Why not use plugins?

tfdesign

Doing without plugins...a stupid way for me. It's really not a big effort to understand the way to install and use them, so I think that people don't use these just by ignorance.

Do you not think this is a rather arrogant attitude to adopt? I have just modelled an entire 600 year old gothic church, in SU7, without a single plugin. Today I threw out SU Animate because it kept crashing SU. I agree with Toxicvoxel. CAD managers hate things like this, and it is easy to see why. A good, well designed CAD systems shouldn't have to have externally developed tool plugins. The functionality should already be there, within the toolset.

toxicvoxel

[I haven't read the whole thread so my apologies if this has been noted before.]

Some fundamental reasons why plugins are not used:

1.CAD managers hate them.
IT/CAD managers know that their responsibilities increase exponentially with the number of
applications they support. Deploying a suite of scripts developed by enthusiastic albeit amateur
developers can be a huge responsibility as they can easily be broken by OS /host application
updates and script incompatibilities. Some company IT managers feel so strongly about this that they will not even try to solve the problem but will simply reformat and reinstall a partition image
containing a standard application installation set on the user machine. The larger the company the more difficult it is to find a balance between maintaining robust system stability and deploying new technology.

2. Scripts create lock-in.
However useful they may be, they are often bound to a specific application or application version
with no updates available because the developers are no longer actively developing the system.
(Especially true when it comes to free and shared scripts.) This leaves you with the option of
staying with an older version of the host application or to upgrade and discard the script. (- Hell, this even happens when I upgrade Windows!)

Another aspect of this syndrome is that one becomes so dependant on the customisations that you
cannot move on to new and a better design technology when it becomes available.

The answer to this possibly is to build customisations in an application-neutral way so that
user investment in learning & deployment do not become redundant when the next generation of design software takes off. From a developer's perspective developing with such a strategy brings the benefit of portability but possibly at the expense of tight integration with host applications.

3.Management have burnt their fingers.
I know of a few examples where a company had the benefit of having a proactive CAD manager who had over a period of years developed the CAD production system through customisation. When that member of staff left the practice there was nobody that could pick up the system and support it. After struggling for a few months the management pulled the plug and issued instruction that all software had to be replaced with standard installations with a complete ban on customisations. When the the support issues start to negate the productivity benefits, the use of plugins no longer remain a viable option.

Panga

I don't think it's arrogant, and maybe I expressed myself the wrong way. I'm only speaking from my experience. All thoses plugins helped a lot in the past, and are still helping me today.

I totally agree with the fact that all the tools that those plugins offers could be implemented in SketchUp, but I'm not sure this is the good way for two reasons :

Not everyone needs all the functions that those plugins offers, and SkecthUp is aim to be a simple and intuitive software. And for this, the native interface and tools panel of SU are good.
Then, all thoses plugins can slow down the system and make it unstable sometimes, as you mentioned.

I'm happy for you that you success to make big and detailled model without any plugin. But just tell me, what should I have to spend three hours on a work, that a plugin is able to do in 5 minutes, and as a landscape architect, I can tell this is often the case...

Then, you tell that a well designed cad system shouldn't to have externally developped tool plugins : I think this is arrogant. Because telling this, is telling that people who makes software are "gods" and all those great guys working and adding essential functions through plugins are just foolish guys, don't you think ?

The time where all software makers worked alone in a closed world is over, today the community is here to help people and software makers.

Without any arrogance and animosity, see u soon.

PeterCharles

@unknownuser said:

3.Management have burnt their fingers.
I know of a few examples where a company had the benefit of having a proactive CAD manager who had over a period of years developed the CAD production system through customisation. When that member of staff left the practice there was nobody that could pick up the system and support it. After struggling for a few months the management pulled the plug and issued instruction that all software had to be replaced with standard installations with a complete ban on customisations. When the the support issues start to negate the productivity benefits, the use of plugins no longer remain a viable option.

The only managers who get their fingers burnt are the incompetent ones. The ones who invest in new application, have it installed in 'out of the box' form then wonder why they they don't get the productivity return they anticipated!

Our first CAD system was chosen by an engineer who then had the sense to allocate one of the users to be the 'development' draughtsman who went on to create a whole raft of macro's that doubled productivity. This system was later dropped in favour of AutoCAD (as you can pick up an ACAD draughtsman outside Woolworths) and out went the customisation of the old system, and down went productivity (although the new management failed to notice this).

When Inventor was introduced one key reason was it's ability to produce flat pattern dxf files. But the laser didn't like the files produced 'at the click of the button' and management kept saying that Inventor didn't produce dxf files. I had many heated discussions saying it was our problem because we wanted dxf files with bells and whistles, and these could be produced with the correct workflow and customisation. It's all in the box, you just need to use it. It's a bit like sitting down to a steak and using a spoon because that's all that's at your place setting even though a box of knives and forks is at the end of the table.

Marian

I worked these few days with Paint dot Net, the SU of the 2d world, free and Simple. I hadn't realised that it had plug-ins at all, i just didn't question it, that's what i got and that's what i used.
I think this is the reason why most people, not businesses, don't use plug-ins is they just don't know or think that they exist, out of sight out of mind, most probably don't bother to take a look in the installation folder to notice there is a plugins folder.

I think if Google advertised the existence of plugins, added a small tutorial to the ones that explain the basics when you first install SU, the users which would use them would at least double.

liam887

I modelled for 3 yrs without using any plugins. Not serious work just playing about while in college. When I started getting better and posting some of my work at scifi meshes some of the other users who use SU pointed me here.
I was amazed by the range of plugins, by this time I was aquatinted with 3dsmax so knew about subdivision etc but to actually have it in SU was amazing. Haven't looked back since.
But everyone is right about google, they should include some of these plugins and more people would get involved. SU is thought of as a sub-standard package you wouldn't believe the bad press I get when I tell people I use it lol eg:

%(#FF0000)[Buggy Virus | Fabled Legendary Member
jaw drops

god...]

%(#00BF00)[liam887live | Member
To many peoples suprise I only use google Sketchup. Its a free software that anybody can use and you dont need a supercomputer to run it you should give it a spin. Ive got the pro version but the only difference is I can export to other file formats, all the actual toolsets and interfaces are exactly the same and there is nothing you cant model in the pro version you cant model in the free version.]

Buggy Virus | Fabled Legendary Member
%(#FF0000)[Oh wait, these are sketch up models, I thought they were .3ds files.

They are still good, I'm just not in as much awe as I was before.]

It goes on with many more examples.

I think google need to make more people aware of the plugins, after conversations ive had with people they see put off initially by SU imagining it to be the most inferior package you can get. I wonder what the story would be if @last still had it not an internet superpower.

Marian

@unknownuser said:

Buggy Virus | Fabled Legendary Member
jaw drops

god...

liam887live | Member
To many peoples suprise I only use google Sketchup. Its a free software that anybody can use and you dont need a supercomputer to run it you should give it a spin. Ive got the pro version but the only difference is I can export to other file formats, all the actual toolsets and interfaces are exactly the same and there is nothing you cant model in the pro version you cant model in the free version.

Buggy Virus | Fabled Legendary Member
Oh wait, these are sketch up models, I thought they were .3ds files.

They are still good, I'm just not in as much awe as I was before.

This is weird, i usually get even more amazement after I say I made that with Sketchup not less.
If they think SU is so primitive why would they be less impressed with a good model and not more, it would mean it was harder to model, right?
Humans, who can understand them.
I usually get something like this "I love your work, you should move on to 3ds max or in the very least Blender".

I agree that i should probably learn another application, but something complementing SU modeling, not switching to that completely. Why fix something that ain't broke?

@unknownuser said:

I wonder what the story would be if @last still had it not an internet superpower.

Probably a better product...for architects, but not free, and not used by so many as it is now. Besides who knows if it would have survived this crysis period. Su now is pretty well known and that drives sales, if you look at google trends for the word Sketchup you notice a significant increase from 2006 onwards.

Also here is the word Sketchup compared with the term 3ds max in google trends....."Fascinating!"

liam887

@unknownuser said:

This is weird, i usually get even more amazement after I say I made that with Sketchup not less.
If they think SU is so primitive why would they be less impressed with a good model and not more, it would mean it was harder to model, right?
Humans, who can understand them.
I usually get something like this "I love your work, you should move on to 3ds max or in the very least Blender".

Yeah I get that also but I was using it as an example of peoples feelings towards SU, sometimes they are very odd even among my 3D peers lol, this was an example!?!!? confusing yes.

@unknownuser said:

Probably a better product...for architects, but not free, and not used by so many as it is now. Besides who knows if it would have survived this crysis period. Su now is pretty well known and that drives sales, if you look at google trends for the word Sketchup you notice a significant increase from 2006 onwards.

Yeah didnt think about it like that you are prob right!

rickgraham

Being a completely newbie to SU and a CAD user for 20+ years - I think I have the one word answer - productivity.

For those who are doing SU for money (I envy you), if you can complete it sooner, you will most likely have repeat clients.

As for the example of CAD - I started out using plain AutoCAD. And then I got involved in writing lisp routines which automated many things. We can certainly call them add-ons or plug-ins. This has been replaced by VB and now #net. And if we take this a step further, any vertical used (Architecture, Civil 3D, etc.) are also plug-ins in the sense that I can still accomplish the same output drawing in plain AutoCAD but oh my, I would hate to do that (try creating an asymmetrical vertical curve in plain AutoCAD - it CAN be done, but oh boy..).

And for the CAD Manager - any CM worth his salt will test the app in a closed or test environment - or at least I do.

I hope I'm still around another 20+ years so I can learn everything I can from this fascinating program called SketchUp. And I'll throw a plug in - I would love to be on the beta test team for SU. I have been on the beta team for Autodesk for the past 4 years as well as other apps. I have Technical Edited AutoCAD books, have co-authored an AutoCAD book and hope to be TE for an upcoming SU book.

This site is awesome - mainly because the participants in it. I learn so much every time I visit. You are my inspiration to reach higher heights with this program.

Rick

rickgraham

@unknownuser said:

@rickgraham said:

hope to be TE for an upcoming SU book.
Rick

Sounds interesting..... is it top secret?

Yeah, can't say anything further - sorry.

Rick