topic Re: New parasol training video? come GS in Modeling

New parasol training video? come GS

rob2218 — Thu, 09 Jun 2016 22:32:01 GMT

come on GS, please....when are you going to make some good stairs.
How often do we need a "parasol object" video?
we need better stairs that are easy to work with.
we need better control of lineweights and pens.
we need composite materials settings where you can change the shape of the different materials within a composites.
we need better roof objects.
we need to be able to do custom GDL better.
we need better/easier customizable object creation.....

we DONT need to know how to work the "parasol object"....

sorry but it's stuff like this that really set me off like John Wick. We need better day to day components, not better obscure library objects.

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

Anonymous — Tue, 14 Jun 2016 23:37:16 GMT

rob2218 wrote:
come on GS, please....

Initial irony aside (totally in on a parasol joke)...

Can you elaborate what is wrong?

Can we start with a simple one to get it going? What does bug you about pens?... not trying to start a flame war, just want to know what pens did or didn't do for you.

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

rob2218 — Tue, 14 Jun 2016 23:43:21 GMT

I have a hard time understanding the "pen assinged" to objects rationale.
here's a simple example.
the window sills (on the exterior). they always come in Out of the Box, with this really really thick, dark pen. something that OOTB should be set to a thin pen lineweight.

Also, that you certain objects (windows and doors primarily) linework can't be manipulated in elevation that easily. You have to riffle thru a myriad of setting pull-out arrows and tabs just to see "which" pen relates to which component of the windows/doors elevational parameters.

You can't imagine how many times I've been repremanded for having window sills read very boldly and the wall edges read too lightly.....

just should be easier to use all those 256 pens and pen combinations.

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

rob2218 — Tue, 14 Jun 2016 23:44:22 GMT

and for the record...I wasn't kididng about users needing some basic objects....(ahem) stairs...that work better than they are now, even at release 20.

Anton wrote:
rob2218 wrote:
come on GS, please....
Initial irony aside (totally in on a parasol joke)...

Can you elaborate what is wrong?

Can we start with a simple one to get it going? What does bug you about pens?... not trying to start a flame war, just want to know what pens did or didn't do for you.

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

Anonymous — Wed, 15 Jun 2016 00:27:26 GMT

rob2218 wrote:
I have a hard time understanding the "pen assinged" to objects rationale.

You can't imagine how many times I've been repremanded for having window sills read very boldly and the wall edges read too lightly.....

just should be easier to use all those 256 pens and pen combinations.

Actually I can imagine. I actually looked at out-of-the-box linework issues with doors and windows recently... they are all wrong with cut lines in wrong places line weights messed up... etc., the issue here is not with pens that are very simple to use and set up, but with default ARCHICAD template (that is simply horrendous) and errors in pen assignments within window/door library parts.

So, in essence your quarrel is not with pens that are rather simple to manage, but with ARCHICAD's template settings and out-of-the-box library part quality.

As an example here is a screen shot of out of the box cut line problem in windows (left) compared with debugged and fixed library parts (right). This is not a pen issue, but a template/library problem.

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

rob2218 — Wed, 15 Jun 2016 03:00:54 GMT

OK, agreed then. not a pen issue but a library object with horrible pen assignments issue.
Either way....it's a nightmare where an OOTB software should come with some semblence of a good lineweight basic setup.

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

Jeff Kogut — Wed, 15 Jun 2016 15:19:21 GMT

I agree Rob.

I had heard last summer the stair tool was on the way. I guess they had to stick it back in the oven.

In general, it seems to me that many sub-disciplines within Archicad get baked to 90% and then released with no follow-up for that last 10%.

An obvious example is window schedules. YEARS ago we tried to set up and use the schedules but gave up. I.E. with 3 ganged windows needing 3 indicators and a 'W Ribbon' (or other multi-pane window) needing only one indicator it just created a confused mess. Just making the ability to A) group ganged windows to be one unit; or B) schedule each pane - would cover both ways of doing it instead.

Here's a brand-new example of what I would hope would be the first step in an incremental release: the new barge board object. How about tie it to a roof for auto-updating pitch, length if the roof changes? And a similar fascia with optional gutter? And a smart downspout which auto-snaps to the gutter to adjust to the overhang and the outside finish surface of the wall?

Other stuff we get around by 'gaming the game' or a bit of manual drafting. We spend too much time on sections drawing in plates and insulation. We've experimented with complex profile walls with plates, but there are many, many headaches that come up. How about add an option in the wall tool for top & bottom plates, optional blocking at a certain height, and insulation between top and bottom plates. Go in to a section and the plates have a handle to pick to move them up/down in case they aren't immediately correct and insulation auto-updates?

I'll also throw out there, again, that a driveway tool that the user specifies a material or composite and draws or ctrl-clicks a polyline to draw it in. The driveway is tied to the mesh and if the mesh changes the driveway updates.

Building material priorities work on meshes, i.e. concrete cuts mesh.

Zones in section can have a title (room name).

I'm sure there are many more.

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

Anonymous — Wed, 15 Jun 2016 15:53:49 GMT

rob2218 wrote:
..it's a nightmare where an OOTB software should come with some semblance of a good lineweight basic setup.

I agree and I don't understand that ether.
If it is easy for anybody with knowledge of ARCHICAD to go through and correct all the errors within ARCHICAD basic Library and Template (takes a few hours), why doesn't GRAPHISOFT's Quality Assurance department (I think it does exist, as any software house has one) do that?

From experience, things like this are easily fixed by any software company if the bug is clearly defined and suggested solution is given. GRAPHISOFT is no exception.

The proper algorithm in dealing with any software company is very simple:
"we need better control of lineweights and pens." — will never get fixed, it won't even be looked at by GRAPHISOFT for lack of any orderly description. Moreover, as it turns out, initial description has absolutely nothing to do with a problem you are having and, consequently, will never be addressed to your liking.
"please update BasicWindowPanelStraight macro by changing "pen gs_frame_pen_cont" at line 270 to "pen gs_frame_pen". — will work (might require a bit of additonal communication with GS on the part of convincing them that it is for the best).

Alternatively, you can make changes you need yourself, or seek help to resolve your issues locally without involving GS.

You really can take matters in your own hands and fix whatever problems you might encounter with the software, or you might chose to spend your time communicating with GS and getting it fixed for everybody.
Ether way, you need structured approach. In the end, it is just a matter of organization.

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

Ransom Ratcliff — Thu, 16 Jun 2016 16:26:48 GMT

Anton,
You make a good point about taking care to be specific in the problem description or request for change.
But we should also notice that different markets have different localization teams and different OOTB content.
For example, your screenshot might not reflect the American pen table and library that Rob and Jeff are seeing OOTB.

Windows are very complex and there are mistakes and unintended consequences. For example, if we turn on the window sill, it may require other considerations such as wall type, casing settings, and many others. This is not ideal and the complexity of these library parts contributes to the challenge.
But OOTB favorites can help this situation which is far from foolproof.

Here are some screen shots of OOTB content in the US AC19 commercial template:

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

Anonymous — Thu, 16 Jun 2016 17:05:07 GMT

Ransom wrote:
But we should also notice that different markets have different localization teams and different OOTB content.
For example, your screenshot might not reflect the American pen table and library that Rob and Jeff are seeing OOTB.

Than you for official input on this.

I am aware of various localization options in ARCHICAD and you do have all localized demos available for download on your web site, so anyone can take a look, not only regular ARCHICAD users. So, I do keep an eye on any developments in all the markets as a hobby.

Ransom wrote:
For example, your screenshot might not reflect the American pen table and library that Rob and Jeff are seeing OOTB.

My pen table does not reflect any standard pen table. 🙂 It is the one I put together on a whim to test broken library parts/macros-related issues.
But, you are certainly right. Problem area I am referring to in my image was found in INT (International) version of the library/temlpate.

Graphisoft US's Residential and Commercial Templates (and US-specific library) are generally much cleaner and show leaps and bounds better care taken in creating library parts and basic templates, but they still have errors in windows/door macros preventing proper display, just fewer and different ones.

Like I mentioned before — it all depends on who does the job and whether they care about what they do.

Ransom wrote:
Windows are very complex and there are mistakes and unintended consequences.

Yes, they are complex and no, there should not be mistakes like that in a commercially available product. It took me an hour or two to trace and fix all errors in all door/window macros in the INT version. I think GS QA staff can do the same.

-----------------------

Localization aside, there are scores of critical issues to the core ARCHICAD program that don't get addressed for years.
How about making super-hot (pun intended) EcoDesigner calculate Sun heat gain properly without overheating...? 6D BIM anyone? Nope... no luck.
How about bringing a development team back to work on the most awesome feature ARCHICAD has to date — 5D BIM in a form of Lists, Databases and linking property objects? I think ArchiCAD 9 being the last point of update is a little harsh. And now third-party commercial entities develop and market simple interface to bypass horrendously unfriendly Lists set up system and will sell it like hotcakes (outside GS).
What about Construction Simulation ArchiCAD Add-on from the turn of the century... 4D BIM anyone? Nope... no support for Partial Structure Display and all the rest of new features....

Sit down, fix the old stuff get the best software in the world. For real.

It is amazing how much forward looking development already built into ARCHICAD for years is overlooked by GS marketing team.... and as a consequence — letting latecomers like Revit take the market lead. I understand Autodesk is hard to compete with (I come from Autodesk camp and know Revit just as well as I know ARCHICAD), but gosh.... you already have tools to ride future UK's BIM Level 3 wave for years (4D BIM, 5D BIM, 6D BIM), not clawing low double digits of market share.... you have all the tools and none of them work... It is a QA issue. Fire your marketing team, get a competent one, fix the old stuff, get AC21 out with a bang... don't develop new parasol objects — they don't bring money to the house....

Almost forgot... 7D BIM... rebuild ArchiFM in the cloud (and while you are at it, move Lists and Databases to the cloud too) to give FM managers (and cost estimators) worldwide (SaaS paid subscription, anyone?) access to all the data without requiring them to learn ARCHICAD (never works)...

Really... 2D, 3D, 4D, 5D, 6D and 7D+ BIM in one user-friendly application? ... "Do you remember 2017, Karl, when Autodesk went out of business?"... What is GS marketing team thinking? ARCHICAD 20 - New Parasol Library Part... 🙂

And we are talking complex windows here.... Issues like these made me come back to active ARCHICAD life after many years of voluntary reclusion. Lets see if we can make a difference.

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

Eduardo Rolon — Thu, 16 Jun 2016 20:41:09 GMT

ArchiFM still exist http://www.archifm.net and it is in the cloud and it connects to BimX. Look at the video from KCC posted earlier this week the demo was from Gabor at the end.

Was going to write a rant about the parasol object, stair et al, but decided it as not worth it.
TL:DR or (W)rite

2 options about the stair tool: One is that GS is not working on a revamped Stair tool the other is that they are working on it and it is not ready yet.

2 options about parasol: One is that they decided not to work on the Stair Tool and work on this. The other is that they worked on this because of a specific client need (they were "forced" to do it) and they got permission to share it as part of the release. And the video is part of all of the stuff they need to do as part of the marketing for 20 (and to make that particular client happy that GS is willing to go the extra mile for them). Or it was made as an internal project with some interns and they wanted to reward them for all of their effort and give them something to put in their CV's.

----
I know which options I choose to believe but maybe I am wrong and GS is withholding work on the Stair tool so that I stop using AC.

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

sinceV6 — Thu, 16 Jun 2016 21:34:45 GMT

ejrolon wrote:
....
2 options about the stair tool: One is that GS is not working on a revamped Stair tool the other is that they are working on it and it is not ready yet.
...

I'd say that those apply to practically every tool.

The sad truth is that there are a lot of things that need updating and currently feel unfinished. The properties and global overrides are indeed great new features. They say this release tackles the "i" in BIM, so I hope that AC21 takes on the B and the M. That's another year gone at least. I'm afraid that by the time things really really evolve I'll be retiring.

Best regards.

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

Anonymous — Thu, 16 Jun 2016 21:35:33 GMT

ejrolon wrote:
they worked on this because of a specific client need (they were "forced" to do it) and they got permission to share it as part of the release. And the video is part of all of the stuff they need to do as part of the marketing for 20 (and to make that particular client happy that GS is willing to go the extra mile for them)

This bothers me a bit as a bystander, Eduardo.
It seems to be the business model nowadays. I am sure GS has reasons... "change management" for one client... "grasshopper connection" for another.... "parasol" for the third one.... all important clients happy, but difficulty for the company as a whole.

Maybe it is worth looking for a more generic, world-wide approach that I outlined in my previous post than chasing a few select firms. We will see how it will turn out.

ejrolon wrote:
I'm afraid that by the time things really really evolve I'll be retiring.

My thoughts exactly. I took a long sabbatical moving from architecture to do software development, but architecture does not seem to be evolving as fast as I, personally, would like it to, so I figured I'd come out and play.

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

Eduardo Rolon — Thu, 16 Jun 2016 22:14:30 GMT

Anton wrote:
… I am sure GS has reasons... change management for one client... grasshopper connection for another.... parasol for the third one.... all important clients happy, but difficulty for the company as a whole…

Forgetting Morph and Renovation. Every single item you have listed, obviously not the parasol object, has benefited me in lots of ways and I am a single practitioner. So I have no problem waiting until things are cooked.

What is the actual price for a truly bi-directional connection between Grasshopper and AC that no other BIM package has and we got for free?

sinceV6 wrote:
…

I'd say that those apply to practically every tool.

The sad truth is that there are a lot of things that need updating and currently feel unfinished. The properties and global overrides are indeed great new features. They say this release tackles the "i" in BIM, so I hope that AC21 takes on the B and the M. That's another year gone at least. I'm afraid that by the time things really really evolve I'll be retiring.

Best regards.

So GS gets slammed for releasing an idea that is not finished yet (Properties, Curtain Wall Tool with reason) and it also gets slammed for not releasing until it is done (Stair Tool, possibly) plus they get slammed for working slow.

----
-----
For the record I am writing about complaining about "wasting" time doing the Parasol object and video. We can critique the implementation of all the new tools as much as we want, GOs, Curtain Wall, AC Properties , New Tabs, Interface, etc. But give the guys at GS some credit that they are doing all they can to fulfill our needs. We can argue about priorities but we don't know how their teams are setup, how they evaluate their priorities, how they classify the amount of effort needed to update such an old tool as the Stair.

So what we should sacrifice for the stair tool? Shell, Morphs, Interface, GO's, IFC, PlotMaker, Schedules, Revision Tool, Teamwork, BimX, CineRender?

For me the answer is none since I have been able to model all my stairs since AC8.0 with the existing tools thus having an improved Stair Tool is not so high in my list of priorities.
If I cannot achieve a Stairs with the existing tool then I would be looking at modeling them using Rhino->GH->AC since with that combo I can coordinate multiple items in a single click, matching a specific form and linking it to the particular code that I need. This can be done now though only in PC.

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

Anonymous — Thu, 16 Jun 2016 22:40:13 GMT

ejrolon wrote:
So I have no problem waiting until things are cooked.

Unfortunately, at times — they don't. And they don't because, for one reason or another, GS has difficulty gathering and organizing resources for new development.

I can care less about wrong pens, missing markers or stairs, as all those issues are easily overcome with existing tools and on-site knowledge of ARCHICAD, but what I do care about, as a full-stack developer, is that there is a very loose structure to marketing and rather patchy and swinging new development roadmap.
This does affect the bottom line, GS makes less money and has less resources to do new development. It is an endless circle and they need to break out of it.

If I where to run a project similar to this, I would first establish a few strategic goals along the lines of where the entire world will look at in a few years, then rework the tools the company already has to get a shiny new thing with minimal effort. This new thing can be pushed to new users expanding the user base and affecting company cashflow... AC20 is unlikely to fill the shoes. It will be an awesome release for people that understand and cherish the concept of Information Modeling (few people do), but short of a new interface there are no standing out features to bring new, uninitiated client base. It basically means that ARCHICAD is very good as it is, but it can be so much better with a bit of out-of-the-box, asymmetrical thinking.

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

Anonymous — Thu, 16 Jun 2016 22:52:37 GMT

I understand their are complaints about what isn't included in AC at every release; but at the same time, this software is really freaking flexible and dynamic. There is not a lot that can not be modeled and documented easily in ARCHICAD.

I think there are two issues with these kind of complaints. 1) Working under the assumption that each tool only does one thing, or that the only way to model anything is with the tool of that name. 2) Lack of a proper template.

So in reading this thread so far (and hundreds of threads before this), the 2 tools that generate the most complaints are Doors/Windows and Stairs.

Doors and Windows, specifically pertaining to their line weights and attributes can and should be mitigated by the use of favorites. Favorites and a quality template are essential- never assume you can just open AC out of the box and have everything exactly how you want it. As Ransom pointed out, there is no way for Graphisoft to meet everyone's graphic needs and expectations for every region/project type/level of anal retention.

The stair tool is another issue. This is an insanely complicated tool that basically writes a gdl script for you. It is pretty freaking amazing that it works at all, yet less gets you the results you need. Is it user friendly? no. Can it be used in most cases of custom designed stairs? no. This is why I don't use it. I design and model stairs with a combination of Walls, Slabs, Beams, Columns, Roofs, Shells, and Objects. Expecting a single tool to design and represent an entire complex building component like a stair is a stretch. Some third party products may get closer than ARCHICAD's built in tool, but they are still not good enough for anything other than fire stairs or that schematic design model that you only need something and don't care what it is.

So rather than rag on what AC can't do, use the tools given. Give constructive & specific feedback, maybe we will eventually get some components that will do some design work for you... but I don't know that I want that anyway.

Learn how to build objects from different elements, save as objects, or script objects from scratch. Its a lot to ask, and can seem overwhelming, but its such a versatile and powerful option.

Most importantly, get a template that streamlines the settings and use of all of ARCHICAD's tools that you use.

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

Anonymous — Thu, 16 Jun 2016 22:56:14 GMT

Ok, one last thing... given the example of schedules for ribbon windows not doing what you need... This is a perfect example of not exploring all the options fully.
You can easily model each window independently with correct "mulling" dimensions in the settings. This gives you a unique marker for each. Then use a label to show your "W Marker" at the central panel. If the window needs to schedule as the full dimension, you could also have non-scheduling windows for the individual windows and an empty opening for the full mulled unit.
I do this frequently for sliding door units with varied leaf widths.

If it seems like you should be able to do something in ARCHICAD, you most likely can. It normally just takes a small amount of out of the box thinking.

Anyway, thats the end of my rant...

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

sinceV6 — Fri, 17 Jun 2016 00:58:41 GMT

ejrolon wrote:
...

So GS gets slammed for releasing an idea that is not finished yet (Properties, Curtain Wall Tool with reason) and it also gets slammed for not releasing until it is done (Stair Tool, possibly) plus they get slammed for working slow.
...

I'm not saying things to slam anyone. Even less at GS. I have always praised the deep analysis they put with new tools. Sometimes it works, sometimes it needs to be addressed (i.e. orange orb and current snap guides). And I have always said that the strong part of AC is its workflow paradigm.

I'm not talking about a single tool. Fixing the stair tool would solve only one thing. I'm talking about the general concept here, where that small gap to get that feeling of things working as they should would make a world of difference. Every new release brings new things. New great things that benefit most of AC users. I guess the general discomfort lies in the sense that there are things that could have been addressed or finished in any of those releases but just weren't. Examples?

Building materials.- AWESOME new feature. Shifted workflows entirely. But priority based connections work automatically with some elements, others need to be connected manually, others just don't use them (mesh). Why not implement them entirely? Why are they not available to GDL? I know there will be reasons as to why they weren't done for every tool the first time, but they could have improved over time.
Solid Element Operations.- I dare to say AC's booleans are some of the cleanest operations I've seen. But as handy as they are, they weren't done for floorplans. Oh, but some tools now show them you might say. Great! Why not every tool or every element displays them yet?
Profile manager.- Be careful with curvy elements. Although the intrinsic nature of GDL won't allow for smooth curves, it is something that could have started to be addressed since the introduction of shells, when GS realized that AC needed more modeling freedom.
GDL itself and libraries.- AMAZING things can be done with it. It is fast and efficient. It is old. It is holding AC back. It takes a lot of development time. Building good and great parametric library parts takes a lot of time, trial and error. I remember GS developers saying they used the same development environment and suffered with the rest of the users. It's crazy that even today, when you know that you can use any tool for a purpose other than intended, you can't use them in the GDL development environment to model directly in it -instead of scripting- and connect its creation parameters. This is also why companies prefer to model their products in other platforms.

Is that small gap to close the circle that rises the frustation bar. And there are many other small things that could have been improved -the forums are plagued with those-, but resources are targeted to key targets. No wonder it is called KCC: Key Client Conference. May be related, maybe not.

I know things need time to develop. Remember when profiles couldn't be applied to curved elements? Got fixed for the next release. I also remember the proof of concept I did in GDL for connected floor to floor height for walls in V13 when a Revit user asked if it could be done in AC. This arrived in V18 with natural constraints.

Many years ago the parametricity offered was ok because it didn't play a big role as it does now. Isolated parametric objects were great, but today standards have different demands. A lot will be solved with the Rhino connection, but a lot will not.

I hope this clarifies a little what I'm talking about. I'm not saying things just to say, or flame anything or anyone. I also understand that GS has priorities and a development roadmap, and that when a new feature is not ready, it is just not ready. The frustrating part is that sometimes it feels like things will remain as they are for who knows how long.

Best regards.

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

Eduardo Rolon — Fri, 17 Jun 2016 01:21:29 GMT

I do agree with you sinceV6 and I don't know if you are in the Beta group, if not then you have no idea the arguments that go on in that one between users and the different teams.

The problem is when post like this and a couple of others start assuming that "if GS had not done this then I would have gotten what I want…" or "Why they keep wasting resources?".

If you look at the previous releases you can define what the strategy and changes are going forward. Basically there will be an overall coordinating concept, something New introduced (I don't need this/ this is marketing), something old updated (Finally!!/productivity), some basic new stuff updated or created for the release and some WTFs. Everything aligned to avoid AC running slower than before and that it works with TW.

So join the Beta when it comes around…

Re: New parasol training video? come GS

Bricklyne Clarence — Fri, 17 Jun 2016 07:05:28 GMT

ejrolon wrote:
....
Forgetting Morph and Renovation. Every single item you have listed, obviously not the parasol object, has benefited me in lots of ways and I am a single practitioner. So I have no problem waiting until things are cooked.

Not everyone has that luxury, though.

What is the actual price for a truly bi-directional connection between Grasshopper and AC that no other BIM package has and we got for free?

Two problems I see with this.
With the first, being the obvious that people who don't know how to use Rhino (or worse, Grasshopper) have to learn how to use them to get the benefit of this connection.
Otherwise it's a wasted development effort for the 80-90% of architects who don't use Rhino or Grasshopper

Full disclosure, I DO use both and have used them since Grad school - certainly Rhino.
And my assessment is that while it does show great promise, it's still not where it needs to be to be a truly useful connection that really leverages the strengths of Rhino/Grasshopper in an ArchiCAD environment.
And unfortunately a lot of its limitations at the moment result largely from ArchiCAD's own limitations and shortcomings since it can only translate geometry and information based on ArchiCAD's tool template. For example, if I build an envelop for a surface in Rhino and wish to transfer it to ARchiCAD and have it read as a proper curtain wall object (for quantification purposes), I can only do so much since frames in the ArchiCAD tool for example can't twist or rotate to any angle on all three axes as you would need to translate some forms, and even the Curtain wall itself can't be double-curved. (obviously), panels can't be twisted - all of which essentially forces you to translate all that information into morphs.
I don't need to point out the obvious problem with doing it this way, in light of what I'm seeking to do in documentation terms.

That's the second problem which I don't believe is that critical - obviously depending on how much more maturity the connection itself can undergo and how much farther GS are willing to keep developing it.
And in light of their history with releasing ground-breaking tools in recent versions (**ahem**Curtain wall tool**cough**), can anyone really have any assurance that they will continue supporting and improving this connection as it needs to be, in order for it to be useful?

I really hope they're taking notes in seeing how McNeel helped nurture Grasshopper's development - which was a ground-up, community-based effort.

There's a third problem which you yourself actually point out (inadvertently) later on in your post.

ejrolon wrote:
So GS gets slammed for releasing an idea that is not finished yet (Properties, Curtain Wall Tool with reason) and it also gets slammed for not releasing until it is done (Stair Tool, possibly) plus they get slammed for working slow.

Does it really have to be an either/or type situation, though?

Getting slammed for releasing an idea that's not finished yet, is a justifiable consequence of forcing your paying customers to have to use half-finished goods that they are paying for.

How would a client of yours like it if you designed a house in which they'd have to cover up some holes in the walls where windows are supposed to be because you didn't finish designing the windows in time?
Chances are this would never happen because no architect (or contractor) could survive such a business model.

And yet we're supposed to be understanding when it comes to a product and tool we're paying for.
Does that make sense to you?

And they get slammed not for not releasing a tool until it is done (stair tool) but rather that it takes them an inconceivable and incomprehensible amount of time (over 15 years that people have been clamoring for improvements to it by my count) to even acknowledge at all (they never really have) that it needs work and improvement, much less even put it on their priority list of things to be improved.
As for getting slammed for "working slow" isn't that at odds with their own self-chosen yearly update schedule? (which most of us pointed out was probably a bad idea in the first place, and which also results in them releasing half-finished tools that they then never finish or make improvements to)?

They chose that schedule. Not us.

I understand the reasons for why they would want to and why they did (revenue-stream based), but with every decision there are clear consequences.

Besides, it doesn't really help their argument, or rather this line of argument, when they then go and spend whatever little time they have (or might claim they have) for development, working on such "revolutionary tools" like a parasol object, or a playground object.

Just saying....

ejrolon wrote:
----
-----
For the record I am writing about complaining about "wasting" time doing the Parasol object and video. We can critique the implementation of all the new tools as much as we want, GOs, Curtain Wall, AC Properties , New Tabs, Interface, etc. But give the guys at GS some credit that they are doing all they can to fulfill our needs. We can argue about priorities but we don't know how their teams are setup, how they evaluate their priorities, how they classify the amount of effort needed to update such an old tool as the Stair.

So what we should sacrifice for the stair tool? Shell, Morphs, Interface, GO's, IFC, PlotMaker, Schedules, Revision Tool, Teamwork, BimX, CineRender?

I would sacrifice all of them (save for maybe the Plotmaker, which they absolutely had do to, and perhaps IFC and maybe Teamwork). That's just how important and fundamental I believe stairs are in a project.

But again, here we fall into the trap of the "Either/Or"

It's not like their options are to either do the stair tool and sacrifice one or all of those tools at the same time.
Why not prioritize?
We all have to do it.
And if stairs are so low on your list of priorities (and at odds with how high it is on your customers list of priorities) then something is seriously askew and generally wrong with your outlook.

You can't really argue that from a utilitarian perspective, that BimX or Cinerender - for as important as they are - are really that much more important and useful than stairs in a building, can you?
Most people were already outsourcing their primary rendering needs before they upgraded from Lightworks to Cinerender and we went for an entire year when more than half the user-base couldn't even benefit from BimX since it was Mac-only initially.

But I understand why they did both first.
Marketing.
I get it.
Graphisoft have to be in the public consciousness as part of their ability to survive in the competitive BIM world, and part of doing that is having revolutionary tools like BIMx and a kick-as.s. out-of-the-box renderer like Cinerender.
I get it.

But still....

ejrolon wrote:
For me the answer is none since I have been able to model all my stairs since AC8.0 with the existing tools thus having an improved Stair Tool is not so high in my list of priorities.

But it is for many...
Yes, we can work around the problems and shortcomings, currently. But workarounds only take you so far most of the time before you begin losing on your return-on-investment and time spent.

Incidentally this is a recurring theme on most of the problems and shortcomings with all their other tools, as well.

ejrolon wrote:
If I cannot achieve a Stairs with the existing tool then I would be looking at modeling them using Rhino->GH->AC since with that combo I can coordinate multiple items in a single click, matching a specific form and linking it to the particular code that I need. This can be done now though only in PC.

And therein lies problem #3 (for Mac people, at least. The reverse of what we had when BimX was released).

Not to mention a return to problem #2 and #1 with the having to force people to learn yet ANOTHER program (AND have to PAY for it) just to deal with a situation that your primary program can't (but should, given it's primary function).

A lot of Graphisoft's problems (to us, anyway) seem self-inflicted.

And a lot of the solutions they come up with to deal with these problems seem to spawn even more problems.

But then again maybe they don't view them as problems.
Which in turn becomes a bigger problem for us.