Please fix the Window PIO for the next release!

[Christiaan 912]

Please please please fix the window PIO for the next release. I really want our office to be using window PIOs but there're a slew of simple reasons why we can't.

Check out attached image. It's meant to be a window with an external stone sill, but where's the internal sill in plan and what are those lines on each side where the external sill extends beyond the jamb?

These are not the only problems (feel free to link to or note other problems) but they're a good example of bugs that are highly limiting and should have been dealt with long before now in a maintenance release.

Also see 3D view where brick shows through sill (there may be a fix for this, anyone?)

[Christiaan 912]

Just getting back to topic at hand:

What would be super helpful, rather than talking about the need for improvements, is to list out the improvements you are looking for and need.

This seems to be half the problem though. For whatever reason NNA appears to be designing and releasing its software (most notably it's new BIM and parametric components) primarily for the McMansion market, and then waiting for customer feedback before attempting to fix all the limitations that this approach builds into the software.

My wish would be for NNA to accept that this approach (designing firstly/primarily for the McMansion market) is not working for a large contingent of its customers; that it creates a barrier between its BIM aspirations and reality, and that a new approach needs to be instituted.

Every single time I attempt to create a 3D model to produce our documents I'm bogged down in limitations, compromises and workarounds that make it next to impossible to roll out as an office standard.

I dread the thought of another couple of releases of VectorWorks not living up to expectations.

[islandmon 4]

Others share your immediate frustrations with McDarwan CAD evolution ; )

A basic question comes to mind ... how many doors & windows have the NNA programmers specified, purchased, and successfully installed ?

Those of us living and working in the real-world are routinely faced with the limitations imposed on our hard-earned knowledge by less than proficient CAD algorithms.

CAD is a database of integrated information ... more or less dependent on User inputs.

However, NNA programmers excel at presenting CAD information reliably in both 2d /3d and complex Ray Traced renderings where a simple misplaced or malformed object can destroy the integrity of the entire presentation.

And that is the rub ... the more proficient the presentation engine the more important the validity of the underlying objects.

It now appears that prosumer CAD exemplified by VW has the ability to model the RealWorld using powerful affordable workstations & servers utilized by people like Christiaan.

Perfection of RealWorldObject code must now become the focus of attention for us all... no more ... no less.

[P Retondo 110]

For whatever reason NNA appears to be designing and releasing its software (most notably it's new BIM and parametric components) primarily for the McMansion market

Christiaan, I note your recent accusations regarding the "McMansion market," and without suggesting I have evidence against that and without for a second disagreeing with the need to revamp the window and door PIOs, I wonder what the basis of this McMansion thing is?

It's a fact that there are McMansion architects and drafting services out there, and that at least some of them use VW - nothing wrong there (I'd rather have them support VW than some other software), though I'm not particularly impressed by the architecture that results nor interested in the fast-food equivalent of design. But where is the evidence that VW is tailoring the program to that market? Frankly, I don't think there are that many "seats" in that sector. And what part does BIM play in that market? Very little to none, I would say. BIM is a creature of institutional clients.

[Christiaan 912]

Pete, it's more accurate to say it's my *perception* that VW is being designed for the McMansion market. How it's *actually* being developed/tested and for who I don't really know because I'm not privy to that process.

What I do know is that if I try to use the parametric objects and BIM tools when producing my documents these tools consistently seem to me as if they've been designed by someone who tests them by drawing a prairie house situated in the Mississippi River valley, with four sides and a pitched roof. Whenever you stray too far from four-walls-and-a-pitched-roof you're stuffed because as soon as a parametric object doesn't do what you need it to do you can't go any further with that approach. You end up with three options:

1. Ditch the modelling process

2. Model manually

3. Ditch BIM and use your sub-standard parametric-based model as a reference for producing the documents you need

The last option is what I tend to do. I'd soon get fired if I tried the 2nd option and I find the modelling process to valuable to take the 1st option.

A few examples off the top of my head would be Window PIO sills, Nth American naming conventions throughout PIOs, no cavity closers in the Window PIO, the Roof and Dormer tools, the Space tool data fields, Stair PIO limitations with regard to multi-storey buildings, etc. I'll think about it harder and post more if you're not convinced.

[P Retondo 110]

Christiaan, I agree for the most part, but I wouldn't call it a "McMansion" phenomenon. It's more like simple standardization. I think the basic solution in that regard is to go beyond US manufacturers and get more kinds of window types into the library, and to integrate those with the PIOs. I've used windows from Sweden and Italy, as well as a fair representation of US manufacturers, and I don't think it would be far-fetched to bring more types into the fold. Plus, the PIOs could make it much easier to customize things.

Regarding the stairs PIO, to my mind it's not a matter of two stories versus many - it's anything beyond a single story. The stairs PIO needs to be able to handle displaying information on more than one floor using a single object.

I'm hoping we'll be able to put ideas out in the context of a focused wish-list thread pretty soon. We could probably write a small book outlining how we think intelligent parametric objects would work. Fortunately for us, it seems the engineers at NNA basically agree that the current tools are a work in progress, and are making efforts to institute some fundamental improvements.

[mike m oz 372]

We need the capability to have:

- Corner windows.

- Door and window units that extend beyond the top or bottom of the walls (without having the perimeter wall band issue around the units and at the top or bottom of the wall.

[Dieter @ DWorks 24]

We need the capability to have:

- Corner windows.

- Door and window units that extend beyond the top or bottom of the walls (without having the perimeter wall band issue around the units and at the top or bottom of the wall.

that's true. but the only way for this (if you realy put them in a wall) is a redefinition of the walls, so that that boundery band doesn't show.

PS: you can have a corner window (and i made a pio of it)! just make your symbol or pio. dont put it into the wall! just put it where it belongs. then edit your wall so that the place where the window has to come is free (you'll end up with a kind of l-shape). now it will show good on plan and in 3D.

[Christiaan 912]

you can have a corner window

You can have lots of things in VW. But they're not fixes. They're workarounds, and they often create as many problems as they solve.

[russh 0]

I agree with Christiaan completely, especially regarding the issue of cavity closures at window PIOs. A user defined wall cap end style would help enormously; the current component wrap just isn't any use to me.

[Christiaan 912]

Here's an example of a Wiki by the way:

http://www.vectorwiki.org/

[boxjoint 0]

What are your specific forums/issues you'd like to see?

For starters, I'd suggest that Windows & Doors, Worksheets, and Section Viewports would be interesting topics.

Pete,

I think I can handle that.

I'll set it up tomorrow afternoon under the Feedback section.

I'm looking for these new disucssion areas but cannot find them. Have they been set up?