AutoCAD 2007 - What do you think?

[michael.12445]

My IT CAD guy sent me Autodesk's overview of AutoCAD 2007. Has anyone else seen this? I'm curious what your impressions are, and whether you think the upgrade will be worth it.

It looks to me like they are really trying to push AutoCAD as a 3D tool, but we have always found it way too cumbersome for this, as compared to other tools like Form-Z or SketchUp.

They also seem to hint - while avoiding actually admitting this - that they have changed the DWG file format again, making 2007-format DWG's unreadable by 2000- or 2004- based products. This alone calls the value of this release into serious question, in my mind.

Our office is on subscription, so we will be receiving the new version upon its release, but whether it actually gets installed will be another matter.

I'm just curious if anyone else has an opinion on this.

Michael Evans
Togawa Smith Martin Residential, Inc.

[Mike.Perry]

Hi

It looks to me like they are really trying to push AutoCAD as a 3D tool, but we have always found it way too cumbersome for this, as compared to other tools like Form-Z or SketchUp.Personally, I would not be so quick to judge without first seeing and testing AutoCAD 2007.



They also seem to hint - while avoiding actually admitting this - that they have changed the DWG file format again, making 2007-format DWG's unreadable by 2000- or 2004- based products. This alone calls the value of this release into serious question, in my mind."Hint" not sure what you are reading, but from what I have read and seen, Autodesk have clearly documented the .DWG format change...

Breaking info on AutoCAD 2007

Have a good one, Mike

[Jordan Truesdell]

Personally, I would not be so quick to judge without first seeing and testing AutoCAD 2007.


I would. I haven't seen it yet, but based on all of the literature distributed by AutoDesk, your appraisal would appear to be accurate. The vertical markets, imo, have relegated vanilla acad 2007 into a lisp-enabled version of LT. This may bring some folks to the table who don't have a defined niche (MDT,REVIT-x,ADT), but it looks to be more wow than substance for the base of Acad users, and certainly for those in the A/E field still doing all 2D work. I expect some bug fixes and some minor enhancements, but very little else.

As for the new format change...of course it is not backward compatible. How else are you going to get all those '04 shops who aren't on subscription (who function just fine with their current 2D system) to spend four figures per seat to upgrade to '07? Simple - make them incompatable with those who are on subscription. Oh, sure, you can back save - but that's a temporary bandaid, and a royal PITA. Autodesk is in a market position to dictate terms to their clients. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: If I were an AutoDesk shareholder, I would require nothing less.

[dfarris75]

Bug fixes? I didn't know that was part of Adesk's forte. '07 will for the most part be just another release. They operate like auto manufacturers. They design a new body style every 3 years or so and then make minor revisions to it over the term, then design a new body style, yet it's the same car all along. It's all about $ to them. If they actually created an efficient program then the users really wouldn't need them. I guess they like to feel needed. This is the business model that corporate capitalism has introduced into our society. Here, have another one. :beer:

[Brian Myers]

Oh, sure, you can back save - but that's a temporary bandaid, and a royal PITA.

I won't get in another value of Autodesk fight, but I did want to point out some software you might not be aware of.
----------------------------------
DWG TrueConvert
http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servle...&linkID=2475161

DWG TrueConvert™ translates any AutoCAD or AutoCAD-based drawing file for compatibility with AutoCAD Release 14, AutoCAD 2000, AutoCAD 2000i, AutoCAD 2002, AutoCAD 2004, AutoCAD 2005, and AutoCAD 2006 versions. The DWG TrueConvert software allows conversion of pen widths to lineweights and the addition of page setups.

----------------------------------
It's a free program and yes, it's also being updated to work with 2007 files. So it might be of some help. As far as the value of the changes? Take a look at Mike's link(s) and get a feel for yourself. Personally (just myself) I likely wouldn't upgrade if I already had 2006 unless I did a lot of 3D work or needed some basic rendering capabilities... but the direction the product is going is a positive one... the 3D design is MUCH better... its not a stretch to call it (the improvements to 3D) the best in the history of the product (it's a must try or at least worth a watch on one of the demo's which really do show how easy it is to use).

[aaronrumple]

Autodesk lost out on buying SketchUp - so integrating more 3D sketching and presentation tools into 2007 seems a logical step. Will they be widely used by those working on technical drawings? Probably not. It will be nice to have though. The rendering engine they have built in is very high end. It will be interesting to see if this same engine gets built into other products.

The DWG format change and the notice "This is a Real DWG file..." I think should be more of a concern. Autodesk could easily take advantage of the DMCA to "lock up" DWG. Will AutoCAD 2008 refuse to open DWG's created with non-Autodesk software? I can see a future where you would have to continue paying a yearly fee just to keep viewing and printing files. Just like the music industry is trying to do. You just know they have whole departments working on creating possible revenue streams - I'm sure more doing that than actually writing code for AutoCAD. They even wrote code into one product where the pencils and tools would run out of ink and you would have to buy more at the Autodesk store. They might not ever act schemes like this - but it is chilling.

...and kuddos to @Last Software (to@LastSoftware) for their Google deal.

[Wanderer]

I'll be installing it here, as I'm on subscription, but, I'll be setting my preferences to saveas 2004 version so I don't have to upgrade my LT users (and save down for contractors, who are mostly using 04 and 05)... I think I heard they fixed the refedit and wblock thing, and are giving an option as to what version to save them, rather than automatically doing it in the current version...

not saying at all that this is a groundbreaking release if you're not using 3d, but, there are a few improvements to existing tools that will make it nice... lynn allen covered plenty of these on her blog if you're interested in the highlights...
for my job, the aectoacad and improvements to flatten will save me time, so it's worth it, but, obviously, my perspective is quite a bit different from a large office with many people to train and customizations to fiddle with.

good luck whichever way you guys go.

they have changed the DWG file format again, making 2007-format DWG's unreadable by 2000- or 2004- based products. This alone calls the value of this release into serious question, in my mind.

Our office is on subscription, so we will be receiving the new version upon its release, but whether it actually gets installed will be another matter.

I'm just curious if anyone else has an opinion on this.

[Ed Jobe]

Your question makes for good discussion, but in the end, you'll have to evaluate it in the context of your environment. Personally, I've always pushed the limits of software, hence I like to keep up with the latest. If it doesn't do what I want OOTB, I write code to do what I want. As far as 3D goes, it may not be practical for you to implement in all phases of your work, but it does have value. One new command you might use is the FLATSHOT command. You can take advantage of the improved ease of drawing 3D objects to get a simple model, then use the FLATSHOT command to flatten the current view to 2D and go from there. This should be really usefull to AEC shops still doing 2D, as someone else mentioned. Most new releases, few people take advantage of all the new features, but there's usually "something for everybody". Shaan Hurley just posted a complete list of all new/changed/obsolete commands and sysvars (http://autodesk.blogs.com/between_the_lines/2006/03/new_changed_rem.html).

[michael.12445]

Mike,

Thanks for the link - looks like I can be busy for a long time reading up on all that information.


Hi
Personally, I would not be so quick to judge without first seeing and testing AutoCAD 2007.


Of course, I haven't seen it and so I have no idea whether the enhancements have made 3D modeling easier than it has been, historically. I was only commenting that, based on prior releases, most users I know don't regard AutoCAD as a very good 3D modeling tool, and have turned to other tools. I'm guessing that opinion may be hard for Autodesk to dislodge.

And thanks to everyone for all the replies. I really had no intention of provoking a gripe-fest, so I'm a little surprised at the depth of antagonism this inspired, particularly with regard to the change in DWG file format. But only a little. As for Autodesk claiming some kind of IP monopoly on DWGs, it seems Microsoft has already had a run-in with the state of Massachusetts over that state's demand that its documents use open file formats. When the monkey grabs onto the apple in the jar and refuses to let go, he finds he has lost both the use of his hand and the apple because his fist clenched tightly around it is too large to withdraw through the mouth of the jar. Some have commented that the inconvenience of a change in DWG format is worth it because they always want to be using the latest and greatest, taking advantage of all it has to offer. I suppose if we had the luxury of working in an isolated vacuum, we might feel this way, too, but we do not. As soon as you have to collaborate with consultants in another office, any change in DWG format automatically destroys whatever productivity gains may have been realized from the new features - full stop. Yes, you can always "save as," but people are guaranteeed to forget to do so. Their task is to design and draw, not to keep track of what version everyone else is using.

Overall, Autodesk's choice of new features to develop seems awfully curious to me. Where do they get these ideas? I mean, I suppose people in manufacturing do need to draw helical springs from time to time, but I really doubt that they need to present SketchUp-like renderings of them. I did go through the most recent AUGI Wish List and voted for my favorites, but I don't seem to remember a great hue and cry for this feature, or for many of the others that appear to have made it into the product for that matter.

One exception, of course, is the ability to plot to PDF files. A lot of users have clamored for this, I would guess for about five years now.

Michael Evans
Togawa Smith Martin Residential, Inc.

[Jordan Truesdell]

The flatshot command is interesting, and I'll try to remember it next time I need it. Of course, I have a lsp routine somewhere that will do the same thing (since 20 years is a little long to wait for such "advances" in internal cad commands). Nonetheless, having it built it may be nice. I frequently get files from architects that are in 3d (done by ADT) and when drafting over top I get into issues over lengths when snapping to z<>0 points.

Wanderer - if the new format is providing added value (as one would hope it would, otherwise it really is a blantent upgrade machine), saving back to 2004 should force you to lose some features of the new format. Are you concerned that you will be getting less out of the upgrade with your back save?

As for PDF, well as long as it prints wipeouts properly (I get black boxes in Acrobat Pro) it will be a welcome addition, though I'll still need Adobe to bind everything together using my current sheet plotting routine.

[Wanderer]

Wanderer - if the new format is providing added value (as one would hope it would, otherwise it really is a blantent upgrade machine), saving back to 2004 should force you to lose some features of the new format. Are you concerned that you will be getting less out of the upgrade with your back save?
afaik, the only thing lost saving back will be the ability to manipulate your lofts and other new 3d things (they'll be 'dumb' like tables and dyn blocks are when saved down)... I don't use those here, so I'm not concerned.

[Ed Jobe]

if the new format is providing added value (as one would hope it would, otherwise it really is a blantent upgrade machine)
Not necessarily. For a long time, there have been requests to fix things. On the adesk ng's, its not uncommon to get a request to an ades rep, like, "thanks for the workaround but why don't they just fix the problem right?". Often the response is, "That would require a file format change." They try to hold off doing that as long as they can so as not to impact as many as possible. But sooner or later they have to.

[Ferroequine]

I am very excited, as we do 3D Piping Design. The new 3D engine alone makes it more than worth the upgrade! IIRC, 3D hasn't changed much since R12. Some of the other new / enhanced features look good too. :D

[aaronrumple]

I am very excited, as we do 3D Piping Design. The new 3D engine alone makes it more than worth the upgrade! IIRC, 3D hasn't changed much since R12. Some of the other new / enhanced features look good too. :D
3D piping design with straight AutoCAD? Why are you not using one of the many specialized versions or add-on's for AutoCAD that automates piping design?

[Ferroequine]

3D piping design with straight AutoCAD? Why are you not using one of the many specialized versions or add-on's for AutoCAD that automates piping design?Sorry, I should have clarified, we use CADWorx Plant Pro. :Oops:

[thomas.stright]

I liked it alot but till my 3rd party piping system runs on it, It'll sit on the shelf....

[rkmcswain]

It looks to me like they are really trying to push AutoCAD as a 3D tool

That is the majority of the new features.



They also seem to hint - while avoiding actually admitting this - that they have changed the DWG file format again

There is no secret regarding file format. It was expected as well, every 3 releases based on recent history.



Our office is on subscription, so we will be receiving the new version upon its release, but whether it actually gets installed will be another matter.


Same here, It will not be installed. We will stay on 2006 for now.

I can appreciate all the hard work that went into this release, I just don't see where they are going with this. The 3D capabilities are very impressive, but its all completely useless to us.

[jaberwok]

I'm looking forward to A2007 - I love playing in 3d.
For most work,though, it'll probably be used just as before.

[tim.101799]

That is the majority of the new features.



There is no secret regarding file format. It was expected as well, every 3 releases based on recent history.



Same here, It will not be installed. We will stay on 2006 for now.

I can appreciate all the hard work that went into this release, I just don't see where they are going with this. The 3D capabilities are very impressive, but its all completely useless to us.

I also don't think we will bw installing it in our office either. I recently saw n article online that listed the recomended system requirements for 2007. They were pretty hight end

Pentium 4 3.0ghz
Ram - 2 gig
video card - 128mb min

For the past 10 years or so Autodesk seemed to be gearing AutoCAD to run on a fairly standard windows based system. Though looking at these specs it appears we are going to have to go back to using high end CAD workstations just for plain old AutoCAD. If we are going to have to spend alot of money to upgrade our workstations just for AutoCAD, I would rather invest just a bit more and get the rest of the office trained in Revit. Currently only a hanfull of us are trained and using Revit.
A little off topic here, but as a long time CAD geek and AutoCAD lover, after 6 months on Revit I hate plain old AutoCAD. The tough thing is that about 3/4 of the office still uses AutoCAD for all their work. It's getting really tough for me to give a dam about AutoCAD and spend any time what so ever managing it when I have moved on to a new love (Revit).

[Brian Myers]

I would rather invest just a bit more and get the rest of the office trained in Revit. Currently only a hanfull of us are trained and using Revit.

Just a couple quick comments:

1.) You don't need an office full of powerhouse machines to run the standard features of the new AutoCAD, just the advanced 3D stuff. Of course, if you have an office filled with 5 years old or older machines then this version will likely be a bit too much. Also, if you don't need the new 3D features, you might think twice about upgrading anyway.

2.) Revit is a very good program, but even it will likely require more system resources for future releases. I'd advise budgeting to upgrade your computer systems sometime in the next 2-3 years to accomodate (I would imagine a superior rendering engine will be added to the Revit software within that time that will require much more power).

[tim.101799]

Just a couple quick comments:

1.) You don't need an office full of powerhouse machines to run the standard features of the new AutoCAD, just the advanced 3D stuff. Of course, if you have an office filled with 5 years old or older machines then this version will likely be a bit too much. Also, if you don't need the new 3D features, you might think twice about upgrading anyway.

2.) Revit is a very good program, but even it will likely require more system resources for future releases. I'd advise budgeting to upgrade your computer systems sometime in the next 2-3 years to accomodate (I would imagine a superior rendering engine will be added to the Revit software within that time that will require much more power).

A majority of the office work stations are about 4 years old and on their last leg. The Revit users in the office all recently got new high end workstations or laptops. So to in our situation we have to upgrade the current stations just to use the basic features within AutoCAD 2007. So if we have to invest money in new equitment anyway, I would prefer to budget some extra for Revit training. All of our existing AutoCAD licences were already upgraded to Revit series last year. We already own the software, now it makes financial sense to go the rest of the way and get everyone trained and using it.

[Brian Myers]

A majority of the office work stations are about 4 years old and on their last leg. The Revit users in the office all recently got new high end workstations or laptops. So to in our situation we have to upgrade the current stations just to use the basic features within AutoCAD 2007. So if we have to invest money in new equitment anyway, I would prefer to budget some extra for Revit training. All of our existing AutoCAD licences were already upgraded to Revit series last year. We already own the software, now it makes financial sense to go the rest of the way and get everyone trained and using it.

Yes, if you already own the software (Revit) it's likely best to upgrade to it. As far as AutoCAD 2007, I wouldn't be surprised if the hardware requirements become one of the most grumbled at requirements as the year goes on since it won't get any better in future releases either. But it's a necessary evil. For that matter, even the new Windows that is coming out before the end of the year will take a fairly impressive machine to run as its own advanced features are pretty graphics intensive.

[michael.12445]

Well, on the latest Wish List cycle, I voted for "AutoCAD on Linux". It remains to be seen how far that wish will go...even though Autodesk has been committed to a Windows-only policy since around 1998, I think, it may be time for them to consider offering products that run on a more efficient OS, especially if their product development is going in a more hardware-demanding direction. In my experience, Windows eats hardware, especially when running not just on the desktop, but on the server, and as noted, the new Vista version promises to be even more hardware-hungry. Linux, on the other hand, will run well even on less-than-current hardware, and you can even run some pretty resource-intensive applications, like layered bitmap editors, on such a setup.

Our office has relatively current hardware - most machines are less than a year old, and the majority are less than six months old - but it sounds like some of the new versions of Autodesk applications could easily bring them to their knees, especially with other MS applications like Outlook running at the same time.

Michael Evans
Togawa Smith Martin Residential, Inc.

[rkmcswain]

Well, on the latest Wish List cycle, I voted for "AutoCAD on Linux". It remains to be seen how far that wish will go...

Just don't see that ever happening. Autodesk and Microsoft are way too married for that to happen.

[michael.12445]

Too bad. The word that comes to mind, more and more these days, is "moribund:"

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/technology/27soft.html?ei=5088&en=d0c02cd75d5822fb&ex=1301115600&adxnnl=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1143677279-Bm9dCiKh5g7n0pvZV2O82w

Michael Evans
Togawa Smith Martin Residential, Inc.

[Mike.Perry]

Hi

No AutoCAD for Linux (http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/blog/2006/03/no_autocad_for_.html) via WorldCAD Access

Have a good one, Mike

[Mike.Perry]

No AutoCAD for Linux (http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/blog/2006/03/no_autocad_for_.html) via WorldCAD AccessHi

Plus, maybe read this post ( Incoming Autodesk CEO Gives His Channel Take ).

Have a good one, Mike

[Ruben]

Too bad. The word that comes to mind, more and more these days, is "moribund:"

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/technology/27soft.html?ei=5088&en=d0c02cd75d5822fb&ex=1301115600&adxnnl=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1143677279-Bm9dCiKh5g7n0pvZV2O82w

Michael Evans
Togawa Smith Martin Residential, Inc.

Michael,

Yes, I voted for Linux support too. Mike posted an interesting link in reference to the Google entry into the CAD market.

http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/blog/2006/03/google_gets_int.html

The relevant part for me was this little nutshell:

"There is a truce between Microsoft and CAD vendors. Microsoft does not get into CAD in exchange for most CAD vendors using Windows APIs exlusively, thus locking CAD users into Microsoft operating systems.

But no such truce is in place with today's microsoft, Google. "

If that is true, it would seem to put a nail in the AutoCAD for Linux idea. Unless you are willing to go the wine route (wich personally, I would rather not). Who knows, maybe Google will someday deliver an alternative.

I read somewhere that what we need is "a product brave enough and popular enough to set its own file format as a standard. An approach like OpenOffice.org is what I'm hoping to see, where support for the defacto standard is well implemented (IntelliCAD may be there) but an effective open standard is promoted." Too bad IntelliCAD is hindered by being owned by Microsoft.

OpenOffice is finally gaining some traction thanks to the ODF format. At least not everything is gloom and doom.

[rkmcswain]

"There is a truce between Microsoft and CAD vendors. Microsoft does not get into CAD in exchange for most CAD vendors using Windows APIs exlusively, thus locking CAD users into Microsoft operating systems.

That is exactly what I was saying above, just nicely... :-)

I don't doubt that a bit.

Bill to Carol, circa 1995: We'll stay out of the CAD business as long as you drop support for other O/S....

On the other hand, would you trust a CAD program from Microsoft.... ?
:Oops:

[michael.12445]

...it would seem to put a nail in the AutoCAD for Linux idea. Unless you are willing to go the wine route (wich personally, I would rather not).

Some people have played around with this, but it looks pretty tortured. Bricscad actually has a version of their program that runs on Linux, but it, too, uses wine instead of native Linux code. I looked at a couple of betas, but they were ridiculously slow and unstable.


I read somewhere that what we need is "a product brave enough and popular enough to set its own file format as a standard. An approach like OpenOffice.org is what I'm hoping to see, where support for the defacto standard is well implemented (IntelliCAD may be there) but an effective open standard is promoted." Too bad IntelliCAD is hindered by being owned by Microsoft.

OpenOffice is finally gaining some traction thanks to the ODF format. At least not everything is gloom and doom.

I thought that "IntelliCAD" referred to a consortium of vendors who have pooled enough resources to reverse-engineer the DWG format and create their own CAD products based on it. If Microsoft owns IntelliCAD, then they are in direct competition with Autodesk.

But IMHO, the problem with the IntelliCAD approach is that the goal of making what is essentially a clone of AutoCAD is misdirected. I agree - for technical as well as philosophical reasons - that a vector data file format other than DWG is needed. The inroads being made by OpenOffice.org suggest that if this can be done with DOC, it can also be done with DWG. I also believe that AutoCAD itself has a lot of problems that make it a legacy CAD program that belongs more to the past than to the future. Without going in to a full-on rant, it just seems to me that AutoCAD has lost sight of the idea that "CAD" originally meant "Computer Aided Design," not "Computer Agonized Design." By that I mean that after some 20 years of supposed ongoing development, users still find themselves in contention with it to perform some of the most basic tasks (i.e., plotting, dimensioning, accuracy, etc.). Those difficulties were acceptable at a time when the very idea of a CAD program running on a desktop machine was miraculous; the hardware - and the expectations it creates - are many orders of magnitude greater now.

Michael Evans
Togawa Smith Martin Residential

[Ruben]

Some people have played around with this, but it looks pretty tortured. Bricscad actually has a version of their program that runs on Linux, but it, too, uses wine instead of native Linux code. I looked at a couple of betas, but they were ridiculously slow and unstable.

I have never tried any of them, but what you describe is what I had expected. I use wine for some reference programs and other non intensive applications. Wine has its place, but not in running a critical application like AutoCAD. Although, maybe I shouldn't be so quick to say that. Apparently Codeweavers has Photoshop, MS Office, Lotus Notes, and many other Windows applications running fairly reliably under wine. But, not yet AutoCAD.

http://www.codeweavers.com/products/cxoffice/supported_apps/





I thought that "IntelliCAD" referred to a consortium of vendors who have pooled enough resources to reverse-engineer the DWG format and create their own CAD products based on it.

I think you are right about the consortium. I don't know much about it though. I wonder what are the terms under which they license the dwg info. Does anyone know if a free software program licensed under the GPL can use it? (I know. I'm dreaming, right?)


If Microsoft owns IntelliCAD, then they are in direct competition with Autodesk.

Well, sort of. From what I understand, they have licensed the technology, but they have not released a competing product based on it. If they really wanted to compete, they would have just made it part of Office and bye bye competition. I think that when they aquired IntelliCAD they realized it was more valuable to them as a barganing chip (even Microsoft has a limmit as to how far they think they can use their monopoly position to their advantage).


But IMHO, the problem with the IntelliCAD approach is that the goal of making what is essentially a clone of AutoCAD is misdirected. I agree - for technical as well as philosophical reasons - that a vector data file format other than DWG is needed. The inroads being made by OpenOffice.org suggest that if this can be done with DOC, it can also be done with DWG.

We are on the same page. :)

[Ferroequine]

I thought that "IntelliCAD" referred to a consortium of vendors who have pooled enough resources to reverse-engineer the DWG format and create their own CAD products based on it. If Microsoft owns IntelliCAD, then they are in direct competition with Autodesk. You're thinking of the Open DWG Alliance, which is pushing for a disclosure of the DWG format due to the massive amounts of drawings out there in the DWG format. IIRC, one of the main financial backers of the Open DWG Alliance is Bentley, the owner of Intergraph & MicroStation. Funnily enough, they haven't made much headway... ;)

[jaberwok]

"...........a number of developers — including MarComp, Inc. — created programming toolkits for reading and writing DWG files.

In early 1998, Visio Corporation (now part of Microsoft) acquired MarComp as part of an overall plan to help make the DWG file format an open standard. Visio Corp. then joined with the other Founding Members to create the OpenDWG Alliance, and donated the source code and programming libraries produced by MarComp to the Alliance for its non-exclusive use in promoting the DWG file format as an open standard."

From here. (http://www.opendesign.com/about/history.htm)

[tolifiers]

Hi Guys from Auckland New Zealand

Can any one provide a link to down load the autocad 2007 trial
outside the usa.

otherwise we cannot get access.

Lets know would be appreciated.

Regards Theo

Designer Architectural , Private Hospitals
Rest homes & Lifestyle Retirement Villas, Apartments.


may contact me
tolifiers@xtra.co.nz

[Wanderer]

as far as I know, that's not available from online, as the site says (http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=5603704), have you tried contacting your local reseller?
Hi Guys from Auckland New Zealand

Can any one provide a link to down load the autocad 2007 trial
outside the usa.

otherwise we cannot get access.

Lets know would be appreciated.

Regards Theo

Designer Architectural , Private Hospitals
Rest homes & Lifestyle Retirement Villas, Apartments.


may contact me
tolifiers@xtra.co.nz