Markvl

I would suspect that this is just the begining, but it's small. I too would like to see way more. The sky is the limit.

It adds a whole other dimension of usability to slabs.

Hey @Bas Vellekoop I should have clarified better. I certainly want to be able to change my extrudes so yes it should still have a history, just not involve an original position. No matter where the extrude is in space I should be able to edit it right where it is.

This is new as of 2017. Great feature. I use it often.

Ya this sound like a very redundant feature. Kinda like a history. Extrudes don't need a history. Gets my vote.

@Matt Panzerwas thinking the same thing.

Wow 900 dpi! That is very high. The above image on an A2 sheet we typically don't go any higher than 400 dpi. 900 dpi definitely accounts for high render times. Do you have a reason for going to 900 dpi. Perhaps a screen pick of your work would help me to understand. I have done some Renders at 600 dpi because for one reason or another fine line detail was needed. Thanks for the compliment. One other thing that came to mind is high polygonal models/symbols could contribute to long wait times and crashing. I have found it only takes one bad apple to wreck render times with crashing. Good clean models/symbols is essential.

We work on PCs. Now I suppose based on your question that our file sizes may be relatively small. Our 4 storey 40 +/- residential buildings with underground parking come in at 600,000 KB. Our plans make use of 3D viewports and renders.

I understand your sentiments @Gadzooksfrom your thoughts here on the forum. I just haven't experienced (as I have said) the negatives that others have. What does that mean? I don't know.

All of our new projects are now on 2019 and I can say I haven't experienced the crashing that others have noted.

I never liked the Chrystal entry. I so often find that modern finishes just can't compete with the ways things had been done in the past. The original entry is so much more grander than the new one. You feel like you're going into a museum. Anyways I digress.

@Jim Wilson Another thing I noticed was an option that was available at least in 2017 but is not there in 2019. It's a folding door configuration. So for instance in a corner cabinet setup with an inside corner there never is a two door setup it's always a folding door. The cabinet will only show the two door setup. When you apply a door handle, two handles will show up on the inside sides. Would you be able to find out why this was changed, removed, forgotten? The pic provided is a screen shot of the OIP from 2017 for the corner cabinet. This is how it should look. This is what the cabinet looks like in 2019.

I've updated to SP2 and indeed it has been fixed. Very happy about that. Thanks @Jim Wilsonfor the original submitall. And look at that he's got this shifted over to Wishes Granted as well. Indeed it has been. Thanks VW.

Any news on this @Jim Wilson? especially in light of this comment...

I totally get your frustration. When we have a job to do I expect the software to do what I want it to do within the limits of my understanding what the software has expressed that it can do. These kind of bugs it seems get in the way of getting the job done. It just takes time to do a work around that shouldn't have happened in the first place.