SU 9 Wishlist
-
@sixingno1 said:
buy all these plugins and install them for us!!!!!!!
wtf ?? you don't know how to copy a file in C:\Program Files\Google\Google Sketchup X\Plugins ??
Any financial investment made by somebody (eg, Google) asks for recovering... maybe a not-so-free Free version of SU
-
@sixingno1 said:
buy all these plugins and install them for us!!!!!!!
Google, like so many other companies with paid creative help have a syndrome called the "NIH Factor" or better known as "Not Invented Here". Almost any "outside" idea cannot possibly be as good as what the paid help came up with.
Witness the countless good ideas made in this forum and in others over the years that are simply ignored or at best feebly explained away. Even the ones that WILL counter some obvious poorly thought out omissions and errors, and even some bugs.So the Ruby magicians fill the void, thank you.
But that being said, and having been in the s/w development game a lot of years (but not recently) there is a valid reason for not just simply incorporating the best externally developed Rubies into SU, aside from the accreditation and compensation issues.
Any large s/w development department has certain written or accepted standards of code structure and documentation, whether good, bad or indifferent, they have to have them. I can state unequivocally none of the external Rubies written follow those standards, mainly because those standards are not publicly known, and more likely, the Ruby magician has his own standards, or quite often, has to deliberately get around some standard that may impede performance or the function needed to make the Ruby work.
So the better part of the reticence to incorporate a really good solution is that the paid creative help have to transform that external code into the acceptable form, and the paid creative help really hate mucking about in somebody else's code. I've been there.
And, the Ruby magician is reluctant to reform his code to the standard, assuming he will be privy to it, because he has better creative fish to fry, and the transformation job is too much like real work, even if he is subsequently paid
and acknowledged for it. 
-
Here's an important argument against bundling plugins: SketchUp release cycles vs induvidual release cycles. Does anyone really want to sit waiting for a new SketchUp release to have their favourite bundles plugins updated?
And another; what plugins suits you, will not suit the next person. So end up with someone always being unhappy because their favorite plugin is not bundled, or you end up with bloat because every freakkin plugin out there is bundled. cough cough AutoCAD cough
-
I would tend to agree with thomthom. Although I think some of the more obvious or basic plugins could be incorporated, it's nice to not be beholden to waiting for Google to come up with updates to each of these. It would be nice, however, since plugins are so crucial, if Google setup a centralized location which housed all of the plugins, allowed ranking, etc. Sort of like going to mozilla to find firefox plugins. And along with that should be the option to be notified when one of your plugins has been updated.
-Brodie
-
@unknownuser said:
It would be nice, however, since plugins are so crucial, if Google setup a centralized location which housed all of the plugins, allowed ranking, etc. Sort of like going to mozilla to find firefox plugins. And along with that should be the option to be notified when one of your plugins has been updated.
-Brodie
Does it has to be Google?
-
Ideally I would tend to say yes. They've got a model via the Chrome extensions page that would work well and it would be the most intuitive for new users to have a google run page (all things being equal the google warehouse wouldn't be as popular as it is today if it didn't have google's name attached).
This would also afford a better possibility to access this page and install scripts directly from within SU (not unlike the warehouse access or google earth).
Additionally this might help to make installing plugins a bit more intuitive. It's not a tricky process once you've done it, but most initial users have never had to actually paste something in a folder and manually restart the program (or delve into the ruby console) to install a plugin. People are used to that sort of thing happening automagically when they click an .exe file or similar. This may be a separate matter, but I think that if google housed all of the scripts it would be more likely that this process would be streamlined, as is the case when you add a chrome plugin, for example. 3ds Max doesn't have a single warehouse for their plugins and I find it very frustrating - moreso than SU even. I've no idea what's available, I end up not knowing what to do with the files when I download them, and when I do install it, I may never find out where it's at within the program. SU isn't that bad but could be much less clunky than it is now in terms of getting, installing, and using scripts.
-Brodie
-
I think Google would maybe have done that already. But they haven't for what ever reasons.
@thomthom said:
Does it has to be Google?
-
There's no control on the dross the Google 3dWarehouse offers - Google don not have any resources dedicated to filtering a submission's quality - unless it's GoogleEarth related etc...
If there was an equivalent Google "PluginsWarehouse" it would be the same again.
The danger of installing a script from an unknown author is that it could cause havoc - think of it as 'the virus you install yourself'...
At least when you get scripts from 'us' at SCF [or SMustard etc] you 'know' the authors and so you know it's likely to be kosher... and where to complain/feedback etc... Also most are free or inexpensive too.We are currently having some debates in the Mods' forum about what to do about certain 'already posted' scripts, that are known to cause clashes/problems - albeit inadvertently [we haven't yet has any that deliberately mess up !]
-
The warehouse needs some improvements, certainly, but I'll again point to something like the chrome or firefox addon pages. There's sufficient quality control there, there's a rating system, you don't need to worry about installing a virus, and everything is in one easy to find location.
I would suggest it's the other way around regarding security. Currently, so far as I can tell, SU is safe for the same reason Macs are safe. It's not that there are any wonderful safe guards in place here preventing nefariousness, it's just that it's a small enough user base that it's not worth the trouble. I could post a virus on the plugins forum and probably get a couple suckers to download it before someone caught it and deleted the post. I believe there are better safeguards at the sites I mentioned above.
-Brodie
-
So, do we have any idea when Sketchup 9 will be out or are we all just again subjected to the usual Google guessing game
-
@paulside said:
So, do we have any idea when Sketchup 9 will be out or are we all just again subjected to the usual Google guessing game
We are not yet a year into v8 - so v9 will arrive when it's ready...
Remember that this is not driven by profit like AutoCAD or Revit, where I'll be upgrading masses of 3rd party code for Revit r2013 et al early in the new year [Revit r2012 was finished and launched months ago - I know that should logically that should make it r2011... but then AutoDesk are always ahead of themselves]
-
@unknownuser said:
We are not yet a year into v8
It's just passed the year mark. It was released at BaseCamp 2010.
They might not broadcast their intentions like other companies but you can be sure they're not twiddling their thumbs. Every major release always bring good features IMO.
-
@unknownuser said:
Simple request: Please for all that is holy, why can't we arrange layers the way we want them instead of just alphabetically?
This has been driving me nuts since the beginning...
Chuck's right.
IMO, this is one of the two main focuses of V9 should productivity be a priority.I posted a few weeks ago about how Layers and the Outliner could be bought closer together functionally.
http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=40338
I know there are users that might use Outliner and love it however it's only really useful while modelling, not presentation with scenes, export to Layout, etc..Firstly, I use SU and LO for Architectural presentation so manipulation of geometry is paramount. for a long time now, I have tried many different ways of setting up my layer structure to try and facilitate the different ways of modelling / output for each project. It was only recently that I realized that this is the answer!!!!
Lets consider this:
• Leave Outliner as it is for those whose use it. The reason why I don't use it is that 'Outliner does not have any link to Scenes'. Hiding a group in Outliner and then saving the currently scene means it is hidden, period. Try going to any other scene and it is not visible. This has no use for saving to and exporting scenes to layer.• Re-work the Layer function to be in line with Outliner in that the layer nested groups and components are assigned would be nested within the parent layer. See example below:
This allows the user to at least have some control over his / her layer structure, visually as well as being a lot more functional. Not to mention if I'm in a group, create another group and want to assign it to a new layer that I should be able to click
in the Layer drop down and do so. This automatically creates a new layered named as required and 'nested' within the parent Layer group. You would even have the ability to move layers from group to group as required to be included in grouped visibility control.
A would be nice also in the Entity Info Box [Yep, I'm still harping on that one!!!] So, lets' think of workflow for a minute; say I have modeled a project on site and want to export a ground floor plan. I cut sections where required and create a new scene called same and save. Now I want to create a first floor layout. If I don't want my site to show beneath in the first floor layout I can SIMPLY turn off the parent 'SITE' layer.... BAM! No scrolling through the layer dialogue clicking here and clicking there to isolate geometry......
I would still expect to see the visibility toggle, color maybe [never used it] and of course the current layer circle to set current layer.
I would love to hear from any Googler's wandering the halls of SketchUcation with their thoughts on this....
The other 'main focus' I think for productivity should be the ability of Solid tools to be 'Live' and also be 'hidden' [or negative solids]
Assume you want to create a window in a wall. [Yes, thinking about myself here but it crosses all disciplines..]Create a Group to define the wall; create a Group to define the window with a nested solid group that would be made 'negative'. Now make a Component out of it and call it 'window'
With the ability to Trim solids now you could insert that window component into the wall and the negative solid would trim the wall to create an opening.Now the 'Live' thing. Seeing the negative solid is unique it could have the ability to be 'live' [stuffed if I know how; just throwing out ideas here...
] so that when you move the component with a nested 'negative' solid inside it the negative re-cuts its opening....Gjenio posted a similar idea of Live solids back in February: http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=30527&start=105 which expands on the idea.
Anyway, this is my wish for the next focus; what a beaut little program SU would be then....
-
That bloody well WORKS FOR ME
I achieve almost the same by hiearchial numbering my layers with a grouping of all the sub-layers in a top layer, so I can turn off the bunch with 1 click. Not smooth but it works. Utilier's way is by far a better way.
I also agree the Entity Info should be improved to show the layers that the entity resides in, not just the layer assigned to the entity, which is almost always Layer0. Editing an object buried deep in layers you lose track of which one you are working on.
With an Outliner style the objects layer could be highlighted when you enter edit mode.
-
Love the layer suggestions; hierarchical layer nesting would be fantastic! How sweet would something like that be for organizing and arranging scenes. Of course, outliner sucks on the mac and I never ever even use it, so the new layers window would have to actually function correctly.
And that adding a layer adds that layer, as visible, to all existing scenes is ridiculous and annoying. I know there is the add hidden layer plugin, but that is just as annoying because every time you add that layer to a scene, it defaults to invisible (off) and you have to go through all your layers turning back on the ones that were on, but were hidden layer plugin layers.
I also wish we could toggle off the inference engine; setting up points on a TIN is maddening when the darn lines keep snapping to an axis. So, then you have to zoom way way in, place the point, zoom extents, repeat 100 times. Lame.
And I don't like how SU, on MAC, starts up with a new document and then I have a new document window open until I close it. How about a dialogue like Layout gives us, where I can choose to open a recent doc without having a new one open. And how crazy is it that the windows version can only have one model open at a time?! That must drive you guys batty.
More Layout components/ native hatches, etc would help tons.
-
or how, if you have a doc minimized on the dock and half the time, when you bring it back up to work on, all of the inference points are giant white squares.
And one of my biggest pet peeves is I hate, and I truly, hate, that the move tool can rotate, too. How many times does it try to default to rotate when I never rotate with the move tool, and I have to zoom in to get it to revert, and then zoom back out to see where I am moving it. Time waster and it happens quite often.
Or, when locking the inference direction by holding down the shift key, it is impossible to rotate with the middle mouse button, as it defaults to panning. Why can't the inference lock work like a toggle ( a la making multiple copies with the option key)? So, worflow would be: move object in prefered axis, hit shift once to lock, hold down middle mouse button, rotate to desired view, and because the mouse button is down, holding down shift would still pan without releasing the axis lock, place object from new view. I know I am being juvenile and I could just change my axis lock hotkey, but I really like using shift, and have for 7 years, so please humor me
-
Does the arrow keys not lock an inference on Macs?
-
@unknownuser said:
Does the arrow keys not lock an inference on Macs?
I use the arrow keys for my front, sides, and back elevation views; also vestiges of an early SU user, you know?
-
Utiler
I am with you on the layers. Users have been trying to get our CAD developer to do this sort of things for years. We have "sheets" that can save combinations of layers and save layer presets, but they are not nested or related in any way. In large files navigating the layers can be quite a task, because the "structure" must be kept in your head to some extent. It should be one-click or very fast to go to a layer grouping in the hierarchy. One thing that annoys me in my CAD is "sheets" is accessed only in pull-down menus whereas switching sheets, in a developed file, needs to be as fast as any navigation action.
@unknownuser said:
With the ability to Trim solids now you could insert that window component into the wall and the negative solid would trim the wall to create an opening.
This reminds of a process I am experimenting on making solid wall elements for creating house models with standard features.It is OT so please see http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=40565&p=359153#p359153 if you want.
pbacot
-
And I wish that when I open a recent doc from the recent file dropdown, and then save as, it defaults to the location of the last document I opened with the open file dropdown, and not the one that I just opened. Wastes a lot of time navigating file structures to where I need to save as to.
Advertisement