Power Users Preventing Needed Changes in Chief

[DavidJPotter]

I think some persons here feel like another's opinion that differs from theirs is somehow a personal threat to their integrity. As I have said before, the purpose of this forum is to offer help in the here and now. This forum has a "Suggestions" forum for make suggestions for future change.

 

Continuing to declare guilty the generality of Chief Inc or this forum and its users is just to impune a generality (everybody knows..., everyone feels...) there  is no such entity as "everyone" there is only you and me. Using such tactics are merely the tools of unhappy persons. I speak only for myself and I am happy about Chief now and Chief in the future, especially if we ignore the naysayers and just get the job done now.

 

DJP

[Alaskan_Son]

... "The Power User never recognizes he is a Power User?"

Sounds like some kind of addict group...PUA (Power Users Anonymous). The first step is to admit you're a user. If you're a POWER user...well then you're really in trouble.

[KevinWaldron]

Leave you guys with this since I started this thread

 

1) Chief could solve a number of problems for me if all screens/clips/ where WYSIWYG and live at all times....... and allow use of the Space Mouse as the builders intended

2) Allow access for third party software to offer options using the database and add -on's ( cabinet programs with CNC ready parts/pieces, structural programs, COGO Programs, Map Programs , Estimating Programs, Rendering Programs etc. for examples)

3) Allow more import / export options (for instance 3D PDF's both import and export, use of programs like Simlab Composer ..... true 3D models like STP, IGES, 3DM, being an example..... and at the same time allow more input as to dynamic 3D objects and XYZ coordinates .... there are many great 3D models available but we are limited with what we can import )

4) Make more intentional effort to follow current International Building Codes ( and/or other National and  International Codes) in regards to framing, stairs, windows, etc..... (example would be spring closer on garage door to house or Glue Lam for Garage door header and other major changes that seem to occur yearly. Software should automatically ask or place these items.......)

 

I'm not unhappy using other programs for doing various detail operations and not necessarily asking Chief to incorporate these... .... the frustration comes in being limited as to what I can import/export into Chief. One example is stairs this could be done in other 3D programs much easier than the current configuration with-in Chief..... either fix it or allow imports..... Period......... Also things like trusting that Chief  will keep us out of trouble with codes...... Good example that Chief does is placing a toilet.....it just want put it in a space that will not work according to code unless we override it.

 

Blessings, and thank you for at least kicking this around....

 

kevin

[Rashid_Garuba]

Code controls? That's a programming rabbit hole.. Who will be blamed for violations? Besides there are already enough unintended issues that occur due the the current level of over-automation.

[TheKitchenAbode]

Code controls? That's a programming rabbit hole.. Who will be blamed for violations? Besides there are already enough unintended issues that occur due the the current level of over-automation.

 

What a nightmare that would be. Here in Canada we have a National Building Code, then each province has their version and then major cities/locals have their versions. That's just the main building code. Then there are the separate codes for Electrical, HVAC and more. They are constantly changing via amendments and of coarse major revisions every 5 years or so. Last time I was involved it was even more complex in the USA.

 

Would not give that suggestion 5 seconds worth of consideration.

 

Graham

[dshall]

......

.....

Would not give that suggestion 5 seconds worth of consideration.

 

....

 

 

I would give it less time.

[johnny]

Lets just be honest.  3D shape tools, including snapping, rotating, grouping/instancing, and overall view restrictions....are awful.....just awful.  Chief needs to understand this for changes to occur and any defense of those tools makes little sense to me.

 

There are free web-based apps for children that are more dynamic and flexible than what Chief offers.

[HumbleChief]

Lets just be honest.  3D shape tools, including snapping, rotating, grouping/instancing, and overall view restrictions....are awful.....just awful.  

Yes they are awful but I find I really need them very little in my work flow. I can clearly understand why you would want them improved (and so would I), coming from your background with Vectorworks but I just don't need them much in my day to day work with Chief. I'll need an occasional corbel, molding,bracket or symbol and I can use Chief to create those fast and easy using the tools as is. Took a while to figure them out (because of the awful mentioned above) and that's a huge downside in my book, but once understood - not so bad. 

 

I wonder how many people really need the tools to be improved, versus those who merely want them to be improved like myself?

[MarkMc]

I'm of the "would be nice but there are more important things " I'd like to see taken care of.

I do run into situations that drive me nuts, I dislike SU and find TurboCad tedious for creation. But it is something I can easily get around. One recent symbol project spurred me on to download FormZ, FreeCAD, and DesignCAD. Already nixed the last one, will give FormZ a spin in my (not so) spare time and see how important this is to me.

[yusuf-333]

Yes they are awful but I find I really need them very little in my work flow. I can clearly understand why you would want them improved (and so would I), coming from your background with Vectorworks but I just don't need them much in my day to day work with Chief. I'll need an occasional corbel, molding,bracket or symbol and I can use Chief to create those fast and easy using the tools as is. Took a while to figure them out (because of the awful mentioned above) and that's a huge downside in my book, but once understood - not so bad.

I wonder how many people really need the tools to be improved, versus those who merely want them to be improved like myself?

Larry the said improvements do not diminish the as is, by any means! I think chief should be moving forward and be able to fix the broken links, it already does it, but lacks the integrity between views. which isn't logically acknowledged deficiency of the codes. I would like to see that one fixed.

[ComputerMaster86]

I always worry about the "If isn't broke don't fix it." Some software companies will go to great lengths to change their software and end up making their software worse rather than improved. I am all for change if it truely improves Chief Architect. I would hate for the so-called improvents to end up changing or making worse what is already good about CA. So far I really like many of the changes that were made in CA version X8.

[ComputerMaster86]

I firmly believe there is no one perfect CADD program out there. I have used different CADD and drafting software in the past. AutoCAD, TurboCAD, Architectural Desktop (AutoCAD Architecture) and SolidWorks to just name a few. I firmly believe they all have their strengths and weeknesses.

[DavidJPotter]

I believe Dermot Dempsey once explained on the Old Chief Talk that they have an on going list of feature requests and bug fixes. The existing list of those back then was and is a large list. The powers that be have meetings to discuss future changes weighed against the actual person power they have at hand. And then decide what to implement in the next version. That is a continual on going process. Not all possible features can be added at once. What they had was able and useful and they have consistently improved their products. Is it perfect in every way, NO. Power users and others are not magicians, they can only tell you want works now based upon their own experiences. Pronouncing Power users and Chief Architect Inc guilty of not being all things to all people is a ridiculous proposal proposed  by unreasonable, unhappy persons who do not have enough real problems in their lives to have a proper prospective. It is not perfect nor do I see it becoming perfect in the near future but it is good enough for me now.

 

DJP

[Richard_Morrison]

Pronouncing Power users and Chief Architect Inc guilty of not being all things to all people is a ridiculous proposal proposed  by unreasonable, unhappy persons who do not have enough real problems in their lives to have a proper prospective.

 

Good thing that these sadly mistaken persons are balanced by the judgmental, scolding people who understand everything!

[Gawdzira]

In the words of Dorothy: "Are you a good gripe or a bad gripe?" At least that is how I remember it.

[HumbleChief]

Larry the said improvements do not diminish the as is, by any means! I think chief should be moving forward and be able to fix the broken links, it already does it, but lacks the integrity between views. which isn't logically acknowledged deficiency of the codes. I would like to see that one fixed.

Agreed there is lots to fix but the priority of those fixes will vary from person to person and that balancing act within Chief to change features is not an easy one.

 

I've given up trying to change their list with my suggestions but instead of feeling defeated I feel pretty confident that they will improve the program in ways that will help my business. No doubt others will be very disappointed no matter which direction they choose to go.

[johnny]

Yes they are awful but I find I really need them very little in my work flow. I can clearly understand why you would want them improved (and so would I), coming from your background with Vectorworks but I just don't need them much in my day to day work with Chief. I'll need an occasional corbel, molding,bracket or symbol and I can use Chief to create those fast and easy using the tools as is. Took a while to figure them out (because of the awful mentioned above) and that's a huge downside in my book, but once understood - not so bad. 

 

I wonder how many people really need the tools to be improved, versus those who merely want them to be improved like myself?

 

I can't help but think the reason people dont use shape/component modeling in their process is based largely on how bad Chief is at it currently.  If someone could aptly use generic shapes right along side architectural elements/tools as easily as it is in other apps I couldn't help think this would quickly become a major part of their process.

 

Another thing I want to be clear is that im not just talking about modeling shapes - rather the rapid ability to mimic architectural objects with shapes...and have them organized in a way to make modification easy post-creation.  

[HumbleChief]

I can't help but think the reason people don't use shape/component modeling in their process is based largely on how bad Chief is at it currently.  If someone could aptly use generic shapes right along side architectural elements/tools as easily as it is in other apps I couldn't help think this would quickly become a major part of their process.

 

Another thing I want to be clear is that I'm not just talking about modeling shapes - rather the rapid ability to mimic architectural objects with shapes...and have them organized in a way to make modification easy post-creation.  

EDIT: I was actually confirming your theory Johhny and it was true in my early days of using Chief.

 

When I first started using Chief I didn't understand ANY part of the paradigm or process that Chief employs. Nothing. I wanted to free hand shapes and get my designs from my head to paper as fast as possible and Chief literally made that impossible, with the way I was approaching it, versus the way Chief actually worked.

 

So, so frustrating and I think if there were 3D tools that would have allowed those ideas to be created easier and more intuitively I would have been all over them and singing their praises.

 

After learning Chief over many years I can now model ideas pretty quickly, using Chief's tools but it was a really painful learning curve because my brain wants to work much more free style than Chief allows.

 

Like I posted above I don't use 3D stuff that much within Chief but I hope future versions help with your needs Johnny (and please keep requesting same) and maybe open up some possibilities I hadn't thought of. 

[yusuf-333]

Agreed there is lots to fix but the priority of those fixes will vary from person to person and that balancing act within Chief to change features is not an easy one.

 

I've given up trying to change their list with my suggestions but instead of feeling defeated I feel pretty confident that they will improve the program in ways that will help my business. No doubt others will be very disappointed no matter which direction they choose to go.

thanks Larry, I understand your point. and agree with this one.

[kMoquin]

an "Architect" is the LAST thing that Chief needs.

productive comment right there

[johnny]

an "Architect" is the LAST thing that Chief needs.

 

I guess that makes sense for a product/company called Chief "Architect".  Kinda like saying the last thing a home builder needs is a contractor.

[johnny]

EDIT: I was actually confirming your theory Johhny and it was true in my early days of using Chief.

 

When I first started using Chief I didn't understand ANY part of the paradigm or process that Chief employs. Nothing. I wanted to free hand shapes and get my designs from my head to paper as fast as possible and Chief literally made that impossible, with the way I was approaching it, versus the way Chief actually worked.

 

So, so frustrating and I think if there were 3D tools that would have allowed those ideas to be created easier and more intuitively I would have been all over them and singing their praises.

 

After learning Chief over many years I can now model ideas pretty quickly, using Chief's tools but it was a really painful learning curve because my brain wants to work much more free style than Chief allows.

 

Like I posted above I don't use 3D stuff that much within Chief but I hope future versions help with your needs Johnny (and please keep requesting same) and maybe open up some possibilities I hadn't thought of. 

 

Thanks Larry - appreciate the discussion.   I think your assessment is probably very accurate for a lot of us...we come in wanting things to work a certain way and have to learn the "Chief" method.  Every app has a learning curve to it, but I appreciate apps that let you approach the same issue from different directions.  The most basic is 3d modeling and having a decent method to work in that mode allows projects to be finished even its not exactly the best way to complete something.

 

The way Chief is now its either you know how to use a tool or you aren't getting the project done.  I dont think thats good.

[Ed_Downunder]

Does Chief listen. Do power users remove the responsibility from Chief to improve.

 

In my view they (Chief) does listen and prioritise. I need to get my drawing printed and out the door and I resist a workaround. So I have to compromise sometimes.

 

Auto update to layout was a fantastic upgrade that came from the user group (power users - maybe - but more importantly it came from interested users contributing their thoughts and engaged with Chief moderators)

 

Story Pole: another example of an upgrade driven by the user group.

 

Stairs - the list goes on. 

 

Like many I have had harsh words to say, driven by frustration and the clock. After I have had my grumble I boot up Chief again and appreciate it does a good job for most of my work.

 

Like many here I will look forward to Beta X9 where serious thought and consideration goes into new and upgraded features. Who knows it may even have foundations tool upgrade or perhaps a working practical materials list and let's not stop wishing for an improved macro set or Ruby Consul.

[kMoquin]

Well said Ed

[dshall]

+1

 

Well said Ed