Talk:FreeCAD

Why

Why would use of software libraries be a possible problem or concern? The article says:

Another major concern of FreeCAD is to make heavy use of other open-source libraries

I would favor changing the containing paragraph to:

FreeCAD uses various open-source Scientific Computing libraries. Among them are Open CASCADE (a powerful CAD kernel), Coin3D (an incarnation of Open Inventor), the Qt GUI Framework, and Python, a popular scripting language. FreeCAD itself can also be used as a library by other programs.

Nmh (talk) 07:29, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I see someone has made that change. --duncan.lithgow (talk) 16:54, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

What is the point of the reviews?

This line: "FreeCAD is beta software and has received mixed reviews from Ubuntu users[3]" does not add any meaningful information to this article. There are only 6 reviews in the provided link from Ubuntu users. Why should a hand full of reviews from a minuscule minority included into an encyclopedic article? Its beta software and as such lacks functionality. Plus the reviews judge it against professional packages such as AutoCAD, Solidworks Pro-E. I am removing the line, it adds nothing. 47.23.29.18 (talk) 20:15, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Run-on sentence

This needs to be broken up into at least two sentences: "As with many modern 3D CAD modelers, it will have a 2D component in order to extract design details from the 3D model to create 2D production drawings, but direct 2D drawing (like AutoCAD LT) is not the focus, neither are animation (like Blender) or organic shapes (like Maya, 3ds Max or Cinema 4D), although, thanks to its wide adaptability, FreeCAD might become useful in a much broader area than its current focus." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.164.166.221 (talk) 19:50, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Two different programs with similar name?

I may be completely confused, but if I am correct, this article needs serious work to eliminate confuion. I have loaded "freecad" from the Debain package manager, and it seems to run ok. It would appear to be true Open Source, the version is 0.14, and it is copyrighted by Juergen Riegel, Werner Mayer and Yorik van Havre 2001-2011. But "FreeCAD" by AR-CAD, which I have also tried to run (it fails to start, with a shared library error), professes to have been based on open source tools with private content, and using a tool called VisualWorks which they claim is open source, the end product clearly is not. I can't see a copyright statement. Now this is not the place for arguments about licensing or other political agendas, by perspective is simply that there seem to be two very different, and in their own ways probably very useful, products of confusingly similar name. Or, is one a much developed version of the other? (I don't think so but can't prove it.) The proprietors of both may have problems with trade mark law etc, again none of our concern, but what do we need to do to make Wikipedia correct? We can't properly use my "research" to show that they are different.

There is more confusion here because as far as I can see, "freecad" is the one that is beta, and can be used as a library by other products, while "FreeCAD" is at least at version 8 and makes no such claim as being usable as a library, so it seems that the previous authors have all been caught out by the same confusion as myself.

I am guessing that a disambiguation page will be required, and a second entry for the "other" one, but would prefer that those more experienced than myself would give their opinions before doing anything so drastic.

I just hope that we can agree what the situation actually is, and fix the article. If I have got it wrong, please feel free to say so.

Thanks.

Tiger99 (talk) 12:08, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Edit: some more investigation has convinced me that it is all in the capitalisation, and this article is about "FreeCAD" (typically "freecad" in the package manager) while the other package is correctly written "freeCAD" and is not open source, and in my case not working. They are not connected at all except by being free, as in gratis, and CAD, and the closely similar names. So that is a bit clearer to me, but I think we still need a disambiguation page, and I don't know how to do those. There also needs to be an article for the other one, as it is just as significant in my opinion. I recall having problems with capitalisation in titles previously, so think that the other one may need to be titled "AR-CAD freeCAD" to make them different. There are also lists of CAD programs where both should appear. I will await other opinions before doing anything. Tiger99 (talk) 00:07, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Version 0.17 available

See German or

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=FreeCAD-0.17-Released — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.90.228.64 (talk) 19:05, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

The development of FreeCad into a Native IFC authoring & editing tool

A paragraph was added to the article that introduced the fact the Freecad is Incorporating IFcOpenshell and elements on BlenderBim Addon to become a native Ifc authoring and editing program, is this not notable enough change to include on the FreeCad page? Lloyd.Bussio (talk) 13:19, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Add Old Logo For Context on Logo Change

It would be very helpful to add the old FreeCad logo(s) to the “New FreeCAD logo” section.

I don’t know why it isn’t included, but I don’t think there should be any issues with copyright?

Here is a copy of the old FreeCAD logo I found already uploaded to Wikimedia Commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:FreeCAD-logo.svg 66.99.95.120 (talk) 14:07, 20 September 2024 (UTC)