What Vectorworks features/tools would you remove from Vectorworks?

[Christiaan]

Given the opportunity, what features or tools would you remove from Vectorworks? To simplify it and simplify the code base.

[Matt Overton]

The legacy ones that have been replaced but still get the best keyboard shortcuts. 

[Pat Stanford]

Nothing and this is a very dangerous question.

 

Over the years there have been a number of people calling for the removal of things they didn't use.  Just little things like "I never use Top/Plan. They should get rid of it."  or "I never use 3D and neither does anyone else, so it should be dropped."

 

The majority of users have no idea how anyone else uses the program so they assume that everyone uses it as they do and that anything they don't use is superfluous. 

 

I would take a large bet that every aspect of VW is critical to the workflow of 10s to 100s to far more users.

 

And most things are not going to simplify the "code base" as most of them are completely separate plug-in objects. While these are code, most of them are not touched from version to version. And some are considered obsolete and abandoned when other changes break them. And then we hear the complaints which is what makes me say that everything is vital to a subset of users.

 

The actual core "code base" of VW is the operator interface, file handling, and primative objects (Layers, Classes, Circles, Lines, polys, walls, text, and probably a bunch of other things I am not thinking about. I don't think there is anything in the "code base" that anyone would want to make anyone do without.

 

I came close to hiding this thread and having this discussion off-line, but decided that it is probably better to explain the why in public.

 

I have zero problem for anyone advocating to add anything to VW that will improve their use and workflow. I have a big problem with anyone advocating to remove things that they don't use just because they don't use them.

 

I think you are asking the wrong question. All it is going to do is disappoint people when their suggestions of things to remove are not implemented.

[E|FA]

2 hours ago, Matt Overton said:

The legacy ones that have been replaced but still get the best keyboard shortcuts. 

 

You can change almost all of the keyboard shortcuts in a custom Workspace.  No need to stick with the default keystrokes, although in a multi-person office there's a real benefit to having everyone working with an office-standard Workspace to allow people to jump between machines, collaborate in-person easily, and protect the office VW guru's sanity.

 

I think they should all stay (see Pat's comment above) but should be marked as "legacy" in the Workspace Editor. I know it's feasible, because a few Commands and Tools have already been marked (screenshots from VW 2024). I've already included this in a Workspace Editor Wishlist thread that I encourage you to vote for.

 

 

 

 

Edited January 28 by E|FA

[Tom W.]

7 hours ago, Christiaan said:

Given the opportunity, what features or tools would you remove from Vectorworks? To simplify it and simplify the code base.

 

I'm interested to know which tools/commands you would remove + how doing so would simplify your experience of Vectorworks. Do you just mean in terms of navigating the Workspace Editor?

 

I am interested to know what the different statuses of tools/commands mean in the Workspace Editor. For example, there is a 'Legacy' tab for Tools but only a minority of the tools within it are marked '(Legacy)'. And if it has warning sign instead what does that mean? That using that tool brings unspecified risks? Why is there no help text telling us? I couldn't see anything in the online Help. Some tools have the warning sign AND are marked '(Legacy)':

 

 

[Matt Overton]

4 hours ago, E|FA said:

 

You can change almost all of the keyboard shortcuts in a custom Workspace.  No need to stick with the default keystrokes, although in a multi-person office there's a real benefit to having everyone working with an office-standard Workspace to allow people to jump between machines, collaborate in-person easily, and protect the office VW guru's sanity.

 

I think they should all stay (see Pat's comment above) but should be marked as "legacy" in the Workspace Editor. I know it's feasible, because a few Commands and Tools have already been marked (screenshots from VW 2024). I've already included this in a Workspace Editor Wishlist thread that I encourage you to vote for.

 

 

 

 

Yes and because a cross office standard is good then the best way to do that is to have it be one that ships and gets updated every release without stress. 

[E|FA]

1 hour ago, Tom W. said:

I am interested to know what the different statuses of tools/commands mean in the Workspace Editor. For example, there is a 'Legacy' tab for Tools but only a minority of the tools within it are marked '(Legacy)'. And if it has warning sign instead what does that mean? That using that tool brings unspecified risks? Why is there no help text telling us? I couldn't see anything in the online Help. Some tools have the warning sign AND are marked '(Legacy)':

From what I can tell, they added the hazard sign and "(legacy)" to items that were moved to the Legacy folder on one release only (2021?).  I wish they'd go back and change this to all the items to limit user confusion.  I believe it's fine to use legacy tools without harming files but it would be nice to have a visual notice when you're modifying a Workspace.  My understanding is that tools in the Legacy folder are no longer officially being updated/supported, and many have been replaced by new versions with better features (e.g. "Elevation Benchmark" vs "Elevation Benchmark (legacy)"), though sometimes the older versions are good to have.   "Circular Stair", Simple Stair, and "Stair" are not in the Legacy folder, but "Custom Stair" is.  And yet, the legacy "Custom Stair" has different features and is still useful.  The legacy tools are unlikely to support more recent workflows such as styled objects, Materials, etc.

 

There are also Tools that likely should be considered legacy but are not labeled that way.  If I had to guess, VW probably considers everything in the Solids, Fasteners, and Bearings folders as legacy. 

 

And finally to answer @Christiaan's original question with a non-legacy suggestion that maybe even @Pat Stanford will agree almost no one will miss (but leaving in does no real harm):

 

 

Edited January 28 by E|FA

[Tom W.]

31 minutes ago, E|FA said:

From what I can tell, they added the hazard sign and "(legacy)" to items that were moved to the Legacy folder on one release only (2021?).  I wish they'd go back and change this to all the items to limit user confusion.

 

Thinking about it I guess the '(legacy)' label is only added to tools which have the same (or similar) name to the new version of the tool, to allow us to differentiate one from the other. Tools without the label have names which are distinct from the new tools which supplanted them so don't need to be labelled as legacy...?

 

Still not sure what the hazard sign means. That it's not only a legacy tool but one which also might have unintended consequences if used?

[shorter]

Campanile!!!  You could always leave it there if you are bored, and the training is getting a bit tedious, and need to raise a laugh, I suppose.

[shorter]

Best to just delete what you don't use and create a custom workspace.

[Pat Stanford]

No!!! Don't take the Campanile!!!  They already took away the Cross Stich tools!!!!  😉

[shorter]

'Spiral' then!  No one uses the 'Spiral', surely?

[Tom W.]

43 minutes ago, shorter said:

'Spiral' then!  No one uses the 'Spiral', surely?

 

Ha ha I saw it used on a Coffee Break to draw the 2D graphics for a Plant. If I remember correctly someone messaged in to ask where the tool was so they could do it!

[Pat Stanford]

Use that one too. From a real project.

 

 

And my logo

 

[Christiaan]

17 hours ago, Tom W. said:

I'm interested to know which tools/commands you would remove + how doing so would simplify your experience of Vectorworks.

I don't know. I was just curious what other people would say. I don't think developers should be scared of removing things from their software, otherwise it becomes bloatware. I'm happy with the deprecation of Screen Plane for instance. I guess my main wish would be for the removal of legacy code that blocks multi-threading.

With regard to plug-in objects, I would open source them and put somebody in charge of managing code input from users, especially for little tools like the Clothes Rod.

[Dave Donley]

7 hours ago, Pat Stanford said:

No!!! Don't take the Campanile!!!  They already took away the Cross Stich tools!!!!  😉

 

I implemented the Cross Stitch tool, which is brought up as a joke since then.  I saw a list of features in previous releases and it was described as the "Symbol Paint" tool, which was renamed Cross Stitch late in the development cycle.  Would you like a tool that let's you place symbols on a grid like a scattering of symbols?  Because I know there are such things for scattering plants on a plan.

 

We retire features and mark them legacy if usage is very low and the feature hasn't received improvements in a long while, and/or if there is a much better newer actively-maintained alternative.  If new versions of the OS don't break the feature it can keep running.  We can see how much a feature is used in the data analytics if this pref is on.

 

 

[Sebastiaan]

The move command. 
 

never understood why I would want to move object relative to screen. And the first thing I do in a new workspace is set the cmd + m shortcut to move 3d

[Pat Stanford]

@Dave Donley Thanks for the history lesson. I never knew that was yours.  I always assumed that someone (or someone's significant other) was into cross stitch and that it was a hobby project.

 

It is actually nice to know that it had a different intended use.

 

A smaller and smaller percentage of us still around who know the history

 

Maybe my favorite hang over is why the keyboard shortcuts for the snaps are (were?) QWER/ASDF and many of the Basic tools are 1234567890.  This comes from the layout of the palettes long before the Workspace Editor. Snaps was 2 icons high by 4 wide and it was basically a geographical mapping. The tools were similar and the numbers represented the first 10 tools. I can't remember if is was one long horizontal palette or something else.  Maybe 1 wide x 10 high?

 

Ah, for the good (or maybe the bad) old days.  🤦‍♂️

[Dave Donley]

Q: What render modes do you use or don't use?  Any rendering/texturing features to axe?  I am surprised Batch Render is still in the render menu but I suspect some folks rely on it.

 

[Matt Panzer]

The Mullion tool came up while implementing the Door and Window Assemblies feature.

Anyone out there use it?  Seems to me that was a compliment tool for the now legacy "Window Wall" tools.

 

[cberg]

The lowly mullion should be reconceived to serve as the vertical counterpart to a framing member. 

 

Call it a wood stud/post or a metal stud.  Allow it to have heights and offsets like walls, so you can manually adjust in the OIP.  If I am dreaming, it should also tilt vertically.  

 

Allow it to have different profiles (metal stud, & standard wood profiles); include optional 2D plan options to indicate wood (stud vs. vs blocking).  Integrate it with a revamped framing tool.  It's odd that the framer tools create parametric objects for the roof framer and generic solids for the wall framer.  It's because there isn't a parametric option in the vertical plane, and the tool is ancient!

 

Just my opinion: we need something faster than the column, which has too many options and dialogue boxes to use quickly.  

 

Columns are deliberate.  Studs should be quick to lay down.

 

 

[Matt Overton]

7 minutes ago, cberg said:

The lowly mullion should be reconceived to serve as the vertical counterpart to a framing member. 

 

Call it a wood stud/post or a metal stud.  Allow it to have heights and offsets like walls, so you can manually adjust in the OIP.  If I am dreaming, it should also tilt vertically.  

 

Allow it to have different profiles (metal stud, & standard wood profiles); include optional 2D plan options to indicate wood (stud vs. vs blocking).  Integrate it with a revamped framing tool.  It's odd that the framer tools create parametric objects for the roof framer and generic solids for the wall framer.  It's because there isn't a parametric option in the vertical plane, and the tool is ancient!

 

Just my opinion: we need something faster than the column, which has too many options and dialogue boxes to use quickly.  

 

Columns are deliberate.  Studs should be quick to lay down.

 

 

Have it also do inverse mullions, posts, etc… for regular voids in walls. 

For expansion joints or panel breaks when using wall systems that modular units like precast concrete or joinery internal cladding that only effect certain parts of the wall. 

[E|FA]

2 hours ago, Sebastiaan said:

why I would want to move object relative to screen

Top/Plan view and Annotations are two examples.

[E|FA]

2 hours ago, Dave Donley said:

mark them legacy

@Dave Donley As I posted above and elsewhere, in addition to moving them to the legacy folder, why aren't all of the tools & command names marked with the "(legacy)" suffix and the tool icons modified the way 3D Selection & 3D Reshape were?  It doesn't seem like it would take a lot of work to do.

[Christiaan]

3 hours ago, Sebastiaan said:

The move command. 
 

never understood why I would want to move object relative to screen. And the first thing I do in a new workspace is set the cmd + m shortcut to move 3d

That's a good one. Or at least merge Move and Move 3D.

[Gaëtan R.]

I think many tools could be combined. Sometimes, I want to draw something, I start by wondering which tool I have to use.
For example : why pilaster is a different tool from the add solid to wall ? why can you make a column using the column tool or the structural member tool ?
Or more simple : why is there the Polyline and the 2D Polygon tool ? (Polyline with corner vertex looks the same as a polygon…).

Maybe Vectorworks could have a “slimming treatment” in the number of standard workspaces tools.

Nevertheless, I think it is great to make some tools “Legacy” and not deleting them, juste in case.