johnny

I think you are looking for "point to point" move tool....but I see you just uploaded a vid so I will look and make sure. After seeing your vid, I would suggest you look at the copy (array) tool and see the "sub" options. Other than that, I would copy in place and then point to point move. It may be just as simple to create a new marker in those locations. Since those markers are "objects" (unlike in generic CAD) the simplicity of making new ones in the location(s) you want may be just as effective IMO.....especially since the text will presumably change in each one.

That is exactly what I would like to see incorporated! Most the time I am "messing" with values to get it right, and having to go back and forth into a dialog box, and then a tab or two, each time is really a hassle when you dont know exactly the right value to start. So you know, many of my apps like Vectorworks which has this feature I move my "info" box over to my other monitor and it works very well.

I agree, this would be great.

Dougs comments and the sneak previews seem to confirm x7 won't be modeless. The features added to x7 look great, but anyone can clearly see they are staying with the dialog box/data entry approach.

I certainly didn't mean to offend the guys at CA - I do think for a single practitioner of residential design/architecture CA stands above the competition. My point is that with sneak previews of x7 coming out I am a bit disappointed that more hasn't been done to get away from all the dialog boxes for nearly every operation. I know from experience that is a productivity drain.

I believe the majority of current Autodesk products are modeless. Id say most high end apps are "modeless". Keep in mind, there are certain aspects in almost any app which would be considered Modal (settings/printing etc) but we are talking about the main workflow.

Just an FYI - Modal interface, such as CA now, means the app enters a mode where its only "thinking" and operating on a specific subject/state until the user makes another input leaving that mode. A "modeless" based system just means the app doesn't have to "enter" a state to consider a specific operation from the user (might not be the best explanation).

I don't want people to think I am campaigning for a visual overhaul of CA just to look cool - the concept of a new GUI is based first and foremost on speeding up processes - less dialog boxes, clicks, and manual input. I also thing some of the quirkiness can be dealt with in the GUI redesign as well. I personally think its "quirky" to use a design element called "slabs" for fascia....so on and so forth. All this should be cleaned up so we are using generically labeled tools that accomplish the same things, but are easier to train people on. CA is not easy to learn right now since its anti-intuitive. I think looking cool and "clean" can be a bi-product of efficient design with slight effort in that regard.

If any of the market leaders turn their attention to residential tools (which they have been focusing mainly on commercial), I really could see a near end to CA as we know it now - IF CA doesn't adapt before that. Id say the same about Softplan. There may always be faithful loyal CA users, but I also say there is a fairly good sized group of users who almost begrudgingly use this app since it is currently the best at what it does. If I was CA id be getting out in "front" of that group to keep their attention only on CA.

Thanks for the vote of confidence. As a side point, I led a team of 4 GUI designers in 2002 (as a side project to my architectural business - long story how that happened but its related to the fact I designed some of the top execs homes) to redesign archaic software that existed in the pharmaceutical world. Ominicell was a publicly traded company that controlled a large portion of the market, and we took their first system and re-designed the entire process. Here is a link to the software, and them showing the extreme difference in how the software looked in a dos window verses what we created: http://www.omnicell.com/Products/Central_Pharmacy_Automation/OmniLinkRx_Medication_Order_Management_System.aspx (FYI - we actually created that graphic for them before the app even ran so they could pre-market - on the left is what the app looked like before we remade it) Omnicell went on to change all their software to match our efficient and new GUI, and other companies in the business even licensed the visual and currently 10+ products use a version of what we did for them. The new GUI was the principle cause for massive market-share grabs from other competing companies - since clients saved money with less "data entry" times (they note "St. Vincent Healthcare achieved at least a 57% reduction in order entry time."). Efficiency is very important.

Im sure it was a major help, but I do say in the software/hardware business if you dont adapt quick you won't keep your lead long. Its really a combination of all sorts of things really....I was just capitalizing on the comment dealing with GUI.

I find that even the semi-custom cabinet companies end up producing their own drawings based upon concepts we provide. Those drawings are actually the drawings sent for field installation etc. Are you saying your cabinet drawings produced in Chief are the last and final drawings for the entire cabinet production/installation? If so, id say that is very unique and not something i've experienced. I honestly didn't intend to speak for everyone...that would be foolish. As with most guys and gals here we know how the industry works backwards and forwards - but its not to say we know how everyone works.

Im suggesting the two are integrated. A modern GUI should also fix a lot of the work-arounds. If i was talking about only a visual issue only I would cry BS on myself. Here is a link for "good design" elements - https://www.vitsoe.com/rw/about/good-design

Vectorworks is about 3k for the Architect version. However, if you buy SSA you can buy most the apps we are talking about for roughly the same price on a yearly basis. Not to mention there are many other aspects to advertising and overhead which are different. Efficiency should always be weight against costs. It cheaper for me to buy software for 6k if it makes up for that differential in efficiency. Modern usable GUI doesn't cost a lot to implement - but I agree with Doug that its a resource decision on a future release. CA's UI (functionality) has gotten so old I believe its become an impediment which should be addressed. It would also motivate those with older versions of CA to upgrade to current version. Right now unless these minor improvement features in cabinet etc are worth it, who needs to upgrade or buy SSA?

I dont know how hard it would be to get in CA, but here is a video showing Vectorworks "object properties" pallet and how it works - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrS7cWHhikg&list=PLiLCoe7DU1HYNYeFLC3R1C-C7JshE_a0G&index=9 I think one of the most powerful features of that tool is the ability to select more than one object and the pallet displays only the "common" modifiable elements. In Vectorworks there is a powerful "select only" tool that allows very customized selections across layers/classes and then to be able to edit their properties with this pallet is truly a time saver.

Id be careful to "plug-n-play" details into a drawing set. If I were you Id look at code requirements and compare with your actual conditions. I've worked on some projects where I called for metal flashing across the entire side of a home that had extreme exposure (waterfront). Flip side you dont want to add details that could cost your clients extra and have the builder say "if your designer/architect didn't unnecessarily call for xyz it would be cheaper".... Just advice....

I agree....thankfully that does work. However, why the heck can't those simply tools be incorporated in CA??? There are free to use 3D tools that are browser based 100x better than what CA has for generic modeling of objects. https://clara.io/ CA could actually buy these tools and plug them into their app if they don't have the time to develop. http://www.spatial.com/

A. My "dumping" on CA is my passion to see them improve an otherwise could-be spectacular program. B. Autodesk is the industry leader by focusing on GUI first....you nearly prove my point. I honestly believe my critique of CA is what is truly holding this app back. Like it or not, CA is an app selling to persons of STRONG DESIGN background who want their tools to be designed well - look and function. The last thing you should be doing as a company selling to such design professionals is making them work in an antiquated environment. I even want to "feel" cool when I am designing a home or building..... (maybe too far, but still) Why do you think people spend more money on an Apple phone/tablet/computer? Design and function...

So as not to come off ultra-negative, there are a lot of things CA does very well and better than anyone else. Its just hard to fully appreciate this thru the antiquated approach to get there. I would bet money that if you took 10 architects (with residential specialty) who never used CA, and gave them a personalized demo of CA 7+ would purchase. I would then bet that in less than 1 month 80% of those architects would give negative feedback on the use of CA and the methods to operate this app. Obviously I can't prove this, but I do make this comment anecdotally.

Yeah, it wasn't to say some out there dont use these features at the fore-front of their work. In an ideal app I suppose the ability to do it all would be great. What I am trying to point out is CA seems to be foregoing major work on fundamentals in speeding up and simplifying processes for more eye candy. I think Doug's comment speaks to the issue of resources. Perhaps CA doesn't think they will sell an upgrade that only deals with GUI. Personally speaking I can say this would be more important to me than much of their improvements. Is - Framing/Stairs/Layout Updates more or less important than GUI?? To me, GUI should be fixed before adding more features....otherwise you will make work harder down the road. CA needs to be revamped into a modern app. Next, I would say revamping modeling basic shapes should come before specific tools. CA's general modeling abilities are ABHORRENTLY BAD.

Here is the problem with CA - you guys are getting too wrapped up with minutia that translates into a pretty picture....and not spending enough time on what matters most. Virtually nothing you guys do in cabinets is "real"....in that all you are doing is making a client concept that can be sent over to the cabinet guys and then the process starts again when they design working drawings based on the concepts. Seriously, unless some of you (can't be many) are making your own cabinets onsite, many of the features related to cabinets can't be as important as streamlining the GUI or other important issues. These videos CA puts out are nice, but 1 in 20 clients (maybe) do I have to put forth this type of interior concept....and even then they aren't actually asking for it. CA, you guys creating a product that specializes in something that blows the socks off of would-be CAD buyers, but in truth isn't actually needed most the time in the practice of architecture or home design. What CA is getting really good at is more interior design in nature. Oddly, what CA specializing in would probably have more use in commercial work where this type of interior design/detail is packaged with the architecture.

Does anyone know the cost of just a straight upgrade? I let my SSA expire too, but unless CA comes out with an update every year, I dont find much value in SSA beyond that.

My focus wasn't necessarily the ribbon - but eliminating so much the need to enter a dialog box to change nearly any data for an object. I can't think of an app I used regularly post Y2K that requires dialogs to pop-up for nearly all aspects of its function. CA doesn't even allow changing line thickness/color without entering into a dialog box and tabbing to another section of the dialog box to then enter the data. If that isn't archaic I dont know what is. CA operation to change line thickness: 1. Double Click Line. 2. Enter Dialog Box. 3. Click Tab Below for line properties. 4. Select Line Thickness text.* 5. Change Text to new line thickness. 6. Click "OK" (enter). Vectorworks operation to change line thickness: 1. Select line options on menu. (click hold) 2. Scroll to line thickness desired. (release same mouse click above) *Note: I know many people have layers setup so they select the layer properties in place - still an operation, and may even need scrolling. Vectorworks doesn't have a "ribbon" but it does contain some data fields in the upper section as well.

So to be clear, you can't pre-select a layer and "draw" CAD lines on that layer using its attributes? I dont use CA enough to know this off hand, but I dont think i've realized that before. You guys are saying you have to (1) create a 2D shape, and then (2) change layer to = 2D object with custom defined attributes different than what is set for "Current CAD Layer". I thought there was a way to draw on a specific layer (with its attributes) using the "Layer Set" (or whatever it is) option. Maybe I am wrong.

Yeah, Revit and Autocad have it too - heck, MOST apps now have either/or both combination ribbon or floating or dock-able tool-pallets that take the place of dialog boxes. Typically the information changes real-time as you select an object. Here is a screen shot of Revit.