Maybe a little read will answer some questions:
It is just a small lightweight SOLID modeler with an assembly system and parametrics!
Probably will stay free then, especially if they want to push their own 3D printing services.
more intuitive than max ;p, and i can see they are really threatened by open OSS :D.
well there is not real OSS NURBS modeler which is really usable.
But 3D printing is now finally reaching market acceptance for consumers not just companies.
400MB = small lightweight?
I didn’t threaten them: I have already discovered that it is perfectly useless to have any kind of interaction with them (e.g. there is a tremendous bug in the single window maximization which could be fixed in minutes but it is still there, after 2 years of having been notified). The deadline I mentioned is a timeout for my patience.
P.S.: the “f**k off you micro$erf” attitude of many OSS advocates is one of the reasons why people continue buying proprietary programs.
Fweeb ever installed Pro-E, SoldiWorks or those ???
P.S.: the “f**k off you micro$erf” attitude of many OSS advocates is one of the reasons why people continue buying proprietary programs.
I am not sure if that is the reason. Feature structure, product future, and most important software support is very important
when not the most important part. That is the result when I tried to promote Blender to design studios here.
People stop the argue about the Operating Systems …just DUALBOOT and shutup!
Blender 3D can do what this software do if the comunity make the NURBANA project move ? https://sites.google.com/a/ckbrd.de/blender---nurbs/
So instead arguing ask developer what it is happening with this project and why it is not in Blender already.
The reason people buy proprietary programs is the features, and compatibility with others.
I’ve used inventor a fair bit and i gotta say it’s fairly nice. Parametric is nice, but it is quite a change from blender if you want to take full advantage of it.
However, i don’t think it’ll work too well as a demo for inventor, because it’s still too big. Maybe if it was allowed to be mirrored though.
So, when compared to a freight train, a dump truck is small and lightweight? I dunno. 400MB is 400MB; I personally wouldn’t consider that small at all.
Wow… this conversation is degrading rapidly…
I’m trying this now. Very nice, never used a nurbs modeler before.
Too bad there isn’t a version to FreeBSD, but the Autodesk plans for MorphOS looks promising.
(Seriously, if you want to see how unfair is the world try to use one of these for one week)
Numarul7
no - 123D does not only deliver the typical tools for creating and editing solids but
comes with a complete design tree, snap system,geometry constraints, sketch planes, and an assembly system.
This type of tools require a lot of code which is why I defined this light, because by nature those programs are large.
WiKKiDWidgets
I very much agree with you.
Well the size of the code is probably neglectable compared to rest of the package (material presets etc.).
100mb help and localization
270mb .DLLs for QT, fbx, libai, OGS, shaders, parsers and algorithms and godsknowwhat.
Ok, if you count the external libraries…
the external libs contain most of the tool codes.
Arexma what do you think about 123D? It looks not bad. I am impressed with the sketch, constraint, and solid tools.
Just fine tools such as variable fillet ect. are missing, but they mentioned this is currently not available, indicating
this might come.
Well this is still a beta software.
Yeah, but most of this code was not written by Autodesk, but whatever I’m digressing.
What are the advantages of this software vs. other free or FOSS alternatives and/or vs. professional proprietary software?
I have been looking for a CAD compliment to Blender that can do constructive solid geometry modelling and be scripted. I’ve been playing with BRL-CAD. The learning curve is herculean but it’s very powerful and always being developed.
123D seems like a good offering but to be honest I prefer FOSS.
So what are the pro/cons of 123D in context?
Most of the code indeed. Instead of installing the libraries seperately they just shipped the whole lot with the binary. There´s also a redundant install directory. I guess this mess is just during beta.
I gave it a shot, to be honest, just to have it seen.
It is no tool I really need, neither for my work, nor for hobby. But it´s always good to broaden ones horizont, and if its free no harm done looking into it.
I still can´t use it though. It might be bug that occurs with my system, but I can´t really use it. Viewport looks grand and is lightning fast, but as soon as I start any parametric operations, my 4 cores have around 25% load each (dualthreaded and 100% load?) and it´s really not usable.
Extruding a part, no matter if I drag it or type in the extrusion distance, it takes 10-15 seconds until its updated.
Might try it again after the next beta - or try the 32b version on my other system.
BRL-CAD looks nice, its also in GSoC 2011. There was another FOSS solid modelling tool I liked but I can´t remember the name, can´t find it on my HDD anymore and can´t find the post in the forum… says how often I need it 
But 123D isn´t for you I guess, see my last paragraph in this post. But Claas is the man for this topic rather than I.
They don´t do that anymore anyways.
As I said in the thread prior to this one about 123D… they buy smaller companies as assets to their code and knowledge base. What do you think is cheaper for them, develop the algorithmic themselves, pay license fees, or simply assimilate the company? Bad for the end customer as it eliminates all competition, good for the developers as they have one common knowledge and codepool.
“We are Autodesk, resistance is futile, your biological and technological distinctiveness will be added to our own.”
–
I think you guys have the wrong picture of this tool, it´s not a 3D-CAD tool, or a modeler. The way I see it it´s for rapid prototyping, and quick product creation, with a buildin pipeline to actually produce this model, be it a Toy or a spare part. I just read the other day the first 3D homeprinter is going into massproduction, and not the foam or gluecrap but one that hardens a polymere liquid with laserlight allowing 0.20 mm (IIRC) precision. You got a broken plastic cog in your toy? Just whip it up and print it out. Got a great idea for a toy, mock it up and it´s “production ready”.
I am not sure though what place this tool takes, where to put it or what the goal Autodesk wants to achieve with it. Lure people into buying inventor? Making a “pro” version. No idea.