PowerCadd 10

[EduardoJB]

Respectfully... and honestly, I see no reason why PowerCADD should support ancient OS systems. Most other software does not anyway, and even OSs will eventually not support older machines either. Yes, having an all-newer workstation will maybe be costly for some, but we cannot expect total satisfaction for all. And, obviously, if that could mean making the wait even longer, it makes less sense.

[snydmax]

As you know, Apple makes it hard to maintain compatibility with older systems. From an engineering perspective, with PowerCADD 10, we are finding it harder and harder to maintain compatibility with a broad range of older systems. Supporting older systems affects the functionality and performance of PowerCADD 10. We have determined that supporting macOS Monterey, Venture, Sonoma, and what comes after yields the best balance of performance and capabilities. Your feedback is essential. We are looking for feedback on supporting only macOS 12 Monterey and above. What hardships will this cause?

Best,
Todd Stanley

For me the biggest hardship will be transitioning, primarily during beta testing... I like many others have remained on Mojave in order to continue using PC9. If PC10 is OS12+ only, we will have to upgrade our OS to try it out and there will be no turning back!

In the end, I look forward to being on the "current" mac OS but admittedly am a bit concerned about the day I have to do it not knowing for sure what other software (i.e. workflow) implications it will bring after having remained on 32bit for so long

EDIT: sounds like VM may be a suitable bridge. Hope this all actually comes to be soon... been talking about it for quite a while and sounds like many have given up the wait.

[arogerr]

I can’t help but notice recent posts to the forum of those of us “mature” professionals who remember the art of drafting. Like cursive writing, basic drafting isn’t taught in schools anymore (having taught at the college level at several design schools), in favor of a multitude of 3D applications. Could that be the reason there isn’t much pressure to get PowerCadd updates. If they wait any longer, they my not have anymore users alive! Are we a dying breed?

I think you might be right. I started hand drafting in junior high school, in the early-1970's, then did so in high school and college, at my first jobs, etc. In the early 1990's, we started using PowerDRAW, mainly because it was Mac-based and easy to learn if you already knew how to draft (and I was getting tired of erasing through velum). I'm 64 now, and tapering down my business, so I am reluctant to learn something new and hope to limp along with PC until the end. I still get complements about how easy to read my plans are (due to my replicating the line weights I learned in school). When I see plans developed by other firms, they just look like a bunch of lines, and it is hard to understand the hierarchy of information (quite possibly due to my hand-drawn background).

I was shocked to learn that Revit, a standard modeling program used by many of the large firms, doesn't (or very hard) to control line-weights. I, like you, get great compliments on the clarify of my drawings and details because of learning drafting 101 in high school and using those standards throughout my career.
It would be helpful if we got more frequent updates on the progress of PC10. Earlier posts made it sound like maintaining basic customer PR notices seem so burdensome. It's called maintaining a business. Though I am certainly not a software engineer, blaming Apple for the slow pass doesn't help the matter, so I would just avoid mentioning that. So many other applications successfully transitioned "years ago" even releasing light programs and updating occasionally to get to final products. It's clear PowerCad has a loyal customer base (how small or large is in question), but most may not be around (or alive) when PC 10 is finally released.

[Silvarch]

As you know, Apple makes it hard to maintain compatibility with older systems. From an engineering perspective, with PowerCADD 10, we are finding it harder and harder to maintain compatibility with a broad range of older systems. Supporting older systems affects the functionality and performance of PowerCADD 10. We have determined that supporting macOS Monterey, Venture, Sonoma, and what comes after yields the best balance of performance and capabilities. Your feedback is essential. We are looking for feedback on supporting only macOS 12 Monterey and above. What hardships will this cause?

Best,
Todd Stanley

Compatibility with old systems is much less important that being current with the new systems. Keeping the functionality of PowerCadd is much more important. As it is now, I have one computer for PowerCadd and another for everything else. This is not a sustainable way to continue. I choose PowerCadd years ago because it worked the way I had learned to draw on paper and I could simply draw rather than having to start over.

Like many others on this forum, I have been loath to jump to a different program because of the superior results I'm able to produce with PowerCadd. Please, let's just move forward rather than coddling those that do not want to upgrade their hardware. The bigger hardship for all of us is not having PowerCadd being able to function on the new systems. It would be a huge loss, however, to not have PowerTools. PowerCadd without PowerTools will not at all be the same experience for any of us. I hope your relationship with Alfred can and will be remedied quickly. As I see it, that needs to be one of your priorities. Perhaps updating PowerTools can be a team effort or better yet, can be integrated into PowerCadd?

Eugene Silva
Architect and PowerCadd user since the beginning...

[fred johnson]

My two cents here is that PC should be compatible with Mac OS 12 onward, and everything should be done to continue to develop and offer Wild Tools.

[Shoucair]

This whole process, taking years, has gotten very very frustrating!

[johncruet48]

As you know, Apple makes it hard to maintain compatibility with older systems. .....

Best,
Todd Stanley

My attitude is this- once I get the Mac Studio I will be ready to audition the beta of PowerCADD 10. My opinion is that PC10 should start at the point where the old 32-bit PowerCADD became incompatible with MacOS. This is either at Big Sur or even Monterey. Actually these problems started at Catalina, but that would be too far back for me to care. Once I find PC10 to work properly, then I plan to upgrade my 2019 MacBook Pro to either Ventura or even Sonoma. My only concern at that point is to make certain that the new PowerCADD can open my PowerCADD 9 documents. As many of my PowerCadd files were updated to PC9. this migration process should be OK. So please- please- BRING IT ON!

[johncruet48]

My two cents here is that PC should be compatible with Mac OS 12 onward, and everything should be done to continue to develop and offer Wild Tools.

I'd rather see just the most useful WildTools be incorporated into PC10. For one thing, the 3D tools don't need to be incorporated if porting PowerCADD data into FormZ is a feature. Having one complete set of drawing tools in one palette, and another set of modifying tools in another palette, is what works for me.

[PeterKona]

The WildTools Transformation tools are very important. Also tools like the wall tool, grid line tool, section and balloon symbols, and other line healing, curve extending tools in WT--whose names I barely remember, as I just hit the command key or the icon without thinking anymore. We've been so spoiled its impossible to list the ways that WildTools would be missed. I too don't see the need to support old OS. I have my old system because of PowerCADD. Sure if I go all new its going to cost money for other software and hardware.

I also want to put here my OPINION that some of the frustrated posts here are the very reason developers don't preview usually. You should be used this by now. Usually a developer is not going to tip their hand, because it's a often a thankless gesture, not to mention other complications from making predictions.

[David Jones]

Unless I am mistaken Mac Studio has either an M1 or M2 chip which means Parallels or equivalent installed on Monterey or Ventura will not allow Mojave to be installed within Parallels. If you want to continue running Mojave you will need Mojave installed on Parallels or equivalent installed on an Intel Mac.