Archnot-Boltz

Not a hijack, just embellishments to the OP.

I'm complaining about a lack of consistency and expectations here. From the get-go, I never understood why the North Arrow Pointer was a CAD item, but it always was and now it ain't! At the very least, because of the change it should have appeared with the Sun Arrow in a separate area of the menu by defauld. Instead, you have to search it out, find it and then drag to a random spot in your menu.

Usually, when doing porch additions etc, I just work backwards and raise my beams to create the proper birdsmouth. I use cad lines and the elevation marker tool which shows the absolute elevation in section or elevation views. In the case of the porch roof not framing to a 10 ft raised porch ceiling, I would then just Raise the Offending roof planes 12" and then manually reframe each roof plane. This back and forth bs by having to create and recreate different false ceiling hgts is a crap way of doing business (which you have to do when creating knee walls in attic rooms for example).

Ok, now we're in x15. Did we gain the ability to selectively remove a curb edge? Thus far, I'm struggling with the new library browser and trying to remove a curb at a 4 way curbed street intersection. Plus One to the OP and I'm now requesting that x15's inadequacy in this department be improved in x16.

Dear Chief, please let me know why I shouldn't be requesting that the North Arrow (and probably the Sun Angle Arrow) be added back to the CAD Tool Pallet. See attached illustration. I was able to add the tool to my Child Pulldown (icons) bar and place it beside the CAD Line Tool but would maybe prefer the option to have it back in the pallet. Maybe it's better where I have it now because it's more obvious but a head scratcher to find at first and I don't recall any documentation on on how best to use it other than to look for it under the regular CAD pulldown word menu. Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

This is why we need the ability to specify individual bearing heights with walls or cad (bearing line) lines.

Would be a great Option. Plus 3 to add to the OP.

And your amendment or commentary to the OP is a logical improvement. Plus Two (2)

Where do your clients poop!? In the corner pocket?

Yeah, but why did they spend the time to reduce what we already had?! Senseless.

Porch designation always defaults to creating a Slab floor structure, Porch Frost Walls should default to bottom of Slab and should not create this issue. Chief has all of this automated crap and why do you have to jump through hoops for such a simple construction detail ? Maybe some of their resources should be diverted from interior design and cabinets to the real reason for this program's existence- Construction!

Nothing to be sorry about, your post was pertinant and additive. I gave your comment a Heart. thanks

Ok Chief, thanks for the improvements in X15 (Except I'm still struggling with your Revised Library Browser and the Extra mouse clicks). But Why In The Heck did you reduce the number of Room Names from 39 (Nice) to 31 (Not Nice, actually counter productive or retrogressive)??????????????????????????? When you changed Master Bath to Ensuite, ok you bowed to political woke correctness (but I let you have that one because you don't need the woke police up your economic butt). And the same for changing Master Bedroom to Primary Bedroom (which I changed back to Master so big whup). But, what was the logic or benefit to users for reducing the Room Name List and eliminating Ensuite, Primary Bedroom, Bedroom 1,2 & 3? Also, you eliminated Powder (why because powder could be construed to be a white snortable substance?!!). My request, suggestion is:1) Please Patch the Program and give an x14 Room Name Default Options and 2) How about adding the following to the existing, Bedroom (Existing Bedroom), Primary Bedroom (Existing Master Bedroom), Bath (Existing Bath), Powder (Existing Powder), Living (Existing Living) etc, you get it. This would save a lot of menu editing and benefit all users. Thanks for your consideration.-BB

This issue relates to all things wrong with the ongoing porch slab, porch room, porch railing, porch roof beams, porch foundation walls issue. My attached example is only illustrating the one issue of the porch slab being created inside the foundation walls instead of flush with the outside edge of the foundation wall. I will now have to 1)Draw a 4" Thick Slab at (-)7" that overhangs the Foundation Walls by 1 to 1.5" and if I want to stop the Z-fighting, will have to set the slab 1/16" higher than the Porch Room Floor height. Or please tell me what I'm doing wrong because if there's a right, it ain't Intuitive. Thanks-bb

Good afternoon Dermot, this issue was first brought up on Chieftalk by me several versions ago. The current same issue is occurring in X15. I did report it as a bug and sent it in and can't imagine that others haven't done the same. I just figured since the "bug" was never fixed that it's not a bug so, I'm suggesting that it be resolved in a future version. But, I will again send it in as a recurring bug that has yet to be fixed. thanks-bb

and the Beat Goes On!

Good morning Chief. Can you please fix this unwanted Rafter Clipping that still occurs in X15. I made this suggestion years ago and it's still an unwanted issue that causes inaccurate roof section displays. This is not acceptable for a Professional Design Software. Please fix goofy items that drive me (and presumably other users) crazy. See my attached roof section as a picture is still worth a thousand excuses. -thanks

Another glaring issue with Chief is something that I noticed in your image regarding how Chief still clips rafters wrong. Am hoping to find that they fixed this in x15 but haven't had a chance to check it yet. I think that your issue regarding the requested rafter splicing option over a beam or bearing wall is an excellent and logical request. bb

I agree with Doug. Greed is a bit strong and I would believe self preservation, making a reasonable profit and making enough to do adequate R&D all come strongly into play. It's a simple business model, they have to make money or why bother. Hopefully, they will be able to sustain.

Bingo! Very nicely stated. Looks like you've been taking a serious look for comparison. My co-worker would definitely concur.

Softplan is the name. Sorry for the abbreviation.

Obviously, there's No arguement from me regarding the perpetual licensing thing. SP still gives both options and their perpetual license wasn't much more expensive than Chief's. Their monthly subcription at $95 per month is half of Chief's. Their work-flow and drawing methodology is a bit more indirect in that you can't as easily draw first and ask questions later like you can in Chief. Chief kicks arse in preliminary design work and SP kicks arse in materials take-offs an reality of construction drawings. Also allows multiple options within the same base plane without having to do Save As multiple plans (Existing Conditions, Demo Plan and multiple plan options such as Bath 1 w/shower, Bath 2 w/ tub shower etc). On what basis are you so emphatic about Chief's superiority over SP? I used SP briefly back in the late 90's and my coworker, who's a long time veteran Chief user (since Chief 6) and turned me on to Chief in '97 is currently running SP thru it's paces and anxiously awaiting SP2024. I have high hopes for X15 but don't see how an architect would choose Chief over SP. The fact that interior designers and kitchen designers prefer Chief is sort of telling about Chief's not giving the builder, architects a little better in the nuts and bolts department. To continue beating my dead horse: Decks, Stairs, Railings, Beams and Framing, still need work to get up to an architect's level of required detail and model accuracy. Love Chief and hope they continue to improve. But will also be demoing SP to see the grass on the other side. bb

Humble Chief is correct in his assessment that this thread is moot. The die has been cast and those of us who are continuing with SSA are currently hitched to the wagon and continuing on the path. If I were coming in fresh out of the cold, I'd take SP at $95.00 per month hands down (but that's just me).

I don't mind getting a downvote as everyone is entitled to an opinion. Only problem is you don't know if they are downvoting my entire post or a specific portion. A rebuttal is a better response and accomplishes more.

Ok, I can't recall exactly what things cost during all the transitions and thanks for the correction. Actually before SSA, you paid for each upgrade which occurred approximately every two years or so. I recall paying 199.00 to upgrade from Chief 97 to V8? The problem with SSA was that, for awhile, it was cheaper to not pay SSA and skip a version upgrade that didn't seem to do much and then upgrade at the end of season when the next upgrade went on sale. I'm ok with the current cost of SSA vs the subscription cost and hope they keep making it available to us if it allows the program to be sustainable without getting new customers. Of course, the best way for Chief to get new customers would be to fix (not make more complex) the missing or flawed pieces in the program and get more architects. We need real beams, beam pockets, auto joist hangers, definable wall plate heights(in lieu of defining wall hgts with room ceiling hgts which is limiting and makes the drawings unstable etc). Shoot, our CAD doesn't yet have a good rotate around a point tool.-bb