Jump to content

VW2013 teaser...is this the best you've got...?


Chris D

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 261
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Jaded as I am, every time we get to September and the buzz about the new features of VW starts up, I can't help but think of images like this one.

Over the years, that's the picture of VW that's growing in my mind. I still love it for multiple reasons, but in some way with every release, instead of making it more robust and better, they just ad more and more things to it that aren't well integrated into the existing stuff and try to hold all these bits and pieces together. Each bit is good on itself, but there is always a wasted oppertunity to make it really good instead of half-baked.

I really really hope that the other features are worth the new description of VW2013 : EVOLVE, because now, we have a non-feature and a half-baked one.

Link to comment

This seems to be a feature I always wanted however from DWorks observations and my experience with NemV, they don't give the user much freedom when it comes to control. I personally don't like (in fact hate) PIO's and now they've made this feature (automatic plan representation) a PIO. I don't use PIO's because I never get it to look the way I want it to look like, in 2D because of the lack of control.

Over the years, that's the picture of VW that's growing in my mind. I still love it for multiple reasons, but in some way with every release, instead of making it more robust and better, they just ad more and more things to it that aren't well integrated into the existing stuff and try to hold all these bits and pieces together. Each bit is good on itself, but there is always a wasted oppertunity to make it really good instead of half-baked.

That's because they're trying to make vw into something it's not and was never meant to be, a BIM software. The foundation of vw was meant to be a CAD program with good modelling tools.

Link to comment
You can't change the height of the section plane from instance to instance, .......

How do you know that?

Say it is possible to change the section plane height and the look of the Top/Plan image is it useful then?

It could be the first stepping stone to a very usable 'custom object' PIO?! I'm thinking custom stairs, roof (objects), custom windows etc. etc.

Edited by Vincent C
Link to comment
You can't change the height of the section plane from instance to instance, .......

How do you know that?

Say it is possible to change the section plane height and the look of the Top/Plan image is it useful then?

It could be the first stepping stone to a very usable 'custom object' PIO?! I'm thinking custom stairs, roof (objects), custom windows etc. etc.

You can change the section plane height for the auto hybrid and it is usefull for your custom stairs, roofs, windows, very usefull indeed. BUT they had to make this part of the symbol object, so you can also have all other things like collecting it's data into worksheets, using it like symbols for in walls etc...,

Now when you want the data of those objects inside a worksheet, you have to create extra records, ..... And what if you want to change all instances of your custom stair at once? With this auto hybrid, you have to copy past to all of them. If this was part of the symbol object, you could do this.

Edited by DWorks
Link to comment

I don't like symbols because they're a blunt instrument. They don't talk intelligently to other objects around them and they're sledgehammer approach to repeatability.

For repeatability we need an object that allows us to define the things we want to be in common while at the same time allowing for variations between each instance.

Link to comment
For repeatability we need an object that allows us to define the things we want to be in common while at the same time allowing for variations between each instance.

Though I agree because I know what you mean....this is (i have found through trial and error in various programs) a contradiction in terms for programmers and it really shows which R&D depts have actually consulted architects to define in what way this repeatability/variation is possible.......e.g. windows and doors, we need to be able to create window and door types, however sometimes offset from walls needs to be different for different instances of the same type, I don't create symbols from windows/doors because I can't control offset from wall individually for one symbol type = this simple little omission removes a huge potential for actually solving window and door scheduling in VWs......

Edited by Vincent C
Link to comment
Though I agree because I know what you mean....this is (i have found through trial and error in various programs) a contradiction in terms for programmers

True. When we and a couple of other architects in UK had a meeting with Nemetschek a few years back this was one of our main requests (if not the main one) but it was also the only one that got a wide-eyed reaction.

Link to comment
I don't create symbols from windows/doors because I can't control offset from wall individually for one symbol type.

You can use symbols in symbols. You could create a symbol for the window itself, and then a symbol for each wall offset. It's not that difficult. Or you could create a pio that controls the offset and take your symbol.

I guess that could work....I wonder how much work that encompasses when it comes to corner-windows etc. but it might be worth a try.....I have no better options anyway :(

Link to comment
I was expecting another one today. Maybe they put a stop to it because the rabble keeps taking the piss?

LOL...

I guess we are a difficult mob to please!

Like probably most people here, I spend most of my time using Vectorworks and have high expectations of what it can do... I just wish it would get to where I want it to be right now, a lot quicker....nothing wrong with a bit of scrutiny and tough love!

Link to comment

Yeah, the "clip cube" by Kevin Lee Allen seems to be good, this is the best feature yet for me. It could also indicate live sections as it seems to be a similar principle or could be a usable alternative to live sections?

I didn't get the benefits or the concept of the "Detail viewport" by Bill Knight either. I guess I must be missing something. Seems to be like the Normal Viewport only with additional annotations added to the viewport, similar to those you get with the section viewports, anybody see the benefits to this one?

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...