Jump to content
  • 1

Vectorworks top four


Chris Brough

Question

We all recently received a requests to fill out a feedback survey.  The first item was to provide the top 5 areas of Vectorworks we would like to see improvement.  I was able to write out 4 of them on a bus to NYC to visit a few job sites.

 

I'd like to provide these as public requests for other users to give input, as i believe i'm not the only one with some of these concerns.

 

Please read, hopefully enjoy, and let me know if you have anything to add, or simply just vote for one or all of these as areas that need improvement/fixing.

 

1: Our main frustration is slow down on a majority of our files.

Windows machines in particular seem to have more issues with panning, zooming etc. Our three main workstations for Vectorworks consist of: 32+ gb of ram; 4+gb of dedicated video ram; intel core i7+ processors; 500+ gb SSD system drives. Far higher than recommended specifications. Side note; I would recommend that your main page for "system recommendations" include a section regarding multiple applications running alongside Vectorworks which I believe is valid for most of your customers. I believe all numbers on that page only pertain to Vectorworks running alone on said machine.

We have found some work-arounds such as turning off layers with reference information from external files, pdf's etc. However, there are still some files that no workaround can cure.

I have read the article from JimW regarding single threaded cpu vs multithread/gpu features/modules which really helped us understand what types of hardware are worth spending extra $$ on and which ones won’t help at all.

It sounds like Nemetschek is on the right track with migrating bits of the software to more modern processing methods, but seems like it may be a long painful path for its users; since more complex "wow" features are being implemented each year, while the processing power to do the heavy lifting doesn't seem to be as high of a priority to support these new features.

 

2: Unconstrained dimension tool: in 2015, 16 & 17 our team has become used to the N button for constrained and M for unconstrained dimensions. 2018 has changed the M key to toggle multiple view mode. I would ask that this be reverted back to the previous standard. It is very convenient for the M & N keys to be right next to each other and I believe key commands for dimensioning are going to be used more broadly among your user base compared to the multi view mode.

 

3: The dashed lines which control dimension baseline offset seem to take selection priority over the grip for moving either end of the dimension to a different snap point. I have seen this primarily when zoom levels are at a lower percentage (zoomed out farther). Dimension end grips should definitely take a higher selection priority over the baseline offset as I believe these grips are used at a higher frequency, especially during the revision process.

 

4: "Always do the selected action" choices: The reset saved settings dialog for this check box in particular can be frustrating as a "broad reset". I believe it would be highly beneficial to productivity to expand this checkbox to individually select which particular dialog is to be reset. On multiple occasions I have accidentally locked the wrong option due to the fast paced environment many of us work in. If the user knows which particular dialog is locked to the wrong setting (i.e. yes or no), one could open the "reset saved settings" dialog and undo only what is necessary. Having the "always do..." check box is great for productivity but is too easily undone by one mistaken click of the mouse.

Link to comment

3 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
1 hour ago, Chris Brough said:

2: Unconstrained dimension tool: in 2015, 16 & 17 our team has become used to the N button for constrained and M for unconstrained dimensions. 2018 has changed the M key to toggle multiple view mode. I would ask that this be reverted back to the previous standard. It is very convenient for the M & N keys to be right next to each other and I believe key commands for dimensioning are going to be used more broadly among your user base compared to the multi view mode.

 

While I also found the default odd, this can easily be changed under Tools<Workspaces<Edit Current Workspace. I actually have my M mapped to the Mirror tool, and Multiple Views wasn't about to take that over :)

 

1 hour ago, Chris Brough said:

3: The dashed lines which control dimension baseline offset seem to take selection priority over the grip for moving either end of the dimension to a different snap point. I have seen this primarily when zoom levels are at a lower percentage (zoomed out farther). Dimension end grips should definitely take a higher selection priority over the baseline offset as I believe these grips are used at a higher frequency, especially during the revision process.

 

I've found this to be the case as well, particularly with chain dimensions. I try to grab a blue handle and instead it starts altering the baseline offset (which I pretty much never want to do). Very frustrating.

 

1 hour ago, Chris Brough said:

4: "Always do the selected action" choices: The reset saved settings dialog for this check box in particular can be frustrating as a "broad reset". I believe it would be highly beneficial to productivity to expand this checkbox to individually select which particular dialog is to be reset. On multiple occasions I have accidentally locked the wrong option due to the fast paced environment many of us work in. If the user knows which particular dialog is locked to the wrong setting (i.e. yes or no), one could open the "reset saved settings" dialog and undo only what is necessary. Having the "always do..." check box is great for productivity but is too easily undone by one mistaken click of the mouse.

 

Agreed; having more granular control here would be nice.

 

That being said, none of these would be on my top 4 (except maybe point number 1). Without delving too into it, my top four would probably be an overhaul of Cameras, an overhaul of Light Objects (including lit fog), a better way to manage and output render viewports (see C4D's renderer), and generally fixing all of the small things about tools that have been requested over the years instead of introducing large brand new tools. :)

Link to comment
  • 0

Thanks for sharing.

 

My top four as brief bullet points -

  1. Fix the Screen Plane/Layer Plane situation.
  2. Interface consistency.
  3. No forced upgrade paths to new features that haven't been properly vetted or beta tested (the VW2018 Title Block Border object is a good example of what not to do).
  4. Improved drawing coordination and drawing setup on Sheet Layers recognizing that we all produce construction drawings.

Kevin

 

Link to comment
  • 0

1,2 & 3 Yes please

regarding 4:

If there was a unified list making it easy to go tweak then hopefully that list would :-

a) carry between versions so we only get hit by new options not have to rebuild every option after upgrades.

b) make the list an office standard.

 

My points seem to followed 2 themes

- Too much interface clutter. Important things hidden, related things too far apart, unimportant things prominent.

- One for you, one for me. Too much information repeated as VW requires it for modeling but doesn't display it.

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
Answer this question...

×   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...