I do architectural design and SU is not the answer to every problem. If you're doing multi-million dollar designs, heck, spend a couple bucks and use programs that are easier and more powerful. Sure, it can be fun to try to learn and navigate your way through the program, but give me my architectural design software with ease and simplicity and powerful photo-realistic images in a fraction of the time of SU. Play with free. Work with paid for programs.
Of course, just because a program costs thousands of $ doesn't mean it's any good either. I'm short on examples, but in my experience the more expensive the software the worse it is. AutoCAD and ClearQuest are the only ones coming to mind now, as I think I've mentally blocked out the worst experiences. There are exceptions to this of course. Fluent is pretty good.
But I agree in general that if you're doing professional work, your software choices are expanded because cost is not an issue.
I'm short on examples, but in my experience the more expensive the software the worse it is.
I can give a good example where $1000 is well worth it. I've been using Chief Architect for almost 13 years. It is stunning. It allows me to design real working drawings and do what SU does but a whole lot more and a whole lot easier. The article is correct in saying that SU can making a great looking image with a "simple design", but it will take more than a little bit of time to do the same with a complex design.
Ultimately, Google designed this so people would help populate their 3D Earth with build
Ultimately, Google designed this so people would help populate their 3D Earth with buildings...
Not to nitpick or anything (ah heck, who am I kidding, I love to nitpick) but Google bought SketchUp when they acquired @Last Software, they didn't design it.
You see but you do not observe.
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, in "The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes"
Free is not always better (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Free is not always better (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, just because a program costs thousands of $ doesn't mean it's any good either. I'm short on examples, but in my experience the more expensive the software the worse it is. AutoCAD and ClearQuest are the only ones coming to mind now, as I think I've mentally blocked out the worst experiences. There are exceptions to this of course. Fluent is pretty good.
But I agree in general that if you're doing professional work, your software choices are expanded because cost is not an issue.
Re: (Score:1)
Except that as bad as AutoCAD is it's still better than the freeware tools.
Re: (Score:1)
I'm short on examples, but in my experience the more expensive the software the worse it is.
I can give a good example where $1000 is well worth it. I've been using Chief Architect for almost 13 years. It is stunning. It allows me to design real working drawings and do what SU does but a whole lot more and a whole lot easier. The article is correct in saying that SU can making a great looking image with a "simple design", but it will take more than a little bit of time to do the same with a complex design.
Ultimately, Google designed this so people would help populate their 3D Earth with build
Re: (Score:2)
Ultimately, Google designed this so people would help populate their 3D Earth with buildings...
Not to nitpick or anything (ah heck, who am I kidding, I love to nitpick) but Google bought SketchUp when they acquired @Last Software, they didn't design it.