!Restored: CADImage Door and Window Builder
Anonymous
Not applicable
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2008-02-04 04:51 PM
2008-02-04
04:51 PM
I am interested in purchasing it, but now I have two opposite opinions on it.
And other opinions are appreciated!
Thanks.
16 REPLIES 16
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2008-02-12 01:08 AM
2008-02-12
01:08 AM
Kees, I'm not sure how you could make the argument that CadImage DWB schedules are "better" than homemade AC11 door/window Interactive schedules if you have not used the latter.Chazz,
I have to support Kees here, simple because the current IS can not do properly what DWB can, and that is - drawn schedules. I would say this is the major drawback of IS at the moment.
Yes, DWB schedule is not biderectional, however it does deliver as oppose to IS which is a nice idea (talking about scheduling in general) however it is utterly useless in terms of opening schedules.
AFAIK, the drawn D/W schedule is essential for (at least) Scandinavians, AUS, NZ and UK.
Talking about DWB - I have stopped using it because of the problems with new versions of AC. Also, whilst appreciating Cadimage efforts to 'fill the gap' I do not like their ruthless approach towards a smooth AC integration, creating dummy layers, attributes, fixed folders etc. I think they are putting too much 'creativity' into it resulting in a bloody mess and problems with upgrades. They should really keep a low profile with AC resources handling and integrate DBW without interfering too much.
::rk

Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2008-02-12 06:32 PM
2008-02-12
06:32 PM
Rob wrote:I sense an Australian conspericy brewing here, the southern hemisphereians ganging up on us poor yanks with brains addled from reading too many election/political blogs. ....
Chazz, I have to support Kees here, simple because the current IS can not do properly what DWB can, and that is - drawn schedules. I would say this is the major drawback of IS at the moment.

As I'm sure you know, the Interactive Scheduler absolutely will do drawn opening schedules (if by that you mean elevational views of the openings). No, it will not dimension the openings but it does give you a picture and the proverbial 1000 words. For me, the convenience of keeping my schedules live and bidirectionally editable is worth the cost of losing the dimension strings which, given that the sizes are already provided in the table, is mostly redundantly redundant. Yes, it's nice when grids, muntins, mullions, transoms, handsets, etc are dimensioned separately.
I agree that IS could be better but what I really want is DWB to work better with IS.
Nattering nabob of negativism
2023 MBP M2 Max 32GM. MaxOS-Current
2023 MBP M2 Max 32GM. MaxOS-Current
Anonymous
Not applicable
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2008-02-12 07:32 PM
2008-02-12
07:32 PM
I can agree with the wish for better integration of DWB w/ IS. I have DWB but we have been trying not to use it for the same reasons as Rob suggests and the fact that we will now need to fork out more money each upgrade to keep current.
We put a lot of time into making favs of the std units and using IS. We don't show drawn elevations so that's one issue aside for us. What does kill me is the lack of options available in the std. lib.
At the moment i need to show a simple door with 2 sidelights and an elliptical transom. No part has this. But i can find references to each missing part of the code in two similar parts, just not one that has it all.
so I'll build one in DWB, stick a hidden part with my listing parameters in it off to the side so my sched works. All in less time than it took me to type this.
THIS is why we need a better DWBINSIDE AC!!!
We put a lot of time into making favs of the std units and using IS. We don't show drawn elevations so that's one issue aside for us. What does kill me is the lack of options available in the std. lib.
At the moment i need to show a simple door with 2 sidelights and an elliptical transom. No part has this. But i can find references to each missing part of the code in two similar parts, just not one that has it all.
so I'll build one in DWB, stick a hidden part with my listing parameters in it off to the side so my sched works. All in less time than it took me to type this.
THIS is why we need a better DWB
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2008-02-13 07:01 AM
2008-02-13
07:01 AM
THIS is why we need a better DWB INSIDE AC!!!I think this is the essence of DWB blunder.
You can not make a successful add-on without a proper integration into the main engine and eventually all little odds and sods will mount up and they become a major issue with upgrading as it is now...
I sense an Australian conspericy brewing here, the southern hemisphereians ganging up on us poor yanks with brains addled from reading too many election/political blogs. .Oh, don't start... your silly election campaigns take at least 10 minutes of everyday news... as the most famous American says - booooring, where are my donuts?...

As I'm sure you know, the Interactive Scheduler absolutely will do drawn opening schedules (if by that you mean elevational views of the openings). No, it will not dimension the openings but it does give you a picture and the proverbial 1000 words. For me, the convenience of keeping my schedules live and bidirectionally editable is worth the cost of losing the dimension strings which, given that the sizes are already provided in the table, is mostly redundantly redundant. Yes, it's nice when grids, muntins, mullions, transoms, handsets, etc are dimensioned separately.apart from all of this we need to show dimensioned sills for windows. Also, another shortcoming of IS is that it will list all openings separately, so if you had a window as a composite of different library parts (eg complicated shape etc) you're stuffed as it will not be listed under one opening. (as oppose DWB that allows you to designs really complicated geometries)
However, this goes into questions about the obsolete design of openings creation relying on sort of one-off GDL lib part.... but that is a different cup of tea.
::rk
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2008-02-15 01:06 AM
2008-02-15
01:06 AM
I have used DW Builder since it was a Theometrics product and think it is great, particularly the latest version. Saving preferences as txt files makes it very easy to duplicate styles from previous projects and the new schedule is fantastic. Once the schedule filters are set up all joinery schedules can be updated with a single click. I have now set this up in my template. It means that providing I give the windows and doors the right ID code, the schedules will update with interior and exterior joinery, or joinery on different stories separated and will exclude empty openings etc, making first carefully selecting the correct ones a thing of the past. I highly recommend DW Builder and use it exclusively.
AC25 & AC26
Win10 64 bit
Win10 64 bit
Anonymous
Not applicable
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2008-02-18 03:12 AM
2008-02-18
03:12 AM
Hi Robert – We are sorry to hear you have stopped using Door & Window Builder. Yes, there have been issues in the past, but we have worked hard to fix these issues so don’t give up on us!
Chazz – Sharing projects is now a lot easier than in previous versions. Anyone can download the library for free. Feel free to approach us if you need anything.
Chazz – Sharing projects is now a lot easier than in previous versions. Anyone can download the library for free. Feel free to approach us if you need anything.
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2008-02-18 04:05 AM
2008-02-18
04:05 AM
Dear Cadimage support,
I know you do try hard, however being in the position of an add-on developer you have to heavily rely (fortunately or unfortunately - cross out what is unappropriated
) on GS and that is essential. You need to 'plug yourself in' as seamlessly as you can for everyone's benefits (including you). And that includes abandoning your naughty habits creating special attributes and messy folder file structure that makes a hellish experience for AC admin.
Also, your creativity should 'hit' the IS use as it has been already mentioned before. Knowing a bit about GDL programming you can simple register your listing variables with the subtype in order to access them from IS along with your drawn schedules.
Sometimes, the excessive flexibility creates absolute mess overkilling something that should be a simple and straightforward process, perhaps.
...and I have not ever given up on anyone unless they have given up on themselves... ooh, that's heavy...
I know you do try hard, however being in the position of an add-on developer you have to heavily rely (fortunately or unfortunately - cross out what is unappropriated

Also, your creativity should 'hit' the IS use as it has been already mentioned before. Knowing a bit about GDL programming you can simple register your listing variables with the subtype in order to access them from IS along with your drawn schedules.
Sometimes, the excessive flexibility creates absolute mess overkilling something that should be a simple and straightforward process, perhaps.
...and I have not ever given up on anyone unless they have given up on themselves... ooh, that's heavy...

::rk
- « Previous
-
- 1
- 2
- Next »
- « Previous
-
- 1
- 2
- Next »