Jump to content

M5d

Member
  • Content Count

    320
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

About M5d

  • Rank
    Journeyman

Personal Information

  • Location
    Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. M5d

    Vectorworks Performance Benchmarking

    I'm unsure what the jump-cut from the previous thread's question, to this thread's answer is intended to convey Jim? The question asked in the original thread (ever-decreasing performance of Vectorworks) was about "slowness", the progressive deterioration of productivity from version to version and, obviously, the frustrated user experience, which got summed up as, "what's wrong with Vectorworks?" To "clarify" Jim, is this statement intended to address the "user experience" that was raised in the previous thread? If so, I don't see how that's not already meaningful? Also, I have to say, the logic of deliberately avoiding benchmarks that include the apparent, problematic, operations and calculations etc., until they're no longer problematic, is truly inspired. Is that a standard operating procedure (S.O.P) at N.A.? Anyway, let's agree, for convenience sake, that as you say, these operations and calculations etc. are not "benchmark-able in a meaningful way, since a lot of the slowness in those operations is currently a Vectorworks software limitation" which is exacerbated by "what other applications [are] open" "and not the fault of your hardware" . . . hmm, I think I've forgotten my point, let's just agree that you've already summed it up perfectly!
  2. M5d

    End of Year 2018

    Does your graph indicate the percentage of users actually using the latest release, or just the download numbers? And isn't it possible, as jnr already pointed out, that your influence had something to do with those download numbers as well? The context for this year's release was the narrative you used to introduce it. I know my own reaction to the introduction –– "Our teams here at Vectorworks, Inc. paid close attention to the wishlist requests and other forum communications this year, and we heard you loud and clear - you want improvements to the quality, speed, and usability of the software . . ." –– was one of great enthusiasm, it "genuinely" had me considering an early jump as well. This statement seemed both definitive and indicative of major changes in Q.A. and approach, "loud and clear" it said! Now the narrative, with hindsight and the release period over, is that you're telling yourselves at N.A., in a post telling us, that "users are less and less inclined to wait" and that this means you are "more obligated than ever to improve the quality of initial releases" with "multiple new efforts underway". What I believe we (users) are actually "inclined" to do, is follow our previous experiences until, of course, we're presented with a reason to reconsider, which is most likely what is shown in your numbers. We were given a story of genuine change and, in your voice, it was genuinely embraced as genuine. 😏 But the irony of this rather odd-looking loop of cause, effect and post hoc analysis Jim, is it seems to expose that the rhetoric about quality was just that, rhetoric, and now, it seems, a little more rhetoric was necessary to mop up the last lot. I'm curious as to why this may have occurred and wonder if that's not shown on your graph too? Because the other thing the data appears to show is a 6 to 7% decline in the number of users who bothered to install the previous version at all. Nevertheless, action = confidence; it would probably help if, instead of nebulous statements like "loud and clear" or "more obligated than ever", we had detail on what the "multiple new efforts" actually are? And help if we knew why it is you now think the Q.A. resources and actions, if any, implied to have taken place for the 2019 release fell short in hindsight?
  3. Yeah Bob, that kind of power looks amazing, GPUs and eGPUs look to be the way we will finally see the rendering bottleneck disappear. I had hoped there was some kind of new OS magic in Rob's results making the eGPU available. I don't see why this couldn't start happening though; Nemetschek recently took it's holdings in Maxon to 100% and Cinema 4D has already started making use of the GPU for rendering. Why not unleash C4D's rendering / visualisation capacity fully "within" Vectorworks as either an upgrade or as a more thoroughly integrated plugin? This has been a longtime request of users, then what's happening on the GPU front can become part of the Vectorworks workflow in a timely manner. It seems like low hanging fruit to me? Especially when you consider CineRender is the engine underneath Renderworks and that we can already import C4d textures into Vectorworks . . .
  4. Who stole our easter egg? 😢
  5. Don't know if this will solve the issue, but it is worth checking. Under the vectorworks dropdown menu, choose preferences and set the 2D conversion resolution to very high, then retry the export.
  6. This is very interesting news, by those figures adding an eGPU is like adding another 6 to 8 CPU cores. I wonder if GPU rendering is limited to an eGPU, as a secondary resource? I would love to know more about how this is working from NV, and what's possible?
  7. Just checking, those renderings weren't done with Vectorworks / Renderworks were they? The addition of the eGPU appears to have made a big difference.
  8. Bump. This problem persists, it's still on the agenda for the next 2018 SP I hope?
  9. M5d

    Texture mapping badly broken in VW2018

    Yes, it's highly dysfunctional. I'll add to your list that it can also cause Vectorworks to crash, but there does not seem to be a particular set of circumstances that cause it to do so, just repeated use. After a crash and restart, it will usually work again on the offending object / texture.
  10. Once you perform a Solid Subtraction on a Framing or Structural member, their data becomes unavailable, but the member is still intact inside the subtraction. Worksheets should be able to get their data still, but they can't as far as I can tell. Is there a way?
  11. Thanks Pat, I had it backwards, so to speak, because I've always used a Location field in my records for entering room names into, if this works in the worksheet, then that field will simply become irrelevant.
  12. Hi Pat Yeah, I was dreaming, not completely though. I watched a tutorial some time ago on recording the location of objects within a drawing, which I thought was in the service select library, but I cannot find it. There's the location (LOC) criteria, which oddly doesn't show up in Help, and the recently added criteria GetSpaceNameForObj, which I'll experiment with. But you're right, Records are always inert and scripts, I suspect, would be getting overcomplicated.
  13. How do you get a record to pick up the location of the symbol it is attached to from a space object. I’m sure I’ve seen this, but I cannot find any examples of how it is done, does it require interaction from a worksheet to happen?
  14. When set to By Object Class, the correct texture displays in the OIP and Edit Style dialogue, but the rendering remains linked to the By Component class texture.
  15. Edit - I thing my original request was impossible 🙄and the tool works in more cases than I thought.

 

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.

×