Jump to content

Gerard Jonker

Member
  • Content Count

    186
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Gerard Jonker


  1. I have VW 2008 running on Leopard. It has its problems, but no worse than 12.0 had. So I'd say it runs well on Leopard. Better than 12 anyway. I have 2008 running now for a few weeks on Leopard and experienced 1 crash.

    I'll bitch NNA about every bug I see, you can trust me on that one. I have reported afew already. But in general I am quite happy about VW 2008.

    Gerard


  2. I would love to be able to shape the texture mapping as I feel like and apply it in that orientation to all objects included.

    Also the Edit mapping dialog could do with some spring cleaning.

    mmmm, no, sorry, it probably has to be rethought and redone entirely.

    Since I want to be able to map brick on any object I create I made a separate texture with the bricks standing on their side.

    To me this is a silly approach.

    If NNA could give the C4D approach to texture mapping a VectorWorks UI, I would be in heaven.

    Gerard


  3. Hi Katie,

    With the SP1 installed I see the same errors and reported it to bug submit. With an instruction how to reproduce it.

    (Sorry for the avatar, that is for a more threatening thread)

    Gerard


  4. Petri,

    I'm terribly afraid that I have to agree with you on this matter. I know you don't like the association with the likes of me. (backwater mud still under the finger nails, my Mac Plus shutting down time after time because it sits under my desk not safe from the murky flood waters the windmill is hardly capable of milling out again.)

    Your "half-baked" words bring the message across clear enough.

    I wouldn't have called the Heads Up Display silly, other than that: I agree.

    Gerard


  5. NNA, Please keep the insertion point of symbol (0,0).

    In the past it didn't, but it was fortunately fixed for VW 9.

    Chris, if you insist in seeing the moved origin reflected in your symbols then make a group inside the symbol, edit the group and there you see the coordinates according the moved origin.

    Please read the origin article on VCOR:

    http://www.vectorlab.info/index.php?title=Absolute_Origin

    Gerard


  6. Hi Francois,

    I'm sorry it was your time lost here. Your warning however may have saved others from upgrading their OS before the box with VW 2008 arrived. Fortunately you had already ordered the upgrade.

    I'd like to thank you for immediately sharing the info rather than sitting on it.

    I agree with you that there is a substantial possibility NNA knew about the problems a few weeks before Leopard was released. In their defense I must state that even they only had a developers version and not the final release. Also, their main concern was, of course, VW 2008. Since their new version VW 2008 was scheduled before the release of Leopard I can imagine NNA thought they were safe to worry slightly less about VW 12.5.2.

    Thanks again,

    Gerard


  7. Hi CRSA,

    We ran into several screen redraw problems with VW 11.5 and 12.5.0 and 12.5.2 on OSX 10.5. I'd suggest to go for OSX 10.4 or Upgrade to VW 2008. The latter seems to work fine on Leopard except for some minor installation problems, (workspace doesn't recognize all plug-ins). But that was easily fixed and may have been related to the way the Mac's OSX was upgraded.

    Gerard


  8. Up to VW 12.5.2 (haven't tried for VW 2008 yet) you can copy a Mac workspace to a PC and vice versa. You have to know that a Mac file can have a resource fork and a data fork. Sort of two files in one. Copying to PC makes a file loose the Resource fork, but in the case of the workspace that is where the "data" is. Use QuickConvert by Dave MacLachlan

    ( http://download.nemetschek.net/eDispatch/QuickConvert.zip ) to swap Data and Resource forks.

    Duplicate your Mac workspace, add the extension .qtr and drag the file onto QuickConvert. You don't see anythingh happen, but it did. Send to a PC and ready you are.

    Gerard


  9. Are you saying this feature won't allow me to create a model at real-world co-ordinates and turn it at right angles to work on?

    Hi Christiaan,

    I think that is exactly what it ought to do. (and think it does).

    Let's wait until we have it on our computers and running.

    (Simply can't imagine advertising such feature without actually doing just that..... mumble mumble)

    Gerard


  10. At last there is someone even remotely capable of challenging my authority on all matters relevant to anything, on the basis of deep philosophical understanding of Life, the Universe and Everything.

    Except for the utter lack of social intelligence. I thought it was little at first, but that part of his brain is so completely numb he doesn't even realize he is carrying this dead weight around.

    Unfortunately these people exist in real life, too. So full of their own qualities there is little room for opinions from others. As long as the others hold on to a different opinion the others must be morons and as soon as the person in question realizes is heading for a defeat, he grunts a last insults and keeps his mouth shut for a small period of time, until his ego, brushed up and polished in the mean time, bursts out again.

    It is not that these people are stupid, the problem is that their mind set ("Denkraam" or "Window of thought") is so small and limited (not rarely extremely fine tuned on a limited number of subjects, like SF and hard- and software) that they even can't fathom the notion of the whole world of subjects, ideas and thoughts, that might be lying just outside their mental reach.

    These people often compare themselves with people like Leonardo Da Vinci, a broadly interested man, knowing almost everything there was to know for a person in those days. But he was modest and realized all too well that he couldn't even imagine the amount of things he didn't know yet.

    No Ignatius, you are not an "Uomo Unversale" you simply have a very narrow "Denkraam", and the absence of social capabilities is the first proof of that.

    That is why I find little respect for, or interest in, the large number of Ignatius like man (usually male) we see around us, bloating their way through life, leaving a trail of bewildered and hurt, more sensitive and more thoughtful people behind.

    Your Dutch Genius,

    Gerard


  11. The Dutch Genius Gerard "Petri, you are deluded!" Jonker

    Hi Petri,

    I forgot in which topic I wrote that, but I do remember I wrote it because I hesitated before sending that. Obviously it came across in a more offensive way than I meant. I sincerely apologize.

    Was it our discussion about the ellipses? Might well have been the reason why we never finished that discussion. You never managed to explain why the VectorWorks ellipses isn't a true ellipses, I understand that may very well be caused by the obvious omissions in my education, or the sheer lack of intelligence on my part.

    Or was it the discussion about Secular Islamic Architecture? When Dennis got your full load because he accidentally sent a private mail to list, explaining to me the difference between an oxymoron and a moron. (I, as usually showing the full depth of my ignorance, called it a contradiction).

    I'm deeply sorry I offended you, then and in any other occurrence.

    Regards,

    Gerard Jonker


  12. Hi Gideon,

    Thank you for the warning.

    Anybody care to continue the discussion on a more gentle tone and see if we can get to some dept before start calling each other names?

    The trap Petri seems to be falling into (in the humblest of my opinions, of course) is that of many computer "literates". (Please don't think I am not aware of his skills and insights.)

    They focus too much on creating a model (2D/3D, an information model) of reality in their computer, the need to describe everything. From that point on they want to share that information with other parties. Is it not too much a need for control or too much fear things will go wrong if we delegate some responsibilities?

    But the computer never holds everything, no matter how you try. The computer is not the source of the information, the idea ripens and gets shaped inside your brain. Sometimes you need visual clues, sketches, you are at that point communicating with your self.

    Only after the point the idea has matured you start to look for media to communicate that idea.

    Up to now VectorWorks has proven quite a good tool for communicating, even at sketch level, but we couldn't do all the communication with Vectorworks, sometimes we had to fall back to pencil and paper, fax, spreadsheet- and database programs and don't forget the telephone.

    Now BIM is around the corner, it is not the first attempt to:

    a: increase the communication abilities of a CAD program

    b: channel more information through the CAD program.

    I can only be very enthusiast about a, but b worries me a bit:

    Who is going to feed that stuff into the computer?

    Is it necessary to put it there, i.o.w: will it come out again?

    Is a CAD program the best way to communicate that data?

    The idea is that when you click on an object, some text pops up, displaying all nicessities (the first i is not a typo) about that object.

    Now, if we return to the example of the engineer.

    What would be the minimal information we need to send him/her?

    What if we send the engineer a 3D model of the whole building.

    That would probably enough, unfortunately the engineer has to start looking to what information is his/hers.

    If we assign some classes (a standard would be nice) the engineer can extract the construction from the rest of the building, while that the rest of the model immediately gives some idea about use and therefor about loads. (If you are working on an exceptionally small building with an exceptionally heavy floor load you probably already talked about that when had the engineer on the phone.)

    Now I can add information to the constructional elements: "This is a concrete column, or this is a steel column" But that is something the engineer can see from the shape of the object.

    The next phase is the engineer has made the necessary calculations and sends the model back, the concrete column is still a concrete column, a suggestion is made about different size or materialization, either drawn or not, depending on your contact with the engineer.

    When i click on the column now I can see how much steel goes into the column, this is great.

    I pick up my MacBook and walk to the site. There I see the column, concrete ready to be poured.

    -Hey, wait up! There is not enough steel there, my model say 10 rods, and you are putting in only 8!

    -Yes, we ran clean out of ? 10, but we have plenty of ? 12.

    -Ai, Ai, 8*12 is not the same as 10*10!

    -Agreed, but is falls right in the margins. We phoned the engineer about this, this morning and he faxed a signed approval, I think by tomorrow your model will be updated by his staff, they are changing their models as we speak.

    Yes, I can see BIM would work, Yes, I can see it would be great if the information was there.

    But the weakest is link is often forgotten. As long as blueprints are used on site, those drawings have to be made, the drafts persons are the weakest link. They have to put in all data, also data that doesn't immediately appear on drawing, and that is where they will cut corners to get the drawing finished in time.

    That is how it is how things are going right now and I see no reason why a BIM format would prevent that.

    People in Holland hardly used classes in MiniCAD. They didn't need it for their own drawings, relying on an object oriented structure of groups and symbols. Only after Classes could also assign colours and hatches they started to use them.

    I have yet to see a similar bate, to lure people in preparing good BIM models.

    Just my 2 rather lengthy cts,

    I'll try to be briefer next time,

    Gerard


  13. I really wonder how much more information you might need to add to a column or slab (in whatever format) so your engineer might finally understand what you mean? Give the (wo)man some credit.

    The decisions are made on the top. (do I get that contract or not.)

    Whether or not the format gets to be used to its optimal capabilities is determined further down the line, because people are people.

    What rests is, at the very end, the agreed CD with the complete model the client demanded.

    What I fear is that the whole BIM idea will turn out to be nothing more than an improved Drawing Exchange Format, a lot of extra bells and whistles, none of which making the exact sound you wish, and a lot of extra work on the plate of the architect.

    Ignorantly yours, (or should I write "Ignored-ly")

    Gerard

    P.S.

    This eardrum ripping silence may, of course, also be caused by something other than the (possible lack of) IFC capabilities of VS.


  14. I happen to know what it means, I also think we will be forced by the bigger clients to work BIM compliant.

    That, when we hand them the key to their new building with the CD (DVD?) containing the BIM, they will shelf the CD and use a simple PC with and excel spreadsheet to manage the maintenance and use of the building, will be not a topic of discussion at the moment we get the contract.

    On the architects side lies a more serious problem.

    The problem in the average architects firm is still the devision of responsibilities. The drafts person, responsible for finishing a certain sheet of paper on a certain date will care less about the actual content of the file as his deadline comes closer. Then when the piece of paper is on its way to client or contractor he might be persuaded to check his model. After that the person in charge of pricing etc. gets the file, makes a few attempts to retrieve data electronically, gives up and starts counting by hand. Not quite the way it should be, but unfortunately still practice.

    We still have a few years to prepare ourselves, before BIM takes over.

    What you describe as "toying" with (3D-) models may be very important to the individual client. The 2D/3D models you are "working" with contain a lot of information, which is a lot of work to set up and, more importantly, to keep accurate over the year(s) the average project lasts. A lot of work we are only prepared to do when that data is actually going to be used. The data is only going to be used if there is a guarantee about its accuracy. People are still waving those responsibilities, and that is problem we (here in Holland anyway) are facing in the years to come.

    So BIM or no BIM, the answer is in the attitude and not in a certain format.

    15 years ago, my partners in the firm back then, had set up a beautiful system that created complete tables with everything to order for a building, the system was accurate and fast and allowed for very sharp pricing of buildings. It was done in MiniCAD 4.x!!!!

    Regards,

    Gerard

 

7150 Riverwood Drive, Columbia, Maryland 21046, USA   |   Contact Us:   410-290-5114

 

© 2018 Vectorworks, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Vectorworks, Inc. is part of the Nemetschek Group.

×
×
  • Create New...