_James

I really don't like to come on here and whinge about things but the fact that it's in "In development" means that an update is at best 18months away for VW 2025, maybe 30 months for VW2026? Surely any update is now too late for VW 2024. I hope that I will be proven wrong with the more frequent updates that are made possible by the switch to subscription. Of course it's not my field and there are countless other factors at play but I just can't see how it could take that long to sort out. From what I have inferred on the forum there seems there's lots of 'legacy code' that things have to integrate with which to me is the tail wagging the dog. I saw some clips of Tesla's recent investor day where they said that it took them only 9 months to go from an empty field in Shanghai to shipping the first car out of that newly built factory. Perhaps an unfair comparison but it offers some perspective. I would like to understand more about the challenges of developing Vectorworks features, but I understand why VW staff would rather not come on here and get shouted at by people saying "why bother spending time on X feature when I want Y feature". But anyway, I'm very much in favour of Roof Face modernisation and look forward to parametric roof light objects in the future! If they could incorporate the "wall closure" functionality that walls have that would be great too.

rather than make a new file* or duplicate layers.

Strongly agree

Sorry, some more thoughts on this - Having a more formal approval process (i.e. the administrator needs to merge the branches) helps the administrator/project lead stay up to date with the project. For example they could sit at their desk on a Monday morning and go through the all the pull requests from the previous week, merging the data into the main file both giving their approval of the change but also understanding it fully and, more crucially, understanding what the current status of the project is. I think this is underrated in projects that are large/complex/have many people working on them in that the 'current' information can be in flux for long periods of time, and can also change very rapidly when a few people commit changes. In the current system, people can just press 'save and commit' and change the project entirely without the administrator approving the change. I'm probably getting carried away, but if they system could detect what is changing, say a bathroom layout, and show a summary of the change on a sheet that could then be viewed by the administrator or sent to the client for review, that would be a huge feature for us.

I mentioned this to some members of the vectorworks team a few years ago on one of the vectorworks open house sessions. They seemed positive about it but I don't think it went anywhere. I think it's a great way to consider changes too, rather than make new fews or duplicate layers. Say for example a change to a bathroom layout - you can quickly and easily see the new vs. old and decide which to press ahead with, with just a mouse click to merge the proposed change. This data would be incredibly valuable to assign/link it to change requests from clients and then track the time spent making the changes. I think a system such as this could be very powerful and I hope that the Project Sharing item on the "In Development" roadmap looks at this, although i'm not hopeful with it's description being "Improve performance and reliability of transactional operations in our project sharing solution." which sounds like just an evolution of the current system.

I have an image of how it looks when unread but I can't seem to upload it for some reason - it quotes a server error? I like the concept of the homescreen but a few things need polishing to make it better: - When opened for the first time you get a bouncy icon from the Mac dock. Even when all notifications are read. Shouldn't this only be used when there is an issue? - Can't quit the programme by right clicking the icon in the dock and pressing quit when the homescreen is open.

Most tasks are single core processes only, so they can't be spread across the 8 cores you have. It would be great if it could use the full amount of power but that's not possible unfortunately!

@jeff prince Does Twinmotion take advantage of the extra features of A-series cards over the 30 or 40 series gaming focused cards? For a long time I have heard that VW doesn't and nor does Twinmotion. Whilst I appreciate "bigger is better" generally on the GPUs, I am more interested in how will Vectorworks be using graphics cards moving forwards, will the VGM continue to expand? Will Renderworks go to the GPU? Hidden Line? Multi-GPU support? Will there be a point (or are we at it already) where the GPU is more important than the CPU? An update to this article would be helpful as the hardware has come quite a long way in 4 years (as has VW) -

I would also be interested in some more information from the VW team on this - @JuanP, do you have any more info on this or know who the best person to ask is?

Was this image made in VW/Renderworks? If so do you mind sharing your rendering settings?

Yes please!

Google File Stream isn't recommended I don't believe. The main benefits of Dropbox is LAN Sync (sync across your local network rather than back to dropbox servers, increasing speed of syncing) and delta sync (syncing only the part of the file that has changed, again increasing speed). I don't believe google drive/file stream can do either of these. I don't know of a plugin to help, although I do know Vectorworks are working on Project Sharing as it's on their roadmap, who knows when it will be ready though! Have you considered Vectorworks Cloud Services (VCS)? It now supports LAN sync, so may be a good fit although I haven't tried it myself. Whilst we're on google drive, we pay to have some larger projects on dropbox and use project sharing with them. It's not perfect and has gotten worse with the recent MacOS developments, basically what is described in the thread here -

It would be far more helpful if this dialog also contained the 'Sheet Title' alongside the 'Sheet Number' and 'Sheet Description', or at least have an option to display it. In addition, if this import process could also import the titleblock object, that would save a step whereby the titleblock needs to be added afterwards.

@JuanP perhaps something like, and i'm picking a date from random here, 14th March?

Nvidia Omniverse Connector is in the "Scheduled" section of the roadmap so hopefully we may see it soon.

No, sorry. I think you need to have unique numbers. The only workaround I can think of right now is to go to page setup, and have multiple pages either in the horizontal or vertical direction. Then you could have say 4 pages under SB001 which will all have that number. I don't work in this way so i'm not sure but perhaps that would work?

I've opened your file - which field are you trying to put the sheet number in? The title block works fine and you've set it up correctly, you just need to add a field that has the ddynamic text linked value of "Sheet Data.Sheet Number" Does that answer your question?

Yes. What version of Vectorworks are you using? Are you using a custom title block or one of the default ones?

Agree.

Spare a thought for those of us on 16GB shared between CPU and GPU!

A variation on point 3. would be to allow the user to set up the shortcuts as they would like them and then it could summarise the conflicts and allow the user to rectify them at the end, before they are committed. i agree that it's quite annoying to try to change something, only to find it won't let you until you change some random command that you then have to search for, think of a suitable replacement etc before heading back to the original item (if you remember).

Kind of agree, kind of disagree. A UI refresh would be welcome if done well, but I agree that many existing tools could do with some attention. I don't think it's as simple to say that all the UI engineers should just move onto fixing the stair tool for example. A team of bricklayers can't all lay the same brick. So many issues seem to be tied up with legacy code that then needs to be retained to ensure cross-version compatibility (and then there's the space tool). Perhaps the switch to subscription, and therefore all users on the same version, will help alleviate this aspect.

Yes me too, I can't remember the last time I clicked in the mode bar but I think most people in my office click rather than use keyboard shortcuts.

I would also be interested to know whether VW know how many people press the 'U' key to cycle through tool modes compared with those who click with their mouse.

I agree that it's annoying, but I'm all for the toolsets being condensed and having one "Wall" tool that combines straight and curved walls. I guess it's exacerbated at the moment because it's one of the only, if not the only, tool that behaves in this way but perhaps more will follow suit in the future. I think we could condense a few other tools in this way: - Constrained/unconstrained linear dimension - Component join/wall end cap (join the outer component to itself) - All the screws and bolts to just a "fastener" tool - All the HVAC tools