VectorGeek

I bought a brand new Plymouth Valiant in 1963. Left it at the dealership instead of taking delivery. It's still there, so technically I believe it still has the original warranty which kicks in once I pick it up. ;-) V-G Sochi Olympics Greeter VW2013 VW2013 Mac OS X

gester: Final output drawing scale is based on a number of things: - type of drawing (plan, detail, wall section, site plan) - size of project (shopping center, SF dwelling) - desired page size (compact or "bed sheet") - available printing technology - bureaucratic requirements - personal preference - eyeglass prescription - not kidding For example, I have done large projects at 3/32" = 1'-0" (roughly 1:120 in metric terms) for floor plans to make them fit on a D size sheet without match lines, which I personally try to avoid. It all depends. V-G.

This is excellent advice from Vincent. Draw at the predominant scale that your viewports will be set to. V-G -------------------------------------------------------------------------- VW2013, VW2014 Mac OSX NOT accepted for the Mars One project --------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Jim, In their version of AutoCAD (2011 I believe). Happens with all consultants - not just one firm. Weird.

When we export our VW files as DWG files for consultants to use, the text, dimensions, and text within PIOs is reversed and/or upside down if it's inside a flipped symbol. Anyone know a fix? V-G VW2013 SP4 Mac OSX 10.7.4 iMac i7 New Winter Boots

So I gather. That's why I added SP2 as an occasional possibility. Let's hope things improve with the next SP. VG

Do I assume from this that your company have bought these 10+ licenses and that you have had no personal financial liability in the purchase of these? Unlike many VW users who personally have to pay for their licenses and therefor have to prioritise their expenditure on software against other necessities, it is easy for those who do not have to justify the cost of upgrading to overlook the fact that some of us have to prioritise a set of hyped up new features against a years caffeine intake and Internet access. Glad you have nothing against garden design. You could assume that, but you'd be wrong. As a shareholder in our company, I had a vested financial interest in the decision to adopt VSS. As the managing technical director, I continue to have a vested interest in seeing that our team has the latest tools and that those tools work properly. We too prioritize, and while there are always features in a new release that we don't need and will never use, there are also features which make the upgrade worthwhile. Not to mention, the critical element of technical support (both from NVW and through this valuable group of message board users) is always better when one is using the latest version. Again, my policy is to wait until SP1 (occasionally SP2) before making the switch. My time to implement the new system is budgeted for at the outset of the year, and it offers a chance to clean up wayward libraries, fix some bugs in our internally developed plug-ins, and call the staff together for a 2-3 hour "what's new" office training seminar. That time is well-spent and generates significant productivity improvements every time. And you can take all that to the bank. Provided it is not invested in sub-prime mortgages. V-G.

Or they may be highly organized and managed professionals, who work for a company that is forward-looking and doesn't see a huge financial upside to devote the required resources needed to re-code and support versions of their software that are three years old. Again, the cost of VSS is pretty insignificant as compared to almost every other line item in our company's financials. V-G. "Thar's gold in them hills."

My preference would be to make converting/upgrading of files more reliable (converting to v2014 has been a reasonably good experience for us). This, surely, is the ultimate solution as it allows everyone to take advantage of advances straight way and forget about supporting multiple versions of VW within an office. This is particularly the case when you have projects that span over multiple years. ^ This. The main upgrade pain point that users call in with is (more commonly than OS compatibility) issues with file conversion and workspace import/preferences migration to the new version. If we can remove these snags from the upgrade process, the Service Select program and upgrading yearly will become much more appealing. Agree with you both 100%. It's not practical for us to operate multiple versions (and associated ancillary resources) at the same time, therefore a "full" upgrade is the best. I'd be hugely supportive of any mechanism that allowed simple transition of workspaces and plug-ins for a start. V-G.

Hi kdo, We are doing similar work (large multi-family projects, 2D only). Basically, heavy production-oriented use of the software. We use similar hardware (iMac i7's with 16GB RAM). We do see slow downs when we have multiple design layer viewports referenced from external files (say more than 20 DLVPs). Our staff all work "live" over the server with Gigabit speed. Typical file size is 80 - 120MB. We have numerous custom plug-ins that also reside on the server (accessed using workgroup folders). I would say in general that speed has improved considerably from 2011 to 2014. Wherever possible, I like to use WG referencing, however I always consider the performance hit when doing so. Sometimes, by shuffling staff resources around, it's possible to eliminate referencing to some degree. You need experienced users to do this, but we commonly have only one person responsible for developing floor plans (even for a 100-200 unit building), with another working up sections/elevations, and another 1-2 staff doing detailing. All of this of course depends on staff experience and project complexity. Hope this is helpful. It's nice to dialogue with someone who uses the software in similar ways to ourselves. VectorGeek Proud Vectorworks user since 1859.

I don't see much of NVM's marketing these days aimed at hobbyists. IMO, those that get 10 days of use per year should have little or no say about the future direction of the application development. V-G That's really an arrogant comment. Why do you think that people who have paid the same amount of money for software as you (assuming you paid for it personally and not the company that you work for) should have less say over things than yourself just because they use it less? Also, garden design is not a hobbyist thing. Its clearly enough of a sector for Vectorworks to be directly marketed at. Because we have been users (10+ licenses) for 21 years, have beta tested for 15 years, run user groups, worked closely with DG/NNA/NVW and distributors to improve the software, participated in focus groups, online forums, mailing lists, taught MC/VW to countless parties. That's why. Vectorus Geekus A man with absolutely nothing against garden design.

$40 trillion or -$40 trillion? It was CitiGroup right? ;-) In all seriousness Ian, this has gone off track. I would contend that you really have no idea as to the comparative complexity of VW versus the CitiGroup banking app, so probably better to not comment. The fact is, NVM made a conscious decision to adopt a business model that is becoming more and more common in the industry. Like it or not, it's probably here to stay. As users, I think it would be more productive for us to continue to demand better stability in x.00 releases, better transition tools for firms that implement multiple licenses, and increased focus on improving core tools. V-G.

Sure, but careful not to try and compare apples to oranges. Is it really fair to compare the technical underpinnings of an application for trading money to a multi-platform 3D modeling and rendering application? Well I think you are incorrect Ian, however if it is a commercial choice, then surely that's NVM's prerogative correct? As a long-time user who doesn't really want to switch our firm to anything else, it's in our best interest that NVM stay profitable and continue to develop their software. If a "commercial" choice supports that, I'm all for it. I don't see much of NVM's marketing these days aimed at hobbyists. IMO, those that get 10 days of use per year should have little or no say about the future direction of the application development. V-G

Agreed 100% Kevin. VG

Bill, you have proved my point. Wouldn't you way rather than NNA's technical resources be devoted to a workspace and plug-in transition solution rather than making VW2009 work on Mavericks? I too sympathize with users who are frustrated, but arguing for support 2-3 versions back is ludicrous. As for the upgrade, the +/- one day I spend each year reworking our setup is time lost, but also a chance to tweak, clean-up, and improve our system. I quite enjoy it. Not our experience at all. We have successfully transitioned files from 2009 to 2010 to 2011 to 2012 to 2013 to 2014 with few issues. We wait until at least SP1 to make the switch, so we are a few months staggered from NVW release dates. As I am sure you do, I regularly monitor this discussion board as well as other resources to help in deciding when to make the switch. Nope. The whole industry is moving this way. We pay $50 a month for the complete Adobe suite of products (2 concurrent licenses). $50 a month to always have the newest version, tech support and training resources. I spend $100 a month on coffee. All the best, V-G.

That was then, this is now. I personally don't want NVM to spend any money or use any resources to support older versions of their software simply because people are too cheap to upgrade yearly. Professional businesses need to budget for annual fees (Select Service). Hobbyists get what they get. V-G WAS ONCE: MiniCad+ 4 Macintosh LC3 System 7.01 Compuserve AT ONE TIME FLIRTED WITH: MiniCad 7-ish Power Computing Power Tower Pro 250 System 8, on 22 freaking floppy disks IS NOW: VW2014 SP1 iMac i7 quad-core, gobs of RAM Mavericks baby! WILL BE NEXT YEAR: Vectorworks 2015 iWatch (CAD production model) OSX 10.10 "Bacon"

Have you looked at "Link Text to Record"? V-G.

Not true anymore. This has long been a frustration for us. There is a difference between an architect (someone with the qualification), and a practicing architect. Since the early days (we go back to MC+4), there has been a demonstrated lack of understanding of what really happens in architectural drawing and drafting. This carries through now to supposedly useful PIOs that are not intuitive, cater to a particular geographic region, and lack a cohesive design specification, or......flat out don't work. My short term radar has a blip where VW2014 lies. The long term scan is starting to point to alternatives. I fear if NVW doesn't hit a home run this time, the trail of rats leaving the ship will be significant. V-G Holding out hope.

#1 thing Georg Nemetschek doesn't do when he wakes up in the morning: Read this forum. V-G

Well I don't know too much about clouds or nomads, but I do know that the absolutely last way I would present anything to a client is on an iPad (or Android tablet). V-G VW2013 iMac i7 27" 1978 AMC Gremlin (V8 sucka!)

Just started to see a weird bug in 2013. When we double-click on a resource (usually to open a folder, or apply the resource to an object), instead of the expected result, the dialog box opens to create a new resource (as if the double click was NOT over an existing resource, but in white space). Anyone else seen this? VectorGeek ----------------------------------- VW 2013 SP3 183378 Mac OSX 10.7.4 iMac i7 1978 AMC Gremlin

Or perhaps try disabling Java (there is a system preference in which you can do that) for a couple of weeks to see if things improve. V-G Vector "doesn't works sometimes" Works 2013 Mac OS X 10.7.4 Coleco Vision Pong 1.0

Vectorworks Preferences > Session Tab > Click "Add?" V-G.

I concur with DWorks that multiple open files do cause problems, especially when switching from one to another. Since we have avoided this, we've had way fewer crashes in VW2012. Our iMac i7's have 16GB of RAM and our files are typically 80MB - 120MB in size. V-G, eh.

Dear will 'o maine, We use walls (and wall styles) for drawing linear materials such as plywood, mdf, gwb etc. in our architectural details. We have a server-side library of every thickness, and material, with hatches in most. Hatches can be setup to rotate in walls so it works great. You also have the flexibility of end conditions such as closed joins, open joins etc. Works great, less filling. V-G.