Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Everything posted by Davide

  1. Layers should not be organized by name. Stacking order is how VW layers organize structure of drawing. The only thing to improve, like in PowerCadd is to have a drop down menu always open that shows layers name and the user can click on the list to turn them on off etc.
  2. Yes, thank you. It is a very very informative place, when there are no wars. This site has become one of the sites in general I frequent the most on a daily basis. Katie seems to me like a person runnign thru many tennis courts trying to catch all the balls being thrown. And she's doing a very good job at not loosing patience.
  3. I agree completely. Scattering them as they are in the middle of everything it is not well organized.
  4. I agree, especially the class management should be more refined then what I do, like copying an object and paste it to another drawing just to bring that class in. Anyway, if you delete a class, you don't lose any object belonging to it, they just go to the none class, (unlike layers).
  5. like a pastry tray, a nice rectangular window that the cursor carries aound when invoked and shows little representations of copied/cut objects, sort of Object Browser window, but not just for symbols. And I paste what I need by clicking on it, like Oj Br. I need it for example when I have to insert several notes or key notes and basically I'd be bringing the note legend around and choose from it. But in general, like in MS Words, it would be nice to copy more then one object, preview them and paste them fron any corner, like in PowerCadd. Thanks.
  6. D Zens (I will not get involved in what VW has that AC doesn't kind of thing, reminds me of intelligent discussions like "that woman has bigger breasts so I like her more". If you want all the tools possible imaginable get Microstation Triforma, AC by comparison is a toy, and if you want the most drafting tools for less money then get PowerCadd or TurboCadd. A sum of tool won't make a better program, there is something more to it and VW has it, others don't). 2 things: 1-No, new electronic capabilities will not get me in places (design wise) that I couldn't imagine before (perspective when discovered was a manual task) Michelangelo and Borromini did things that most of today's Architects cannot conceive Cad or not Cad. Complex shapes like Gehry's were not explored just because not harmonious, there is nothing new in a clash of shells. 2-I always noted, working with AC users and PowerCadd users, now VW users , that there is a sort of rage in the AC ones. Their minds so strictly linked to the way things were done in AC that they hate anything else at first, forgetting how incredibly frustrated they were at first, when they started using that dry program. Then of course after years of struggle they became masters of the secret words to make it work fast, and now they don't want let go that ?Zen secret knowledge? that made them feel so better then others. That rage cannot come in my opinion from a very pleasant program. PowerCadd users were so more flexible in the transition, so more accommodating even when they had to renounce to their shortcuts, to PC legendary easy of use, to their powerful 2d tools (some of them VW should really have). Like your acrimonious posting Zens, about other people?s blowed mind and masturbation. Never heard these stuff on this bulletin board from VW users.
  7. PRetondo Class could be even more flexible if you could turn them on a layer but not on another so that in the same sheet you see on the right the new floor plan, on the left the demo. Demo c lass being on only for the left side (demo layer) not the right, (new layer). You would draw on one base plan (existing plan) converting to demo some elements and adding new elements, using layer links to shift a copy of the plan, you'll get both plans, on the same sheet drawing just ones. If a later survey requires you to change the existing plan, you edit that just once (the base plan), changes being reflected on both demo and new. Now you can do all this, but not on the same sheet, side by side, it's either or. Not sure though we want so much complexity.
  8. Well Chris and Kevin, thanks for your comments. I really hope they'll introduce those features for version 10 or within the year anyway, whether I'll use them a lot or not. One of the reasons I'd like that, is that all of a sudden my pushing for this program will make even more sense to the AC nostalgic group in my office. I'm like a soldier on the war border, hoping to receive new ammo as soon as possible. Just a clipping tool for layer links/references would make a world of difference.
  9. Answer should have been: you buy Autocad and do what that makes you do.
  10. While I strongly hope that soon we'll get those necessary features (viewports / single model approach) I'd like to invite to check the discussion on the same subject on the wish list. I think there are some very good mentality/philosophy approaches to the viewports issues. Just saying copy the AC viewports and the Archicad sections won't make a better VW in my opinion. Again, for sure links are needed. It?s primitive the way we work, but especially for Architects there are other factors involved. A building is not (simply) an object, a piece of industrial design, treated as a sectionable shell that we need to view and rotate from any angle like an egg in real time. Section don?t come directly from floor plans. They cannot. Archicad cannot give me the sections just based on the floor plans and roof plans. A section is like a vertical floor plan and it?s part of my design, of my layout. I have to develop almost at the same time sections and floor plans to finally get the whole. I could even start with the section and then develop the plan and then readjust the whole thing to make it work. Drawing a section is studying, is not an automatic process, like a database. I enjoy drawing sections, and the only sections any cad can give me thru the plans, are just outlines, contours, pretty basic things that I can quickly do anyway. For real sections, with detailed structural and architectural elements, so far, I would have to draw it by myself. Not to mention that to make it look like the masterpieces sometimes sections are, for sure any automatic tool is inadequate. I have to choose line-weights and shades of grays and hatches and patterns and symbols by myself and decide how deep is my field of vision. In a similar way, but less stringent, the same applies to exterior elevations. So unless you are designing Frank Gehry or Zaha Hadid kind of things, I don?t see a huge advantage on the auto section features, except preventing interns from drawing wrong building (1/8-1/4?) sections (outlines) because they get confused with the roof planes etc.
  11. Agree with everybody. I see VW vieports like the TurboCad ones, where you sort of bubble the area you are interested in, and you get that bubble (any shape) containing a portion of the whole, pannable and editable on any instance of it, editable in both directions (something layer link should do). Class visibility editing per view not just per layer would allow to put on the same sheet a demo plan and a new plan both based on one base drawing only and layer links and classes creating / showing two plans simultaneously. I like the idea of not copying ACAD, let's find the MiniCad way.
  12. Robert, use layer links for multi view of a 3d model. And to update exterior elevations.
  13. Broesler is 100% right. Any office that I've been where they could see AutoCAD dwgs or even PowerCadd quickly realized that dwgs in VW looked better. Is a philosophical thing, has to do with grabbing and manipulating objects directly with your hands instead of telling a window dialog box what you'd like to do. It has to do with the extraordinaire representational flexibility of classes crossing layers , patterns and hatches and images and the natural approach of using the colors (shades of gray) you want to print wit,h instead of electrical (red yellow blue etc) thick less wires that represent lines on a black depthless background. VW instinctively makes you feel the pressure of the pencil on the white paper.. ok maybe I'm exaggerating, but there is more beauty involved in this program then precise engineering.
  14. What's up with this now? Start measuring with the tape tool, pan using the space bar to move to a distant point, and the location bar (x,y etc) disappears. Anyone feels like speculating on the matter? Thanks
  15. Looks like you have to build from the plan not the sections. And to add horizontal details use the extrude along path. Your approach would make sense if you have a cross vaulted space, then you intersect 2 semi-cylinders and get just the intersecting space.
  16. So many people around the world rely on this program for their work, and therefore life. Shouldn?t the next direction that VW will take be discussed in an open forum that involves the users much more then just asking them which tools they want? A functional effective program is much more then the sum of its tools: it?s how it interprets the way a designer now uses an electronic media instead of a pencil. Then, it is paramount to discuss about this evolution, we cannot go on waiting for a new release to add some tools and fix bugs and be a little faster. One year from now I guess there will be VW 11. Will it go in the 2D/3D complete integration direction? Will it become a database oriented program (where the users at the same time defines quantities and elements to encompass the whole project more then drafting lines and attaching records) instead of linearly evolving the a ?lines first, data after? application ? Since it takes so much developing time to create a new version, now it?s the time to talk about it. How do we want to digitalize our projects one year from now? What are the actions, more then the commands, that our ideal workplace would like to see happen during the execution of a project? Linking, recording, sharing, editing, reverting, assembling etc, those are the actions. For example (I?m talking of course about Architect), I can see areas of the program dedicated to specific parts of a building, where in few steps we can assemble roof details, or others for wall sections, like tablets with all the customizable assembly parts ready to be dropped in, like blocks of elements and all linked to symbol marks numbers etc. In such a modal approach, you?ll see only the tools needed for that task at that moment. And directly type the scale for it and export, clip, print, insert in library, options for that cell element only (not the whole layer) at your fingers. Enough. Basically I will like to know and participate on how I will draft/design in the next future as a VW user, so that I can make an informative decision on which electronic media to adopt.
  17. There was no polemic intention from my side. I thought that the reason of the quietness was no problems and that as usual people write about bad things, not good ones. I am happy if VW 10 is selling a lot, it is an advantage for all of us VW users if the VW market share increases (is it?). I will upgrade as soon as have the guts to convince the management.
  18. So, when version 9 came out, messages (mostly rants) poured on this MB; now that VW 10 came out (I haven't upgraded yet), it's so quiet out there, that there are two possible explanations: 1-nobody upgraded yet, or not so many, (but NNA says it is a very successful release) or? 2-the new version is very smooth, stable, and yet not mind-blowing as there aren't many praising messages either. Katie, which one is the truth?
  19. Not sure about the issue, but to create a 3d face that you can view from any side, use the roof face after you created the triangular polygon in plan view. By doing that you will assign the slope and obtain the real thing. If instead you are creating it by connecting 3d points (locis), with the 3d polygon tool, make sure you triangulate, connect only 3 points at a time, or you might create non planar surfaces that will show ok in wireframe but not render. Hope my answer has any relevance to your question.
  20. Hallo VW people. Is there any way to export the sheet layout to another file, without saving as, maybe using a scrip? For sheet I mean the class/layers saved composition. I need to recreate a corrupted file. Thanks
  21. Just put 3d Locis points at the z values you need (use the obj info palette if you need to adjust their values), then connect them with the 3d polygon tool.
  22. Hi there, question of the day. When you import from AC (will this task ever end in the next century?) text lines arrive as single lines instead of blocks or paragrafs. Is there anyway to work around this? I don't think in VW you can combine single lines of text into a block, right? Thank you
  23. Davide

    VW 10

    To be honest, while 9.5 wasn't ready at all, 9.5.2 is working very well. I know the few bugs (Windows version seems to be working much better then Mac's, from what I read), and work around them. There are 30 people here using it every day and it flows, no major issues. Except printing patterns and old hatches and demo windows.
  24. Davide

    VW 10

    Here's what's happening. VW, in trying to make MiniCAD more powerful (not Mini anymore) developed a lot of muscles without a strong mind: many idiosyncrasies. i.e. doors don?t really talk to schedules or workgroup references don?t bring you just what you need, or layer links are cool but hard to manipulate and so on and on, scalable layers are great but an hassle when you need to work quickly and select thought them, and so on and on. So old users got used to work around these issues, and were expecting a change in philosophy more then smoother things. A change in philosophy that would have made VW 10 able to compete with any CAD no matter project size. See Matthew, I understand time/cost factors, but again those 2 items (clipping ref /view ports, flexible bi-directional scheduling, and maybe real 3d/2d integration) would have opened wider markets. Now the old users are partially disappointed because of the no-revolution (even though it seems from the new features list that VW 10 will definitely improve production and overall quality) The new one will find a less-weird-very-powerful-cool to use-program -for the?price but no full size CAD. And being version 10,(I know it?s just banal psychology) it should have been full size. All in all I think, price is not crazy (check others), and features seem great (especially 3d and presentation but explain that to production obsessed ex-AC ?thickness -less line on black background? users). More then a new version, a big upgrade which was needed.
  25. Davide

    VW 10

    By quickly reading about what's new in VW10, it seems to have a lot of great new feauturesbut, but:no improvement on the Spreadsheet/scheduling?no improvement(clipping, viewport) on the Workgroup referencing? These 2 features alone would have made the program better then all the other together. I'm really sad, after all the requests about them?
  • Create New...