Font Size and actual devices

[CETLV]

IS there a way to increase the font size of the port tags?  Editing the devices do not allow a change that I know of.

 

Also is there any plans to use actual devices in racks that you can pull from the schematic view?  

 

A lot of the symbols are already in the library anyways, so when adding a device to racks why cant we have the actual connections and geometry from the unit itself?

 

I would also like to see computers in the device builder, laptops and desktops can be so customized I get it, but allow us to have a good start and edit as our needs.

[Nikolay Zhelyazkov]

Hello @CETLV,

 

15 hours ago, CETLV said:

IS there a way to increase the font size of the port tags?  Editing the devices do not allow a change that I know of.

- The tags displayed in the drawing are taken from symbols. You can find the symbol that you are using and edit it and change its text sizes and this should get the job done. If you need more detailed instructions how to do this, I would need a test file or an image showing which device you want to modify.

 

15 hours ago, CETLV said:

Also is there any plans to use actual devices in racks that you can pull from the schematic view?  

- Not exactly sure about this one. You can create equip items from your devices using the Update Rack Elevation command. Have you tried it? If it is not doing what you expect, could you give me some more details?

 

15 hours ago, CETLV said:

I would also like to see computers in the device builder, laptops and desktops can be so customized I get it, but allow us to have a good start and edit as our needs.

- I think that you should be able to create new Make/Models from the device builder. Which version of VW are you using?

 

Best Regards,

Nikolay Zhelyazkov

[CETLV]

Hey Nik, 

 

Thanks for your response.  I moved to CC from Stardraw.... I am looking for features that have already been in this software for decades.  I want a stock database of regularly updated items that you would find in schematics and block diagrams.  This is one thing I asked frequently while researching this product and I was assured that the database is very large.  This is not the case since every answer to a concern I have is "just build one in the device builder",  that is VWX job as a product developer.  I know that there are millions of products out there that could be added, but using already existing products in the libraries for spotlight and modifying them to go into CC doesnt seem like to much of an ask.  For example, I have been creating my Axient racks and the most detail I can get without throwing a gaudy copied picture off google is a plain box with some text in it.  

 

I also want to see features such as IP addressing, software/hardware version numbers, etc.  You have a tool for DMX addressing so why not an IP addressing tool.

 

Basically, I felt like a guinea pig for the first couple years of braceworks, and I am getting that feeling again.

[CETLV]

I would be happy to send my file to give you an example of a simple setup that we are doing.  Just let me know where to send it... I appreciate the feedback.

[Nikolay Zhelyazkov]

Thanks for the feedback @CETLV,

 

@Conrad Preen can give you some more detailed information about your questions.

 

Anyway, you can send me the test file in a direct message here.

 

Also, be assured that we are working on making many of the user wishes happen, it just takes time.

 

Best Regards,

Nikolay Zhelyazkov

[Conrad Preen]

Hi Brandon,

 

Ideally this topic belongs in its own thread. I know that sounds pedantic but when you come to search the forum for that nugget of info you remember reading, it's way easier if the title matches the content.

 

So why is ConnectCAD not like StarDraw? That's a huge question. Why should it be? If it was the same then StarDraw might as well not exist. Over the many years of ConnectCAD's existence I've often been asked these kind of questions.  There is room in the world for many different approaches. For sure we can look at other products and see what features might be useful to add but there's no point in slavishly copying others. You moved from StarDraw to ConnectCAD. Why?

 

Libraries have never been a big part of ConnectCAD because they go stale very quickly. Who underwrites the accuracy of StarDraw's libraries? What does the small print say? Here at Vectorworks and previously ConnectCAD we have taken the view that it's better to provide tools for fast and easy device creation. It's a different and perfectly valid approach that has worked for the past 20 years. If there is a consistent demand for ready-made premium content then we will review and respond accordingly.

 

We are always working to improve our software and we do value your comments and the debate here on this forum.

 

Regards

 

Conrad Preen

ConnectCAD Lead

[CETLV]

Good day sir, Thank you for your reply.

 

I guess I will start with the expectation of your user base.  People use VWX to allow them to work on shows all in one file, and not HAVE to go out to other platforms and re-do work.  This was the case with braceworks, I can do all my truss counts, motors etc in the showfile, then export worksheets.

 

In the case of ConnectCAD being like stardraw, and your question about why I left, see above, AND stardraws libraries are not as up to date as I would like them to be, plus their customer service is sub-par.  I figured (and asked the questions pre launch with no answer) if since the resources are already in VWX library, I thought they would pull those to be able to create the racks, schematics etc.  

 

I certainly do not mind having to build a device that is a one off, or is oddly configured, but there is a complete lack of resources to be able to just drop in and go.  I would like to see those resources in the resource browser like any other asset, than having to go through the builder every single time I want to drop one in.

 

Also, the 3D geometry is unacceptable in my honest opinion.  The schematic and 3d iso views should have some sort of link between the assets, for example, I was trying to recreate some of our higher end Wireless racks, and though you have a lot of good assets in there for Shure, I added the 24 Space racks, added the generic devices in the racks, at this point I had to go in again and re-add everything for the schematic view.  How come I cannot just simply add gear into a rack, and have the asset already available to auto populate on a 2d plan?  Does not have to happen automatically, but maybe a choice click to populate or something.  It is just very redundant to have to do work multiple times.  Plus I cannot provide a 3d view of blocks to my procurement people and hope they can use their imagination, I will get a lot of capex denials.  Thus I have to go back in and do a separate 3d file just for them.

 

I also am missing a lot of informational fields that I wish I would see such as IP addresses, Subnets, Domains, Switch configurations (managed vs unmanaged, ability to split ports etc) 

 

Some Virtual Video solutions are coming very popular as well in the last 6 months such as OBS and NDI, And I have noticed that when I do virtual things like those and Dante Virtual soundcard the check drawings functions get really wonky and freeze things up.  I am likely using that tool wrong.  

 

As our industry moves farther and farther towards virtual and broadcast design, it only makes sense to put a lot of effort into a tool that makes that easier.

 

Also, since so much work is done in spotlight with cabling, power runs, addresses, is there a way to take a current drawing and populate a connectCAD layout using the existing work that has already been done in the file?  This would come in handy especially with hoist cabling.

 

No product is ever perfect, however after it took braceworks many years to even become useful, I am just hoping that it does not take a much simpler add-on as long.  I felt like a beta tester for a released product.  

 

The one thing I really enjoy is VWX love for feedback and how seriously you take suggestions.  That is really a wonderful thing.  I have been a user since 02 and I really don't think I am going anywhere, but given my level of expertise I have vs the normal user, the last couple releases of add-ons have been flops in my humble opinion.

 

If you feel this would be better suited in its own thread, please feel free to move it and start the conversation!

 

Thank you for your time.

 

B

[Conrad Preen]

Hi Brandon,

 

I'm not the admin so I can't move threads around. So we will stay here.

 

Our user base is involved in a broad range of design activities. With all respect, I think I am better informed about that. Some fit your profile as a Spotlight-intensive user of ConnectCAD but others never use Spotlight tools at all. Regarding your personal expectations, what you seem to be asking for is a ConnectCAD more customised to your workflow. This is something you can already do yourself and many users add custom fields to our objects to support the various specific device families you mention. We are also watching carefully to see what customisations might become a part of the standard product. But we want ONE standard product - supporting a huge number of variants to satisfy different users is the road to destruction.

 

So now onto Content. With the acquisition by Vectorworks the ConnectCAD team has increased enormously. We are working hard to take advantage of these new riches. It won't be all done in a day. And it will  never finish either. Of course I  agree that more 3D content would be great. But I suspect you haven't looked into what's already available and usable. Check out the Did you know thread in the ConnectCAD section for nuggets of info.

You've already hit the nail on the head with Stardraw. They have these huge libraries that they brag about, but as you say they are not well-maintained. That's the problem with libraries. Nobody can keep up to date. We can't either. So our solution is to give you the designer the best tools we can and full control over your drawings. We're on your side. I spent 25 years of my life designing systems, if there's a faster more reliable way I'll be the first to implement it.

 

Vectorworks is unique. I don't know any other software company where you can talk directly with the manager of a product and engage in this kind of debate. I've already noted your rack layout to schematic workflow ( the reverse of the current one ). That's intriguing. I'll look into it.

 

Keep in touch

 

Conrad

 

[CETLV]

Conrad, 

 

Thank you for your snarky reply.  You have lost a customer in me.

[Conrad Preen]

I don't know what "snarky" means I'm afraid. I struggle to see anything in my reply that could cause offence. By all means draw my attention to whatever you find "snarky". We have a decades-long track record of happy customers. But it's a fact of life that we won't be able to please everyone. We will do our best though.

 

Best regards

 

Conrad

[Conrad Preen]

Brandon,

 

Regarding content, something you have to appreciate is that we as Vectorworks can't simply scrape stuff off the internet and sell it as part of our product. Other people have worked to create that material and will correctly demand a share of what we gain from using it. So, when we release content as part of Vectorworks we have to secure the agreement of each and every provider. Plus checking the validity of the info, plus getting it all into a unified format etc. and then setting up a maintenance schedule to re-check every item to follow product changes. It is not a trivial undertaking. Stardraw have been doing this for years and as you say, they make mistakes.

 

Don't get me wrong. I really value the debate here and I listen carefully to the opinions expressed. But debate is not one-sided and I have as much right to my opinion as you have to yours. Here at Vectorworks we are in the business of making promises that we will deliver, so on occasion I will politely disagree. If you are not satisfied with the substance of my response then by all means look elsewhere. There are plenty of companies out there that will say anything to retain your custom.

 

Kind regards

 

Conrad