JBender

To answer part of my own question, one method is to use the 2D polygon - "create polygon from inner boundary" tool. Works great. I supose the polyline tool could work if only the "from cubic spline" worked intuitively. I guess I don't know what a cubic spline is....

I am working on modeling some industrial equipment that we build. We currently have 2D drawings which I am converting. I'm hung up on how best to create a solid object from several lines, arcs, and the like. They are all connected, but I'm not sure how to designate the whole as a solid. I understand that in many cases folks will create inverse 3d objects, and subtract the extrudes. In my case, such as an end plate with curved corners, and odd shapes - that method is not ideal... How have others gone about this? Is there a tool that I can "outline" my other objects, and create a solid that I am missing? Some command to "join" 2D objects into one? Another question I have has to do with rendering. I notice that if there are many objects to render when I use the flyover tool - the rendering reverts to wireframe. Is there a way to change that threshold? Also, is there a way to render in hidden line, while using flyover. I find it easier to see what i am doing if only the rendering would continually update and display. We have fast computers nowadays, why would this be a limitation? Is there a product I should be buying to give me this capability?

Does anyone else use VW across platforms? I am 1 PC in a sea of Mac's at my office using VW. I'm sure sheet layers would get around this problem, but the truth is nobody here uses them. We use VW for 2D drafting, drawings and schematics. In any case, the page setup does not translate from PC to MAC (they have different interpretations of layout parameters which I can go into detail of if anyone cares for such explicit detail). My workaround is to choose "one printer page" to re-align the page. It may not sound like much but when printing out an entire design package it is annoying. When I ask VW they tell me that it is not their fault, it is the OS, which may or not be true. In any case they have no plans to help. Anyone else in my boat? Anyone have a seamless work-around? I'd like to stop pissing off my work-mates when they print something and it comes out in 8 tiled pages.

Yes, Jan, that is what I do when I need it, so there is a workaround. Dworks, this is exactly what makes me think the developers might not be listening. I'm just waiting for one of them to admit it should be included and will be in the next release. Along with copy by base point - also very valuable to me.

Make sure you arn't trying to de-select when the resize arrow is "hovered", as any object, that appears not to de-select like you tried. De-select the dimension by clicking the "|" part: |---dim---|

Once you have it you won't want to be without Moving objects is easy in VW, you simply click the object and drag it. In contrast, a move by displacement (as ACAD would describe it) would allow you to move an object by two clicks anywhere on the drawing. In that way you can choose a relationship in any part of the drawing to be your move "displacement" for any other object. Similarily there is a copy by base point which I would love to see. In this case you can choose an object to copy as well as what point you will use to "paste-click" it into your drawing, again this base point can be anywhere on the drawing.

I never rejected VW as a whole. In fact I like VW over ACAD (and regularly use both). I also use the mirror (flip) tool all the time and have found nothing wrong with it! Very simple and very powerful. I was simply pointing out that you may have dismissed valid criticism when you claim one has the wrong (ACAD) mindset. I do appreciate that you agree VW needs a vector displacement move. ...Now I see the post you are confusing me with...

Yes, Mike, I for one would like to be able to draw as well as model. Also, a better question might be how can the Edit tools be more intuitive and easier to use, and expanded upon - for that, believe me, there is room. Retondo, if by resisting the vectorworks system, you mean forgetting about simple, easy to use tools proven in other major CAD sytems, then yes, I am resisting. Why have people chosen not to open their minds? How has loyalty manifested into stagnation?

When I have some extra time I will research Vectorscript as it sounds like a useful tool. I was, however, trying to highlight the fact that some basic functionality seems to be lacking for reasons that are becoming clearer to me in this thread.

I do concede that there is only so much time in a day, and that VW is getting better and better with each release. I guess my gripe is not about the new features and bragging rights so much as the little things that may get lost along the way. I'm talking about small usability things, like selecting, dimensioning, and moving. I fear that those things have been considered "good", and the thinking is don't mess with a good thing. In actuality I think they should be gone over and re-considered over and over again. When you're not a part of the decision process in something like this, or in government, or some technical gadget, or software, I notice people tend to assume it's been thought about and carefully considered. However, whenever I've found myself privy to a decision process, I find reality hits, and I find that whatever it is may not have been as carefully considered as one would have thought... In short, I think the "if it ain't broke" mentality may have stagnated some basic usability in VW. I wouldn't bother writing so much on these boards lately if I didn't think VW is a great program - but it can still be better.

I don't use layers with a vertical definition. To me the biggest difference is that Layers can have different scales. Of course, I am in mechanical and schematic design... so I'm not sure I matter

I think that was very well written, clb. I do hope the designers in NA read through these boards, and can remain open to new suggesstions. You have outlined well the process by which things get done, and don't get done, as the case may be. I, too, like VW in a lot of ways in the year that I have been using it. It has a lot of nice features, and a good feel. I also feel that there are some things that could be changed for the better, like a pt to pt move and copy, more intuitive object dragging vs. object in front, an explode feature in the mech package, 3d associative dimensioning (no, I don't need to know the "imaginary paper" dimension). I hope these things are not left behind because some engineers don't keep an open mind. I think the wrong reaction to a cirticism of VW is if you can't do something, it is your fault because I can do everything I want and have no problems. There are always going to be improvements that could be made. The thing I want to see most is my opinion taken into consideration as a typical user by the VW designers. I know some of them must read these boards - I hope they can take the time to enter into some of these discussions. I'm not sure what their time could be better spent doing for 30 min a week. It's their choice whether to listen to the user in the end...

Oh. I'm not in the least bit interested in just talking about it. I thought we were trying to help VW out by specifically describing what we don't like and what we would like to see. I consider myself to be representative of a typical user. VW is lucky to have "zealots" like us thinking critically and posting those ideas. I'm not so sure that it has been properly thought out by the designers... Also, I don't see divided opinions at all, simply different interpretations of the same thing for the most part. Carry on.

Is it just me that had no idea you could do that in windows - I always thought you had to hold alt down. 'Cause if you could just press and release it, well - things could get screwed up. Windowz.... At least we know what's happening.

I think we have almost come to an agreement here, so I'm going to summarize: 1) It is kludgy to keep the object on top selection rules currently in place. More sophistication is needed. 2) An alternative is for the selected object to trump the object on top, and drag that one. (Selection is functionally equal to on top) 3) Minor complication is when a selected object is underneath an object you want to select, grabbing the surface may be confusing. 4a) The simpliest answer to (3) is "who cares, it's more intuitive than it is now". 4b) An alt-select approach could also be used to inhibit selection. This would also give users a displacement move fuction which is sorely missing in VW currently. 4c) Perhaps the surface of an object should just follow the current rules. Are we ready to propose this to the people who are writing the software? Please edit my list, so that we can get the feedback we need from the designers. Speaking of - is this something we can arrange, Katie?

Very well put. I was thinking as you thought, that if an object is selected already, that object will act as if it were the top most object (even though it isn't). Lets think about one object selected under another one... If they are both selected, no problem - we go back to selecting the one on top. If only the bottom one is selected and not the top - I think it would be perfectly intuitive for that one to remain selected and dragged. It is in essence my problem with how it works. Maybe I don't quite see that point yet. I absolutely love the idea of having the ability to do a move by displacement - I scratch my head wondering why it's not an option. So yes, I also agree with the Alt fix and would love to see it.

Sweet! I love puzzles way too much. I've found a way to reproduce it: -Select your objects any way -Press alt key and release -Delete button doesn't work Press alt once again and it works - so the alt key is acting as a toggle to disable the delete function while objects are selected. You can put my name next to this entry in the next bug release list

I'm going to jump in here, even if I know I don't understand everything discussed here. I will put this as simply as possible: I find it annoying to select an object (or carefully select many), go to a "cross-hairs point" on one of the selected objects to move it, and then drag only to watch VW decide I wanted to select an overlapping object instead of move the selected objects for which I clearly had a cross-hairs for. Does this make sense? I don't understand any reason for it to act this way. Edit: After some contemplation, I see why it is doing what it is. The crosshair is in fact for the frontmost object and not the selected object like I would like to assume. So in that way things can be grabbed quickly and regardless of other selections (they are just de-selected). I propose that a selected object trump a object in front of it for selection or dragging. It's one of those things that if implemented nobody would ever notice, except I wouldn't be cursing when the "wrong" object gets dragged all the time.

NVIDIA Quadro NVS 120M After spending way too much time trying to find a rhyme or reason for the bug - I haven't found any except to note the following: It seemed to happen maybe 1/50 times or so (although I know in the past it seems to have happened much more often) It doesn't seem to matter if it is one object or many - it can happen either way. My best guess is that the software is somehow "sticking" the alt key. I did notice that holding the alt key would prevent you from deleting, in normal operation. When it does happen, you can press delete as many times as you want with no results. Press alt again, and now you can delete. Any others find that pressing alt again re-enables your delete key when it happens?

It does the same to me pretty much anytime I use the alt-select. Of-course after reading this, it's working. I'll keep an eye on when it doesn't work...it is annoying. Version 12.5 on an up to date Dell XP

I use text boxes with tabs to create a worksheet since worksheets themselves don't seem to translate to dwg. The position of the text is different when editing compared to when viewing. The problem is much worse when trying to use it across platforms. Any one else find this. Any work-arounds? If you work at nemetschek - can this be fixed in a later revision??

So I'm not the only one. Is there a moderator in the house?

I think it would be nice at times to draw while in hidden line rendering mode. When I use the flyover tool, however, I am prompted about what I want to do about re-rendering. Anyone know how I tell it to always render again, and quit asking me?

I work in machine design, and I work on schematics, orthagonal machine views, and am learning and heading the way on creating 3d models of our machines. I like a lot of things about VW so far, but am a little perplexed on a few things like this one...

OK, thanks guys - very helpful. Sometimes I wonder if the programmers are paying attention - seems there are a few things that could help us a lot that I would think would be an easy implementation. I will perhaps buy the "bug fix"... As far as the selection, I don't know what you mean by the highest (in 2d) Perhaps I need to do some research. I would think holding down the mouse would prevent a reselection - but that's just my simple view... -J