Has anyone heard when AczdX for AutoCad 2004 will be available?
I clipped this from another post. I'm assuming that a specific date is unavailable. I'm sure Tony will post something here when he knows more. Cheers, Dale
Man, It's tuff to get back into the swing of things after the holidays. That was AcadXTabs. Sheesh. Dale
Thanks Dale, I saw that in a May, '03 post from Tony but wasn't sure if anyone has heard anything new. Best Regards, Bill --
Yes, I know. Well, there was a lot more work than I had assumed, and not much time to do it. Sorry. Paid licensees will be the first to get it, BTW.
I would gladly pay for a license if I could get it sooner. I'm not distributing anything, only in house use. Please email me with the license info. Thanks, Bill --
AcadX for AutoCAD 2004 will be available shortly, but there will be no free 'for-in-house-only' version of it. The reason for this is because it has come to my attention that far too many copies of it were/are being distributed illegally, without a distribution license. I got a call today from someone at Autodesk who made the mistake of telling me that the people he was representing are currently using the 2002 version, and have distributed copies of it with a solution they are selling or licensing to others, and that they now needed the 2004 version. The problem is that those people have not licensed AcadX for distribution, and hence, are illegally distributing copies of it. When things reach the point where Autodesk itself is in some way involved in, or with parties that are willfully infringing on my IP rights, it means that a change is in order. Boiling the ocean just to deal with a few bad fish is not something I wamt to do, but I really don't have a choice.
Tony, Of course do whatever you want with your product. I'm sure you've put much hard work into it and you're entitled to decide how it is distributed. However (even though I don't use AcadX) I would like to make a comment. Perhaps you're planning to introduce some copy-protection or no-download-unless-you-pay policy which would lock it down. But otherwise removing the "free for in-house use only" will obviously not stop the "dishonest" from using it - it would only serve to stop the "honest". If parties such as those mentioned by the Autodesk rep are illegally distributing copies now you have the opportunity to prosecute them as much as you would should you adopt your proposed changes. You may like to instead consider a 5-second splash screen that says "AcadX - Free for IN-HOUSE USE ONLY" or something similar when AcadX is loaded. Nobody is going to be able to distribute a commercial product with *that* in it. Again, it's entirely up to you what you do. I just thought that with your blood boiling (along with the ocean!!) you may not have considered this. Regards Wayne Ivory IT Analyst Programmer Wespine Industries Pty Ltd
With due apologies, I withdraw the previous comments regarding Autodesk's involvement in any suggested impropriety regarding licensing of AcadX. Let me make it perfectly clear that Autodesk had absolutely no involvement or knowledge of any infringement or unauthorized use of AcadX, whatsoever, and what I did say was based on a misinpretetation of what I was told by the rep. Subsequent to those comments, the Autodesk rep told me that they only "prototyped" the application on AutoCAD 2002. I will see what I can do regarding in-house use, but I suspect that if anyone wants to see AcadX extended to support even more power and functionality (specific to AutoCAD 2004's extensions to ObjectARX), then there is going to be a charge (and probably based on number of seats, like AcadXTabs). copy-protection or no-download-unless-you-pay policy which would lock it down. But otherwise removing the "free for in-house use only" will obviously not stop the "dishonest" from using it - it would only serve to stop the "honest". If parties such as those mentioned by the Autodesk rep are illegally distributing copies now you have the opportunity to prosecute them as much as you would should you adopt your proposed changes. similar when AcadX is loaded. Nobody is going to be able to distribute a commercial product with *that* in it.
Don't care if your friend or foe, I'm all for copyright enforcement and protection. It's not right when someone is making a profit out of your hard work, and not paying a penny for it. Knowledge may belong to all mankind, but ones hard work does not. ....unless you want it to. -- Saludos, Ing. Jorge Jimenez, SICAD S.A., Costa Rica much hard work into it and you're entitled to Perhaps you're planning to introduce some down. But otherwise removing the "free for it would only serve to stop the "honest". If distributing copies now you have the opportunity to "AcadX - Free for IN-HOUSE USE ONLY" or something commercial product with *that* in it.your blood boiling (along with the ocean!!) you
Tony, I think you should charge at least some nominal fee for in house use. You need to get paid for your work just like the rest of us do. Obviously, I would rather get free stuff but our company is delaying upgrading to 2004 because we don't want to be without the "Time Saving Tools" that were developed using AcadX and that has to be worth something. Best Regards, Bill --
Bill - Thanks for your comments. Ultimately it will depend on what my future plans for enhancing AcadX are.
Hi Tony, i am sorry to here that there will be no longer a free PersonalInHouse Version of AcadX.arx. I was waiting for so long :-(. May favourite Object was the Curve-object. Do you think that it would possible to make juste a Curve.arx available? I don't think so. Therefore, thank you Tony for your great Tool in the past. But now i want to ask someone from Autodesk. Why it is not possible to make something like the curve-objet in VBA. It is possible to get all those things in lisp, so why you don't do it in VBA? Sorry, but i do not understand it. Roland
I would really like to see some of the AcadX features standard with AutoCAD. (In particular dynamic graphics.) I would be happy to pay a fee for AcadX if I was guaranteed to get an update very shortly after each new AutoCAD release. I too would like to thank Tony for providing his tools. Regards - Nathan
That's probably one of the most inaccurate statements I've ever seen you make. The "vlcurve functionality" is nothing but wrapper functions around some (but not all) of the methods of the ObjectARX AcDbCurve class, which is functionality that was created by Autodesk, not Basis Software. The AcadXCurve class is just the ActiveX counterpart of that, and is also just a wrapper around AcDbCurve.
Trust me. If AcadX were a profitable revenue stream, you would not have to wait long for updates. However, the problem is that it is being distributed without a proper license on a fairly widespread basis, and that makes it difficult to profit from. I've already instituted a compatibility guarantee for AcadXTabs licensees that guarantees compatibility with major new releases of AutoCAD within 90 days of launch, and with no upgrade cost. I don't foresee any need for updating AcadX beyond AutoCAD 2004 (the next release after 2004, is from what I hear, binary compatible with 2004, which means that it should run 2004 ObjectARX code without changes or recompilation). The AutoCAD release after Neo, if it is targeted at Longhorn, is without doubt going to need to expose most API functionality via managed .NET wrappers. The real challenge is going to be to create a version of Visual LISP that is .NET-friendly, which generates and executes managed code (not that Visual LISP isn't already "managed", but it doesn't have access to the ..NET framework, which will become essential in the Longhorn timeframe). Speaking of Longhorn, DCL fans (if there are any left) will probably find XAML (eXtensible Application Markup Language) interesting. It seems to be modeled after Dialog Control Language, except it uses XML rather than the pseudo-pascal DCL syntax. What they have in common is that they are both structured, highly declarative ways to define user interfaces and reusable components. XAML is like DCL for Windows. be happy to pay a fee for AcadX if I was guaranteed to get an update very shortly after each new AutoCAD release.
So, when i read your comment and i did understand it, it should be easy for autodesk to include a Curve-Object. So why they don't do it. I do not understand it. Your Curve-Object is one of the things i always use. Maybe we will find it in future versions of acad Roland
Autodesk has demonstrated a patten of deliberately limiting the API functionality available to plain vanilla AutoCAD, and most seem to agree that the reason is because they are intent on inhibiting its use as a platform that third parties and end users can base their own vertical solutions on, because they compete with Autodesk's own AutoCAD-and non AutoCAD- based vertical solutions. That's the only reason I can think of for not exposing the AcDbCurve functionality to ActiveX/VBA. they don't do it. I do not understand it.
