Selections: The programs are different and hard to compare. They both have strengths and weaknesses. Manipulating objects in AutoCAD is quicker requiring fewer clicks. But I wouldn’t hold this against Rhino as the extra complexity has advantages.
Holding onto selections: Rhino is better in this sense I agree. I like that you can do more while you have a selection. In AutoCAD, you can save selections. Also, knowing what can and can’t be done with a selection is really just down to experience.
Layers: You can actually filter a selection set by layer in AutoCAD. You can also do “LAYISO” and select objects that way; there’s lots of approaches that work and are fast. AutoCAD also has group/property filters. Rhino’s layers are great no doubt there. Both programs have very versatile layer systems and it’s really up to the user to develop their own workflow to capitalize on that.
Selection Filter: AutoCAD has selection filters too. Rhino’s selection filter works good but the dialog is slow (so it AutoCAD’s for that matter). I only use the selection filters in either program if I really need it. I would say that Rhino wins out here. But also the filter is adapted for Rhino.
Hide and Isolate: AutoCAD does have this as well and it works really good. I use the middle mouse button menu lots in Rhino and it’s quicker than even a good macros setup in ACAD. In AutoCAD I don’t really use the hide isolate as much due to the nature of the work I’m doing. But it’s there.
Aliases: Aliases are better in Rhino for sure but AutoCAD macro is still very handy and easy to learn. I program in AutoLISP which is even better, and is very likely the most used API language of any CAD program.
The UI and Customization: I freak out when people dunk on Rhino’s UI because for me it’s the best hands down. It’s the easiest to customize (slightly unintuitive but only slightly). AutoCAD CUI is much the same: Very versatile but unintuitive for someone who’s not familiar with it. Actually I think it was the last thing I learnt in AutoCAD. To say that one is better than the other really depends on what you’re doing. Rhino’s UI seems better suited for Rhino and AutoCAD’s for AutoCAD (go figure hehe).
I would say that AutoCAD’s speed advantage comes from the Annotations (mostly the text editor), Dynamic blocks if they are used, and how objects are selected. For that last point the best way to understand yourself is to manipulate a dimension in Rhino then do the same in AutoCAD. That’s not to say that Rhino’s flawed here; it uses control point manipulation and in my opinion it’s good that it keeps things consistent (opposed to having to learn two unique systems like Sketchup/Layout). It’s just somewhat slower.
Dynamic blocks are a hard sell especially for Revit users. I actually learnt how to make Revit families before ever learning how to make dynamic blocks. They are however productivity power houses if you know how to create/use them. Rhino objects themselves behave very “dynamic” however if you know how to manipulate them. Lots of people don’t realize that they can stretch complex elements, copy sub elements, etc… Dynamic blocks are only 2D as well (but we’re also talking about 2D of course). If you’re really crafty you can create groups that almost behave similar to a 2D dynamic block.
I wouldn’t recommend spending time mastering AutoCAD. If you can do all your work in one program I think that’s the winning solution rather than jumping from one to another simply because one is marginally faster at something else. The whole point of me trying to get Rhino to work is so that I can comfortably do complete projects in Rhino. I would say that if I can achieve 75% of my AutoCAD speed in Rhino (annotating/documentation) it’s worth sticking to Rhino.
