1232
Adobe Gets Bullied Off Bluesky (futurism.com)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
279 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Maybe I'm doing too much engineering - I found Open SCAD to be way easier than Blender for making stuff, and that's saying something because Open SCAD is quite a pain.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I can see why for engineering, it allows you to be super precise. I'm not sure the people who developed the CAD side of Blender have ever used it for anything precise or to build details and drawings of any kind. They just seem clueless, there is no other way to put it. AutoSketch used to be so great, maybe the paid version is now. That was different than AutoCAD and Revit, but I loved it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I’ve always seen Blender as a 3D art tool but never as a precise 3D engineering tool. Didn’t even know Blender had CAD features

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    I hate the syntax in OpenSCAD. It LOOKS like something object-oriented but it is procedural, causing oh so many footguns, if one expects it to act like OOP.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    I'm a mostly procedural thinker, even though I program in OOP all day long. OpenSCAD works a lot like the rest of my code: write it, try it, look at the results, curse, revise it, try it, look at the results, curse differently... you get there eventually. I do highly suggest not coding a masterpiece in OpenSCAD without visualizing the components first.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent