Jump to content

P Retondo

Member
  • Posts

    1,840
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

129 Spectacular

Personal Information

  • Occupation
    Architect
  • Homepage
    www.retondoarch.com
  • Location
    United States

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks, Zoomer, for your input. When you say you can download WinDoor as a plugin, did you have to pay extra for it? It would be great if WinDoor can be incorporated into the standard VW tools and we can integrate its features into native VW.
  2. Right, but walls were solids before - in other words, you can cut through them in sections, etc. I don't quite understand what you mean. I've overlaid window openings with custom 3d objects before, not sure what difference you are seeing. WinDoor would be cool to have - is that in the US version? I used to own it as a 3rd party add-on. It was way cumbersome, but, if so, that's the kind of thing I'm looking for in an upgrade. Just a few little improvements would keep me happy! BTW, I started with MiniCAD version 2, I think. This software was originally based on the idea of a hybrid 2D/3D environment, and at that time there was no such thing as a "Screen Plane" object, all 2D objects were in true two dimensions (unlike ACAD, which always had a Z component to their objects). Then I guess VW got AutoCAD jealous, and had to put a Z component on 2D objects, which were then called "Layer Plane." That's when VW started to lose its original inspiration, which was solidly based on centuries of 2D design and representation of 3D objects, linked to the new 3D modeling capabilities of fast computers.
  3. Besides eliminating Screen Plane - which you didn’t like - is there any positive reason, for someone who actually thinks screen plane was a brilliant concept, to upgrade to 2022?
  4. I've purchased both 2021 and 2022, but I'm still using 2020 because I haven't heard anything that makes it seem worthwhile to update. I'm strongly considering discontinuing my Service Select. Can anyone with good architectural experience with VW give me a good reason or two to continue getting updates? Even some minor improvements would be worthwhile, though I have to admit that VW's failure to understand the importance of screen plane objects is deeply discouraging as an indication of future trends. But, for example, window sills in 3d have never (ever) worked - is that working now? Window and door types do not correspond to common real-world objects, such as multiple track sliding doors. And my current pet peeve, there is no longer a way to model a U-configured stairs with two landings at the turn instead of 1 (for some reason you can do 2 landings and 1 step, but not 2 landings).
  5. Really encouraging exchange of information and perspectives between experienced users and conscientious VW insiders! I haven’t submitted a bug report in at least a year. My feedback has been that the effort “seems” to go down a black hole. Maybe VW gets too many reports to do this, but it would work better if reporters received at least two notifications, one upon initial analysis (bug confirmed/not confirmed, already reported, working on it, etc.), and another at the time of resolution.
  6. I hope VW takes note. I am not happy to be paying every year for "improved" software that performs worse than earlier versions. Still sticking with v2020, even though I own licenses to 2021 and 2022. Unless someone with user experience can tell me v2022 is at least as fast, I'm going to have to pull the plug on wasting money on future updates.
  7. Boh, and others, here's a question: do the Attribute Palette default settings trump the "use at creation" directive in class settings, or vice versa? If there is no clear priority at the algorithmic level, that could be a problem. As a user, it's a problem to me that there are two possibly-conflicting default settings in different places. Later: Okay, so I just did a quick test. "None" class set to "use at creation." Set default attributes to red fill. A "None" object was created, resulting in the None class fill (white). The default red fill setting did not change. A "Dimension" object (not set to "use at creation") had a red fill. So, "use at creation" trumps the attributes palette default settings, but that potential conflict did not change the default attribute palette setting. Leaving me to wonder why there is even a "use at creation" setting in the class definition, if the attributes palette can be set to default to class attributes.
  8. Matt, never use Create Similar command, but I frequently experience the problem others refer to. I always set the Attributes Palette to the default value "all by class," chosen with no objects selected, but it frequently changes to another setting, and I haven't noticed any particular pattern.
  9. I don't use the filter at all, and seldom use the callouts database because its functionality seems convoluted to me. I wish it were designed in a more intelligent and user-friendly way, and I assume this poll is intended to show one way in which the interface is poorly designed. I'd like to be able to edit an xml file directly, and have those files saved in a folder instead of having the mess managed by the software. Then just populate the keynotes with the xml file, instead of this clumsy interface.
  10. I believe you have to get into Marionette and Python scripting for those advanced capabilities.
  11. Zoomer, I don't know what you mean by this. Do you have a minute to explain?
  12. I have noted the "working plane" methods that might be basically the functional equivalent of screen plane in views other than Top Plan, provided we can paste a planar object created in some other view onto the working plane. Seems like a lot of effort went into that engineering when Screen Plane was working perfectly well. So now we can have ephemeral 3d planar objects floating in space in addition to 3d planar objects on the layer plane. What's behind the fervor over that? We always had 3d polygons, and VW since day one has had Screen Plane 2d objects, even though they weren't called that until Layer Plane came in. I don't get it. Why does someone like Zoomer want to get rid of a method others use and have relied on? As for the alleged simplification that started off this thread, I'm not seeing how Working Plane 3d planar objects makes things simpler - just different, at a cost to engineer all that. Thanks, though, to those on this thread who have pointed out that we can work with v2022 when creating, editing and orienting objects in views other than Top.
  13. I'm not sure why anyone who doesn't use Screen Plane cares about it. For those who do, like me, not having screen plane is a deal killer regarding future upgrades of VW. I've already paid for v2022, but won't even use it if Screen Plane doesn't work. I'd appreciate any further feedback on whether the legacy capability actually works.
  14. If you are on a Windows computer, there is a key called “Num Lock” that toggles the functionality of the numeric keypad from numeric input to 3D view modes and back.
  15. Tom, this is what the wall looks like when I edit one of the components to "wall height": It looks this way because of the bug I noted above, where the wall itself changes from a top boundary of "Layer Height" to "Top of Slab" in a project where I don't have a slab. I note that you are using VW 2021 on a Mac where I am using 2020 on a pc. Possibly the bug was fixed in VW 2021.
×
×
  • Create New...