Archnot-Boltz

My co-worker switched to SP two years ago and thinks that SP is oriented more towards builder details and what it takes to design and draft a set of construction documents. SP (he tells me daily) focuses on fixing things that a builder/designer needs while Chief lets us languish with no Framing for Stairs and Landings. SP gives you automatic joist hanger placement. SP gives you automatic secondary graspable railings that are required by the IRC. and I could go on. From my own perspective and initial use of SP back in 1997 when it was still a DOS program (and the first CAD software that I could wrap my architectural designer head around), SP was a much more mature program than Chief '97 which was 3D Home Architect on steroids and seemed initially, a bit "Mickey Mouse" in comparison. Ultimately, purchasing Chief came down to a better brain to hand interface that felt more like drawing than CAD drafting combined with a great intro price deal of $699.00 (can't remember if more or less) vs about $1900.00 for SP which I couldn't afford in 1998. I've always thought that Chief and Softplan should be bought out by a savy tech company with deep pockets like a Google (except they dropped the ball with Sketchup) and marry SP to Chief and Sketchup and have a badarse baby. But that ain't happening in my lifetime (unless Elon Musk is listening!?). To finish, I'm wondering if X-16 has addressed any of these glaringly missing construction drawing tools that SP has been implementing? Or did we just get another Grand Cabinet Library?! -BB

Is it me or does it seem anything but intuitive to not just be able to create and modify a schedule and have it automatically able to be send to layout? Create CAD Detail from View is a convoluted process by not just sending a PRE-Cropped View and having to delete all the superfluous crap in order to have a clean detail. I had to look up this string on Google in order to remember how to send a schedule to layout. Fortunately, I've been able to do additions and such without schedules but indure the pain everytime I need to include them in my drawings.

Seems like a suggestions request item to me. Maybe it's been addressed in X16! bb

Hey Dermot, I just edited my post, there's no issue with the Mod-Bit roof material pattern but the issue does occur with the CAD lines that I had evidentally drawn manually but forgot.. I couldn't get your phone tech (Devin) to get the same results so I'm sending the plan in with "Attention Devin".- Thanks BB

Ok, here attached is an image of an issue that I occaissionally have and can never figure out why when creating a Line of Text with a Leader line arrow, I sometimes get a second arrow at the change of leader line direction (elbow). This is frustrating when it happens but I figured out the issue today. In my attached image, my roofing material is Modified Bitument and for some reason, the horizontal lines of this material pattern are individually selectable as CAD Lines. (while on the phone with Tech Support, I realized that I must have manually drawn the horizontal lines on my roof elevation view, so there's nothing wierd with the Mod-Bit roof pattern, my Bad) When I try to play a text line with leader arrow (Chief continues to name these "dumb" which is misleading), I get two leader lines with arrows . When I place the same text line with leader arrow in a different space off to the side of the roof, I get the expected result of one arrow. Also in my image, I created a CAD Polygon (I still don't know what a polyline is from my days in geometry class - to me, a polyline would be an un-closed polygon) with horizontal CAD lines 0.25" OC. When I place a line of Text with a leader line and arrow, I get the same issue as I did placing my text object on my roof plane. So, the problem is occurring because Chief's Leader Lines with Arrows are CAD items on a CAD layer and I think they should be Text Items on a Separate Text Layer. When you Underline a section of Text, Chief doesn't treat the underline as a separate CAD Line, so why do it with our Text Leader Lines and Arrows? So, is this a Bug or just a "fringe benefit" of Chief's layering logic? I'm open for the critiques, bring em!!

Ok Chief, I've raised this issue on several occasions and yet, in x15, it's still an issue. Why don't (can't???) you fix this dumb anomaly that's been plaguing (apparently only me because no one else seems to find issue, or care enough to *****, yes, it's now a ***** and will remain that way until addressed). Please see the attached OFFENDING ridge beam. I'm not showing the similar issue with rafter tails because I've posted that image many times and Chief knows what it is. Typically for all instances it's because Chiefs framing clips rafters and ridge beams anytime they cross an exterior wall. That transition has somehow befuddled the development and programing staff for at least a decade. But, hey, thanks for adding a gazillion cabinet manufacturers to the library (your generic cabinets work just dang fine and I wish you would give us a separate library with just smart objects (joist hangers, downspouts, standard in-basement oil tank, generic collumns with sizes based on the column shaft and not the dang column base etc).this is a different non related ***** so please ignore. Thank you for any replies from the company because that's who I've been paying since 1997 with every upgrade and SSA payment.-BB

Hey Chief, back again regarding Temporary Dimensions and their Default settings. Why don't your temp dims locate short walls (see attached). You can only access Temp Dims defaults in the Plan Defaults but not in the Dimensions Defaults where you can set defaults for all dimensions Except Temporary Dimensions, Why wouldn't you include the ability to set Temp Dims in this dbx? This is the most accessible and logical. thanks-BB

Mostly agree.

And thus the reason for this discussion. You just made the OP something that Chief should consider. Too bad you will have to repost it as a NEW Suggestion per the current suggestion "Protocol".

It's all about options. Why would you go from having to do nothing to now having to create another dang library item to find? Bounding Box on by default and then Toggle off to install TP Holders etc. Or how about the Bounding Box have enough intelligence to snap to the finish wall surface and ignore the TP holders etc? Just stating opinion regarding the OP, not doing battle. OP is a constructive suggestion.

Plus One. Chief has been known to take away functions thinking they made something better. In lieu of taking away a user friendly function or feature, how about an On/Off toggle and keeping the original function as the Out of the Box Default. Case in Point (see attached). In this example Chief did the Right Thing (thank you) and gave us a Toggle Option. Unfortunately they did it backwards when they released X15 and made it Wrong (or different?) Out of the Box by Default. Had to call phone support and Ask WTF? They did the same backwards Default thing in X14 when they by default Turned of the Manual Roof Intersection Points and you had to find the setting to turn them back on in order to properly intersect roof planes manually because they thought or wanted users to use the automatic roof creation tool more.

Very Nice Mark, but it would still be nice to have in the door tools and not have to do the work a round.

How about making it a request.? All the programmers would have to do is modify a bi-fold and rotate it 90 degrees.

We already have Big Ass Fans in our library (i think).

Easier to delete than to create. Plus Chief's names have drawing intelligence built in.