Matt Overton

All this leads me to say..... Vectorworks should ship a legacy and modern workspace. All the Why's would be answered by saying every say 4 years default workspace gets an overhaul (much overdue) plus there would be a Legacy2022 Workspace that gets new features graphed into it with a shoehorn like occurs now each release. Engineers could plan on the 4 year cycle and leave key commands open for planned future items. Every 4 years everything could be up for grabs in order to surface as much useful function as possible. Most likely the first one would be major just due to the level of technical debt in the system but after that the changes at major revisions are likely to be more manageable.

Still Vectorworks "by class" has been a long standing option and would be useful to extend it as an option to hatches.

Might be worth rebooting the survey here. A lot has changed shifted in the market and well also we all had the lets all work from home for various reasons period in our lives the last couple of years. Could product very different results to 2017

Are surface hatches every exportable to dwg? if not or from memory they have to be rendered then exported as flattened which breaks them to mass groups of lines anyway I don't see why we shouldn't be able to use a tile fill instead of a hatch. Make lots of more complex surface treatments more workable. Indeed would be good with more random patterns like stone walling to be able to draw the tile directly over the image.

Word and Excel are both large installs on MacOS than a Vectorworks install. Scripting might be an issue but Python scripting in the confines of an App is acceptable under i/iPadOS. A focus on improving memory use would help Vectorworks users on all platforms. Plus if the iPad version is tied to service select some more memory intensive operations could be offlined to the cloud as long as produced content could be brought back in to file. How much of the app size is reduced if Renderworks is drop and only VWGraphics engine is only on the device (for now).

Is there a reason why it would be bad to have Low-Medium-High detail levels for a class presentation? Take say a rug or furniture item. Low version of symbol is just a white fill with average pen line used in plans to give idea of layout and room use. For Medium we might add a simple colour and make the line weight white. For High - Image fill replaces colour dropshadows turn on. Similarly we could do the same with textures. We could do this with 3 subclasses of every applicable class but then that creates a management nightmare that viewports already have a control embedded of detail level. I realise this isn't the most high-brow use but once you have your head round the concept the use of level detail in the class itself solves many many low level frustrations that leads us to have many variations of similar classes and most importantly it then requires limited management at point of use. By using the controls that are there it encourages the use of that feature for what it can do now leading to improved libraries already configured.

Also Project files are still large and can bring good hardware to a crawl. Too many things still block the main thread. Dividing up a project to WGR still takes too much time to do, when as it should be encouraged as a way of improving workflow. Viewport Styles which might help some of these has languished on the roadmap with no progress since the day the roadmap was published. Hopefully the lack of visible action is a sign of a larger background project.... but I doubt that. Teamwork has never been a thing the company has improved with passion.

If I understand correctly the wish is for 2 parts A) a better system to combine a group of elements together and have that group react to each other if further edits are required. So once you've created the the flat and trimmed it with a baseboard you could combine them to a symbol-like "thing" or a super-group. The Object info would expose some controls from the combined object (like styled objects do) to allow selective changes to the object. ie a Flat with Baseboard could be resized and it would all grow in the way you've told it to grow. B) on the back of new system complex plug-in objects break up in to smaller easy to maintain object, allow 2 complex objects to use the same sub-object so for example a Stair-object and theoretical Balcony-object would both internally use the same balustrade object to the point of exploding either would lead to a group of the sub-objects.

Also why does it render different to the rendering engine in the installed app. Helpful that it is less buggy.

Also - - why does it cancel 5 hours worth of rendering without an "are you sure?" - why does it look just the same as close dialogue buttons. Why Oh Why oh Why?

Which is there for when you do Reflected ceiling plans.

If there is something in the works it could be called "Vectorworks - Director" for those who've outgrown their desk bound career as a Designer but don't think going back to paper should be the answer in this day and age.

But has no problem if done with each viewport done as a separation.

Add iPadOS benefits over base iOS. I'd be willing to pay for another 1/2 license to use on the iPad for users who need access to some but maybe not the full feature set.

Also should report if the Back up file is more recent than than the recent file in the list.

Well I was kind of hoping if they seriously looked at an iPadPro Version of Vector/Nomad it might get them looking at how bad some of the old interface like OIP is regear it totally and make it better for everyone.

When working on BIM projects that are multi-storey doing Facade/Elevation treatments I find a lot of time I'm bouncing from a full model, Active only it would be most useful to isolate just the active layers of the current storey of the building.

Damn it come here to add this only to find I already had.

I have script somewhere that makes an object in every class with the attributes by class. Make a symbol of that have it in your library and if purge gets to happy you drop the symbol back in and bingo classes all back. Have that symbol on a layer that is other wise empty unlikely to get turned on like a group divider and purge then says there are object in those classes and leaves them out of the purge list.

Will Viewport styles even make it to VW2024? It hasn't even made it past "Active Research" since the roadmap was first released.

That looks to basically the same Versioning system software engineers use to manage complex projects larger and small. I'm very envious of the those tools and how useful they could be to BIM projects. Would dearly love to see a GIT based IFC federation system that worked with Multiple venders and lots of useful tools. No more file formate worries or dealing with contract boundaries stopping co-ordination. As Blame and CodeOwners could really help streamline a single model being worked on by multiple companies.

Or even relative to the file. If your standard folder structure allows it these options would avoid the need to think about it.

It’s in the roadmap under viewport styles. When that arrives I have no idea. since this was posted we now have storeys and story layers have a type as well strikes me a viewport style could have a target story as well and visibility of layers could be automatically set by that.

If this happens what would be the effect of the flip button?

With many still working both in office and home or other remote locations. (some because they discovered how good it is others for many other reasons) It would be good to have a recent files list that covered files we opened in either location. Sure files would need to be accessible both locations like Vectorworks Cloud, dropbox, et al and office server but would be great if it was synced. Even maybe have a team options to share my recent list with co-workers.