MaWi Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 16 minutes ago, ParkerJames said: Ya…I am aware of that stuff. Try joining walls in 3D in 2025 and tell me what happens. VW does not recognize the walls…essentially. Unfortunately, in 3D it only works on the bottom of the wall. I will enter a request for this. 1 Quote Link to comment
ParkerJames Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 That functionality in your video is fundamental and when walls are correctly connected works even when several are picked and moved using C-M command. They remain cohesive. A great feature. Quote Link to comment
ParkerJames Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 (edited) I like service select as it provides utils, and is not a large annual business expense so I am able to be seamless with the architect I work with and for my own stuff. I keep a 2017 version, which is adequate for most residential stuff and even older on a mothballed iMac. I am just an old builder remodeler with aspirations of revenue generation until my time is up. LOL Edited January 5 by ParkerJames Quote Link to comment
line-weight Posted January 5 Author Share Posted January 5 1 hour ago, Ross Harris said: The big problem is that new features or enhancements get 90% to being awesome... And are totally forgotten. Looking at you structural member.. Exactly this. And the structural member is a good example. 3 Quote Link to comment
ParkerJames Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 5 minutes ago, line-weight said: Exactly this. And the structural member is a good example. What issues are you finding with structural members? I find it perfectly acceptable. Quote Link to comment
Ross Harris Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 53 minutes ago, MaWi said: Many users of other BIM authoring tools are still waiting for the correct wall component insertion in the lintel area of windows. We have this feature thanks to the (first part) of the wall reengineering. I'd prefer stacking, tapered and slanting walls over closures. Those three items are what I've seen mostly requested on the forum over the years. In Revit. The closre is mostly backed into the window/door family and are infinitely more flexible. Dunno about archicad - been years since I've used that. 1 hour ago, MaWi said: For me it works well....attached a short video. Which function do you miss? I should have said a wall intersection on a corner... I certainly can't move these. You need the T join tool to join them. I really love Vectorworks, and I have love/hate relationship with Revit, but when you fork out for a sub, you need to see some bang for buck and VW2025 is pretty underwhelming. Quote Link to comment
line-weight Posted January 6 Author Share Posted January 6 2 hours ago, ParkerJames said: What issues are you finding with structural members? I find it perfectly acceptable. https://forum.vectorworks.net/index.php?/topic/90654-structural-member-usability-improvements/ 1 Quote Link to comment
Ross Harris Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 2 hours ago, ParkerJames said: What issues are you finding with structural members? I find it perfectly acceptable The fact it took 7 years for it to get any attention to fix bugs and give it some basic usability fixes-its basically the poster child for new features being unfinished on release and left to rot. It's like a lot of tools - siloed. It doesn't interact with any other function (grids for example), you can't attach baseplates, end plates, splices or stiffeners to them. Basically the only benefit over solid modelling is that it gives you a (now fixed for beams) too plan fill and some ifc. Other than that, pretty useless. Quote Link to comment
MaWi Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 6 hours ago, Ross Harris said: The fact it took 7 years for it to get any attention to fix bugs For me, it is absolutely OK if from me as the reporter errors defined as low-priority are only rectified when the affected area is renewed. Quote Link to comment
line-weight Posted January 6 Author Share Posted January 6 2 hours ago, MaWi said: For me, it is absolutely OK if from me as the reporter errors defined as low-priority are only rectified when the affected area is renewed. If this is the case, then the problem is exactly that: fixes and improvements being defined as "low priority". They should be a higher priority than the implementation of other, new, features. 1 Quote Link to comment
line-weight Posted January 6 Author Share Posted January 6 Another example of an existing feature that desperately needs attention is the notes database & manager. 3 Quote Link to comment
MaWi Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 22 minutes ago, line-weight said: If this is the case, then the problem is exactly that: fixes and improvements being defined as "low priority". They should be a higher priority than the implementation of other, new, features. You misunderstood me. As a reporter of the bug, I give priority. And if I set this to “Low”, then this bug should have a lower priority than “Medium” or higher. For the bugs that I report, I try to give a serious assessment of how troublesome the bug is. In recent years, I have been very happy with the balance between new features and fixed bugs. It's not about simply accepting bugs, but rather about prioritizing them correctly and recognizing whether or not they affect daily work. The cooperation with Vectorworks is very satisfactory for me in this respect. Quote Link to comment
line-weight Posted January 6 Author Share Posted January 6 10 minutes ago, MaWi said: You misunderstood me. As a reporter of the bug, I give priority. And if I set this to “Low”, then this bug should have a lower priority than “Medium” or higher. For the bugs that I report, I try to give a serious assessment of how troublesome the bug is. In recent years, I have been very happy with the balance between new features and fixed bugs. It's not about simply accepting bugs, but rather about prioritizing them correctly and recognizing whether or not they affect daily work. The cooperation with Vectorworks is very satisfactory for me in this respect. Ok, I see. It may be that you don't use the Structural Member tool in a way that is affected by its limitations. But I think there are many of us who do. Most of these limitations aren't necessarily bugs - I would call it something like incomplete implementation. And there are a few threads (like the one I linked to above) that outline these in quite some detail. This of course is a separate process from the bug submittal one - it's users letting VW know that the tool would be greatly enhanced if some time could be spent improving it. 1 Quote Link to comment
zoomer Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 16 hours ago, ParkerJames said: Most aggravating is often not able to join walls unless in Top Plan view. Ah, yes, Wall joining is strange in VW 2025 too. And even Wall Selection in VW 2025 (filled !) for me only works when I hover over parts of the Edges/Wireframe. Hovering over Faces/Fill completely ignores the Walls and selects something occluded behind. 2 Quote Link to comment
ParkerJames Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 On 1/6/2025 at 5:39 AM, zoomer said: Ah, yes, Wall joining is strange in VW 2025 too. And even Wall Selection in VW 2025 (filled !) for me only works when I hover over parts of the Edges/Wireframe. Hovering over Faces/Fill completely ignores the Walls and selects something occluded behind. This is something I hope is fixed soon, as it does affect workflow. 1 Quote Link to comment
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.