one I chose was a perpetual license, perpetual update flavor.  It cost me $150 on sale.  It is a bit annoying because you have to launch it via a web license, but it does run locally.  The plus side is that I can easily run this on two different computers; given that I have one in the shop and one in the house, that feature is very convenient.

IntelliCAD (not CMS) is a consortium that has been around for a long long time.  You can read about it here: Alternative CAD Platform | IntelliCAD Technology Consortium  Basically, however, is about 20 companies (maybe more) that bought into, and co-develop, a library that basically mimics AutoCAD.  Each company then adds on their (non-common) features.  So someone might sell a product for fire sprinkler design, while another does hydraulics.  But the reality is that the CAD aspects are essentially identical to AutoCAD and anyone familiar with the command structure will feel at home pretty quickly.

IntelliCAD CMS is one of the member companies that has been around for for over 20 years, I believe.  I don't think they are going anywhere.  The EasyRun versions are the guys that auto-update.  The downside is that perpetual license EasyRun products do not have photo rendering because that is a third party product for which (I assume) CMS could not negotiate perpetual licensing.  But... I'm personally interested in only the 2D side of the application, so I didn't really care about the rendering.

All in all, I have to say that I'm pretty happy with IntelliCAD CMS.  It was well worth the $150 I paid for it.  If you are interested, I'd encourage you to get a trial version.  That will put you on their mailing list.  Then just wait.  Within a few months, they'll probably send you an email with a discount of between 20 and 50 percent.  I've never figured out their sales cycles, but the discounts come pretty regularly.


----------

