The "lockdown" has given me the time to address a lot of the problems in our templates and workflow. It has also given me the chance to think about how to improve the Vectorworks platform as well. Toward that end, here are some thoughts:
Crowd Sourcing
For software companies, the user base is one of the most valuable resources for expanding the capacity of the platform. Vectorworks could benefit greatly from better utilizing its users in building a better platform.
Resource Sharing
The reason Sketchup has become a standard format that so many 3rd parties support is because it does an excellent job of crowdsourcing content from it's users. Vectorworks could do this as well.
Move beyond the limited "resource sharing" of the forum and create an actual online library that users can upload to, download from and add as favorites to their libraries. Provide a clear graphical interface (like the 3D warehouse) that offers a preview and a short description of what is available. And / or just provide a server location where user libraries can be posted and made available for others to access directly from the resource manager.
For example, I've just translated all of the Fastenmaster (ledgerLok, headLOk, timberLok) drawings into a symbol library as well as the Simpson Titen fasteners. There is no need for everyone who uses Vectorworks to do this - we can share these efforts in common. However, who would think to look on the bulletin board for every little file like this? It's far better to have an organized library where it can be filed by CSI or some other clear organizational system so that users can select it from a list - preferably right in the resource manager without having to download it. The same could be true of textures, line styles, etc.
Vectorworks Improvement Process
It's pretty challenging to get the big picture when it comes to this software. The forum offers a bunch of snapshots, but there's no place to really get a cohesive overview. I think that is one of the main problems with bridging the gap between those of us who use the software day in and day out and the team that is building and maintaining the environment.
This breakdown is readily apparent when things come up like ...Users > " the window and door tool is broken." Staff> "What features are most important to you?"... and then 10 different threads expound upon the many woes and potential solutions - some of which are contradictory, many of which are redundant. It's only because of some of the super users who spend a lot of time consolidating these threads that anything like a cohesive message comes across. I'm sure that a lot of staff time goes into trying to decipher our requests as well. The whole process seems terribly inefficient.
The Wiki Format?
A few years back, Christiaan put together a Wiki to try and and consolidate feature requests into a more coherent structure. For me, a nested hierarchical approach seemed way easier to navigate than trying to search by terms across innumerable threads. Providing a way to group feedback into categories also seems more intuitive and effective.
This is probably way too outlandish, but as a thought experiment:
What if VW created a new category on the forum with an individual thread for every single tool, menu command, or process built into the software dedicated explicitly for feedback from users on Software Improvement.
Debate could ensue about the merits and pros and cons ... and the favorite solutions within each limited area could be "upvoted." that would provide for democratic feedback that could actually work. Right now, "upvoting" seems fairly ineffective. The trick is in consolidating the feedback of the threads into a coherent whole - some moderation would be required.
That idea / format could provide a structure for crowd-sourced solutions. For instance: If I were to drill down to the "Repetitive Unit" tool I could not only complain about the symbols in the library having incorrect pitches, geometry and significant omissions, I could also just post a corrected library for the Staff and other Users to use. That way everyone can collectively contribute toward solutions rather than feeling frustrated by a lack of action.
There's much more to say, but if you've read this far, you're probably thinking that's it time to get back to some billable work ... I hope this helps kindle some discussion on this very important topic!
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.
Question
Taproot
The "lockdown" has given me the time to address a lot of the problems in our templates and workflow. It has also given me the chance to think about how to improve the Vectorworks platform as well. Toward that end, here are some thoughts:
Crowd Sourcing
For software companies, the user base is one of the most valuable resources for expanding the capacity of the platform. Vectorworks could benefit greatly from better utilizing its users in building a better platform.
Resource Sharing
The reason Sketchup has become a standard format that so many 3rd parties support is because it does an excellent job of crowdsourcing content from it's users. Vectorworks could do this as well.
Vectorworks Improvement Process
It's pretty challenging to get the big picture when it comes to this software. The forum offers a bunch of snapshots, but there's no place to really get a cohesive overview. I think that is one of the main problems with bridging the gap between those of us who use the software day in and day out and the team that is building and maintaining the environment.
This breakdown is readily apparent when things come up like ...Users > " the window and door tool is broken." Staff> "What features are most important to you?"... and then 10 different threads expound upon the many woes and potential solutions - some of which are contradictory, many of which are redundant. It's only because of some of the super users who spend a lot of time consolidating these threads that anything like a cohesive message comes across. I'm sure that a lot of staff time goes into trying to decipher our requests as well. The whole process seems terribly inefficient.
The Wiki Format?
A few years back, Christiaan put together a Wiki to try and and consolidate feature requests into a more coherent structure. For me, a nested hierarchical approach seemed way easier to navigate than trying to search by terms across innumerable threads. Providing a way to group feedback into categories also seems more intuitive and effective.
This is probably way too outlandish, but as a thought experiment:
What if VW created a new category on the forum with an individual thread for every single tool, menu command, or process built into the software dedicated explicitly for feedback from users on Software Improvement.
Debate could ensue about the merits and pros and cons ... and the favorite solutions within each limited area could be "upvoted." that would provide for democratic feedback that could actually work. Right now, "upvoting" seems fairly ineffective. The trick is in consolidating the feedback of the threads into a coherent whole - some moderation would be required.
That idea / format could provide a structure for crowd-sourced solutions. For instance: If I were to drill down to the "Repetitive Unit" tool I could not only complain about the symbols in the library having incorrect pitches, geometry and significant omissions, I could also just post a corrected library for the Staff and other Users to use. That way everyone can collectively contribute toward solutions rather than feeling frustrated by a lack of action.
There's much more to say, but if you've read this far, you're probably thinking that's it time to get back to some billable work ... I hope this helps kindle some discussion on this very important topic!
Link to comment
5 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
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.