Cadimage

[Anonymous]

Hi there,

we are getting some AC files from clients which have used cadimage librarys. Even so it is a pla file there are still librarys or macros missing. It is very annoying. This happened with different files from different clients. It would be silly to have to buy the addon to open the files!?
Can anybody shed some light on this thanks.

Carsten

[Anonymous]

archiben,

thanks for your insight. I do disagree so that it is GS problem. If someone developes a plug in, it is up to them to make sure it works with the pla feature of AC. The pla feature has been around before developing the cadimage tool library.
The point of the pla feature is to be able to open the project without having to have any additional plug ins, librarys etc.
It is a hassle to download stuff all the time just to make things work.

cadimage could make the tool non editable for the pla if they are afraid people will use them free after opening an archive.

Saying this I might have access to the cadimage librarys as a gold member, I better check on this!

cheers

[Dwight]

Carstene wrote:
it is up to them to make sure it works with the pla feature of AC. The pla feature has been around before developing the cadimage tool library.

With all due respect, I can attest that the PLA function of Archicad frequently overlooks macro elements archiving even official Archicad library elements. So our add-on building colleagues face what might be an insurmountable challenge in coping with this application flaw.

[Rob]

I have to say that whole strategy and cooperation between GS and CI is not working... apparently. However, I would be blaming both sides equally... it's not good for either party after all.

[Anonymous]

Dwight wrote:
With all due respect, I can attest that the PLA function of Archicad frequently overlooks macro elements archiving even official Archicad library elements. So our add-on building colleagues face what might be an insurmountable challenge in coping with this application flaw.

I agree. I'm using archive files from time to time. I've never had one .PLA document working properly. Every AC version I remember (started with AC6.0) issues missing macro's or textures, even with the correct save options enabled.
I don't use any add-on, only AC libraries (INT and localized)...

[Anonymous]

Many of the Cadimage Tools require a series of Macros that do not get included when you save a PLA.

Any user can register with Cadimage Tools (www.cadimagetools.com) and download the Tools they require without purchasing the Tool. This will ensure you have no missing library parts, however you will not be able to use the tool itself until you either register a 30 day demo or purchase the Tool.

[Anonymous]

The reason PLAs are often missing macros is that some library parts call macros using a user selected (or entered) parameter value. ArchiCAD can only include macros that are hard coded in the scripts and not ones using variable parameter names. I don't know what the obstacles are to fixing this limitation, but it has been around a long time.

[Ignacio Azpiazu]

I think the annual release idea pretty much kills the whole third-party add-on idea. Expenses were significant enough and updates enough of a headache on an 18-month basis, not to mention the export/sharing problems/impossibility. I ended up not really using the add-ons I did purchase.

I think Graphisoft should just buy the products form Cigraph and Cadimage and etc. that have proven to be good products, and make them available as free goodies, and contract the developers for simultaneous development with each AC release.

[Rob]

I think the annual release idea pretty much kills the whole third-party add-on idea.

I agree, this puts a lot of pressure on 3rd party developers as well so add-ons are more prone to be buggy. I have given up on add-ons completely.. can not be bothered anymore.

[Rex Maximilian]

NeckoFromSarajevo wrote:
Without addons, archicad is very poor program . . . (poor door,windows, stair, 3d modeling, terrain etc)

That's your opinion. I think it's way off base though.

I can think of a lot of things I wish were perfect in this world. But nothing's perfect. Frankly, I use two adds ons religiously, CIT Door&WindowBuilder and the CIT Accessories Tools. But without them, I could still do my work using ArchiCAD's default tools.

Your TV tower's very nice, but it can still be done with ArchiCAD's tools. With as little number of steps? Probably not, which is why add-ons are great, but not the end all, be all tool for completing projects, nor defining a product.

[Anonymous]

Rex wrote:

NeckoFromSarajevo wrote:
Without addons, archicad is very poor program . . . (poor door,windows, stair, 3d modeling, terrain etc)

That's your opinion. I think it's way off base though.

I can think of a lot of things I wish were perfect in this world. But nothing's perfect. Frankly, I use two adds ons religiously, CIT Door&WindowBuilder and the CIT Accessories Tools. But without them, I could still do my work using ArchiCAD's default tools.

Your TV tower's very nice, but it can still be done with ArchiCAD's tools. With as little number of steps? Probably not, which is why add-ons are great, but not the end all, be all tool for completing projects, nor defining a product.

When i read comments like yours i just say :

U can use your head to break wall i will use dynamite

I know that this tower is not something from everyday work , and probably many architect will never do job like this, but when it hits u, u just want to have software in which u can accomplish this.
Money is in the game, u have deadlines, and u cant spent 3 months creating just 3d model or even not to create it.

So, when i say archicad is poor, i want it to be better. I love archicad, and im using it everyday, i know what is missing and i know what is good in ac.

No hard feelings,
Respect from
Sarajevo, BiH