GNU/Linux based CAD Environment

[Yagnesh Desai]

Dear Thomas;

Instead of talking of big things starting a
Sub-Sub-Distribution would be great thing.

If you are seriously for such distribution
we can discuss this topic on a new mailing-group.

Well I even don't know how to do it, but I am
really interested in it and would like to be
part of such effort. (May be I will learn
from the process)

I feel that you already know Varkon people
and might be able to set ball rolling. I am
already interested keep me informed
about the progress.

Though XFCE is great I thing FluxBox is the
lightest of the Desktop environment, I have seen.

Regards

Yagnesh

> > > > >
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 13:07:15 +0100
From: email.listen at googlemail.com
Subject: Re: GNU/Linux based CAD Environment;
To: ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com
Message-ID: <200701111307.17595.email.listen at googlemail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="iso-8859-1"

Am Thu, 11. January 2007 10:23 schrieb Yagnesh Desai:
> Dear Thomas;
>
> Just for the record the Varkon is also there in ubuntu archives.
>
> Comming to the topic. Man you went to great depth on this topic,
> Congratulations. Hence I was forced to think further.
>
> I also found your concerns valid and relevant for CAD environment
> As you pointed out the GNU/Linux + CAD environment is  something
> can be a real big thing.
>
> BUT
>
> If someone consider the distribution based on CAD application
> then one would also have to multiply the number of complications
> mentioned by you and they would look something like:
>
> - Which Linux kernel (2.4.x or 2.6.x)
> - Which environment GNOME, KDE, XFce, FluxBOX. .
> - Which Hardware X86, AMD, PowerPC (my knowledge is limited)
> - Which Display . . . .
>
> The focus would be lost from CAD to OS.

I think the focus should be having as most as possible reccources left for
the
CAD application('s). For this I would vote for a lightweigt window manager,
e.g. XFCE.
If such a CAD Distribution would be based upon XUbuntu the questions which
kernel, hardware or display is mostly obsolete due to the fact that this
would be given by XUbuntu. (BTW: that's why I had the idea of a
sub-sub-distribution. one sub for CAD and the other for XUbuntu :-))

> While the distribution would support only Varkon. Fogeting the
> real issues mentioned by you which needs to be shorted out
> to get a real good CAD environment. While many of the people would
> not like to migrate to Varkon. I am yet to try it out.

Varkon came up during the starting thread and because till now it is the
most
powerfull I'm aware of. So it might be better to use the term &CADapp
instead
of Varkon. I would be very glad if we have more Distributions which are
tailored for specific company branches. :-)

> I would like to compare GNU/Linux based CAD environment concept to
> GCC instead of Linux. As this so called GNU CAD environment can bring
> all CAD related contributions to a standard. I think OpenDesign.org is a
> good step while I am yet to understand how succesfull they are
> at creating standards.
>
> I was really curious why so many application for simillar task.
> All seems to be inventing the wheel of their own.
>
> QCAD, PythonCAD, VariCAD, BricsCAD . . . . . . . and they
> seem to be doing same thing. What I call is
> "Everyone invented the wheel."

This often has 'historic' reasons or because of special threngtheness in
one
or the other technical / functional aspect.

AFAIR Varkon was originally developed for SAAB a well reputated aviation
industry company from Sweden. So this is also the reason for Varkons
strength
in freeshape surface design which is a must for developing an airplane.
Catia can be found in a lot of automotive companies, e.g. Dymler Chrysler.
Other CAD Environments have their historic roots in electrical engineering,
e.g. Eagle or in the architecture, e.g. AutoCAD. You will find others for
moulding design, optics design, ..., ..., ....


On the other side the big number of applications for one and the same task
in
GNU/Linux is also an argument for (Branch)tailored sub-sub-distributions.
Under the aspect of winning world domation this would make it easier for
interested people to get into contact with free software in professional
environments. For them it would give (or is it would be? Sorry my rotten
english) some kind of 'proof of feasibility'.

The listing of aplications you gave in the paragraph above is often asked
when
one gets in contact to professionals, e.g. at a GNU/Linux booth on fairs
and
trade shows. A lot of theese people are irritated by the big number of
applications for the same task in GNU/Linux. It's the classical 'not to see
the wood for the trees' phenomenon.


> While main aim of OpenSource (GNU) effort which I consider
> is using the wheel which is already invented and adding engine
> to it to finally get a Merz . .
>
> More Discussion on this would again put us offtopic and might
> remove us from this user group . . Ha Ha Ha . . . !
We are not on a Debian list...
*duck'n'cover*

And not to forget discussion is the first step before planning...


regards,
thomas