SketchUp 2013 Gripes & Bitchin' ONLY ;)
-
@unknownuser said:
the reality for me is that I have no freaking clue about mac vs pc.
I mean, the last time i sat down at a computer running windows was probably 2+ years ago and i had to ask the owner how to get a web browser up
it's super rare (never?) to see a mac vs pc argument where everyone involved knows both systems equally..
so it ends up being some heated fiasco but nobody really knows what they're talking about
that said, macs are way better.. they're faster, more stable, pick up more chix, built better, longer lasting, better support, better graphics, cooler (both kewl and temperature wise), look better, simpler to use, better value in the long run, better system wide app integration, have sweeter tv commercials, and probably at least 14 other things i can't think of at the moment..
lol
I've been working equally on both for the past 32 months or so, but I can't really say I "know" my Mac...
But that's one of the problems: nothing is obvious, every command is different in every program, and it's just trying and retrying all the time (= waste of time).
I'm sure there's a solution for most problems it causes, but someone just needs to tell me about themMac does look way cooler, that's true, but it is much slower than my PC - especially in start-up (Mac 2-3 minutes vs PC 15 seconds).
Also the "better graphics" are not true anymore. It used to be true, in the 80's or 90's, but today PC caught up. My Radeon Club 7870 card is waaaaay better than anything I ever saw on Mac, mine or others.
And the biggest problem is price and durability... My Mac-mouse cost €50 and broke after 3 weeks, the second one after 2 months. I bought a simple €15 Windows mouse, and it has been doing the job for two years nowAnyway, I don't want to get involved in any Mac vs PC war so I'll try to shut up now
-
@unknownuser said:
for me on the mac vs pc thing is that when it comes down to it, it doesn't matter at all..
I mean, do you have good ideas or don't you? if you have good ideas then you're going to get them out there regardless of which OS is being used.
That's well said
-
@fluffy82 said:
@unknownuser said:
lol
Anyway, I don't want to get involved in any Mac vs PC war so I'll try to shut up nowOh I like that. Just throw in your insults and walk away.
-
@bmike said:
w will try and get some demo software running soon.
what do you mean, Mike? and where are you teaching?
-
@mcpcorey said:
I cannot load the SU 2013 model back into SU 8, I will have to completely rebuild the model in SU 8,
CoreyWhat? Why not? There is no backwards save?
-
-
@unknownuser said:
one issue i have now is that sketchup doesn't produce true solids, so when i work with folks that CNC, i can't get them easy to use autocad 3d solids. unless i'm missing something... i've tried some hack conversion techniques, but things get just screwy enough that they always rebuild things.
That probably has to do with Sketchups avaraging min dist, or what it is called.
Solid don't get "watertight". Edges endpoints don't connect.
Poses problems for plugins as well, especially intersections with tiny geometry.BTW, it has not been addressed here though it is a real bugger..
-
What nonsense, open the file and save as SU8.
You can save as back to version 3 if you want.
-
@pbacot said:
@bmike said:
w will try and get some demo software running soon.
what do you mean, Mike? and where are you teaching?
Will try out rhino if I ever get the download page to open, and also formZ.
Teaching at Heartwood school in the the Berkshires end of this week. Will be teaching at the Timber Framers Guild conference in August. Have potential for 2 small, invite only style classes in VT / MA area mid summer.
-
@pbacot said:
@fluffy82 said:
@unknownuser said:
lol
Anyway, I don't want to get involved in any Mac vs PC war so I'll try to shut up nowOh I like that. Just throw in your insults and walk away.
I said I would try, didn't say I'd succeed
-
@mcpcorey said:
I Just completed my first model with SU 2013, ... when you have a PAYING client waiting for finished renditions, in order to secure the sale of a $60,000.00 project. ... and HOPE & PRAY that in the interim, a competitor does not secure the project first... I Could lose my MAIN source of income over this. ...
The possibility to save as .skp8 has been already addressed... but my question would be, how can you update to a new version a few days after release when you are working on such an important project...?!? i don't get it! unbelievable!
@mcpcorey said:
Am I doing something wrong ?
Sorry, but i think... yes.
-
@box said:
What nonsense, open the file and save as SU8.
You can save as back to version 3 if you want.
Thanks for the lesson on back saving guys, you all are WAY smarter than I am, (that is why I hang out here, to sponge up as much of your knowledge as possible) in 7 years of SU, I have never had a need to back save an SU file until now, so I had never had to explore that option. I will give it a try.
Any way, I did not have to rebuild my model in SU 8., While trying to figure out what was causing lumion to crash when it opened the first collada file I had ever saved from an SU 2013 model, I discovered that 1 specific component group within my model, one that I had used in many of my previous SU 8 models, (created in SU 7 or
is somehow to blame for the crash ?... When I eliminated that particular component group, saved a new collada file without that component, PRESTO ! the collada file opens in Lumion, and I am back in business....Now I have to figure out? is there something specifically wrong with that particular component?, or am I going to have problems with other saved components that were created in earlier SU versions? and that I am accustomed to using over and over again to save time...
My initial "Panic" is gone, Forward we go!
To address numerobis The possibility to save as .skp8 has been already addressed... but my question would be, how can you update to a new version a few days after release when you are working on such an important project...?!? i don't get it! unbelievable
I agree with Numerobis, perhaps upgrading only a few days after release was a foolhardy decision, I was asking myself that same question a few hours ago?... But the reality is, the specific project I was working on, was no more important than the last one, or the next one. I have been turning out 3-4 similar projects per week, for the better part of last 2 years. My model renditions are what makes my client stand out from the competition, in a highly competitive field. Whether I take the plunge to upgrade now, just a few days after release, or wait a few weeks, would make little difference, there will be an equally important project on the line then!... and the learning curve will likely be the same now, or later. I would rather just bite the bullet jump in, and get over the growing pains sooner than later... The other option would be not to upgrade at all, just because I am busy, and never know what I was missing? Regardless of when I upgrade, there will always be an important project on the line.
Thanks
-
Dan,
I noticed happy satisfied people are invading this section.
Instruct them they are off topic please.
Off with their heads.
-
@fluffy82 said:
@unknownuser said:
Mac does look way cooler, that's true, but it is much slower than my PC - especially in start-up (Mac 2-3 minutes vs PC 15 seconds).
Also the "better graphics" are not true anymore. It used to be true, in the 80's or 90's, but today PC caught up. My Radeon Club 7870 card is waaaaay better than anything I ever saw on Mac, mine or others.
And the biggest problem is price and durability... My Mac-mouse cost €50 and broke after 3 weeks, the second one after 2 months. I bought a simple €15 Windows mouse, and it has been doing the job for two years nowAnyway, I don't want to get involved in any Mac vs PC war so I'll try to shut up now
Jeez,
Within the last 10 years or so (when I made the final switch to mac) I never ever experienced a 2-3 min startup time unless the system wasn't well maintained..FYI the current system startup time on a new MBP is 10,3s..
For the "better graphics" argument - OSX's internal color management was or is still more superior than Windows' while Open GL acceleration used to be better on PC's in the past (due to better drivers) although the gap has been almost closed now.
And from an End user perspective - if you have ever worked on a retina display for a while, you will never want go back anymore.P.S. The magic mouse sucks - I agree
-
@unknownuser said:
@fluffy82 said:
Mac does look way cooler, that's true, but it is much slower than my PC - especially in start-up (Mac 2-3 minutes vs PC 15 seconds).
@archheni said:
.FYI the current system startup time on a new MBP is 10,3s..
launch all apps at once
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xS2ZipMM2Oo
wheeeee.. youtube vids
-
@mcpcorey said:
....in 7 years of SU, I have never had a need to back save an SU file until now...
Nothing to do with the previous back-and-forth concerning that particular model...but that simple statement begs the question as to why the dev team feel it necessary to provide such a facility in a release (Make) that is supposed to be for non commercial use.
I can't imagine a situation in which a hobbyist (or even a single freelancer 'bending' the rules) would need to save a file in any version other than the one they are using.If Trimble want to monetise their new acquisition as rapidly as possible, the way to go would be to more clearly separate Pro and Make to ensure that people using it for earning serious money pay their fair share of the development costs, rather than pushing all those costs onto the back of the honest Pro users..
A quote from a guitar-modding blog in which SU Make was, quite properly, being recommended for such 'hobbyist' design work. "My brother-in-law, a partner in an engineering firm, says many of his fellow engineers use the free version for most everything that doesn't need to be done in a dedicated engineering app."
There's your hemorrhage in income stream, right there. -
Alan, I'm sure you can remember all the discussions and debates we had, when Google released a free version of SU...
In the beginning it was also restricted to be for non-commercial work only...
Personally I do not see how they will enforce this restriction...
I seem to recall that this was also the big question, the first time Google released a free version...
Don't they learn anything from previous mistakes...??
-
@frederik said:
Don't they learn anything from previous mistakes...??
Apparently not, Kim.
I have some sympathy with (Jason's?) suggestion that maybe they just ought to throw the whole program out there for free and charge for the bolt-ons. But I think that particular horse exited the stable some time ago...too late closing the door now. Whatever extensions were charged for would probably appear in some form of free format, given the number of talented coders out there. Their functionality might be a little limited and they may be a little slower, being Ruby not C++, but Hey! free is free.
This situation already exists regarding exportable AEC formats. There are numerous ruby exporters now that circumvent the lack of such export options in Make; and there are plenty of professionals who have absolutely no need for either a Style Builder or Layout.If they really are going to go down this dual path with Trimble, then someone, somewhere needs to sit down and have a very serious think about what features are absolutely necessary in a free version. There surely has to be a balance between giving away a decently-featured (and extendable) Make to satisfy the needs of hobbyists and the 'little guy' (and which will also act as an incentive and longer-term 'trial-version for commercial users to upgrade to Pro) and putting something out there that people can use to make serious money (if not an entire living) from without contributing a cent towards its development.
-
I definitely sympathize with the need to update based on Layout and teaching needs -- this was where I was with v8. It's an unfortunate reality that many will be forced to "update" and therefore send the message that everything is OK to Trimble -- a message that they may not actually agree with.
Free vs Pro... I've offended people on every side of this debate over the years. From my POV it is not reasonable to expect the software to improve without financially supporting it. Since I definitely want the software to improve, I think Pro only for all update features is the way forward.
However that came with a caveat, the new Pro would have to be such a clear upgrade that users would have no issue with parting with the money to move up. Looking at the situation now I'm not sure that is a feasible suggestion. It seems major updates to the SketchUp proper part of Pro are not forthcoming... and if they do appear they will likely be in the form of Trimble made Ruby+C extensions (at additional cost).
IMO this is not a good value for the user.
What I see happening now is Trimble attempting to make SketchUp appear to have more value to the marketplace by "adding" the (already long available elsewhere) free plugins to the package and calling that an upgrade. As if they are somehow responsible for the time and hard work the 3rd party coders have put in, and can take credit for it.
The problem is they may very well get away with it as long as the 3rd party developers let them by actually using the Extensions Warehouse. Of course I'm not in any position to say how the plugin developers should do things -- but I can say I would be very wary.
The public perception is "Hey Trimble is giving away all this free stuff so the cost of Pro isn't so bad". Just look at the Extension Warehouse with a clear eye -- does it say clearly anywhere that the plugins are not made by Trimble? I can't find that without looking very deep into the website. A user who is not experienced with such things is not going to have a clear understanding that Trimble is not financing these in some way. The implied impression is one that heavily benefits Trimble and the SketchUp team -- whereas the reality is that SketchUcation has done more to support these developers over the years than SketchUp itself has... however we see no mention of that anywhere.
To me this is a spit in the eye of the community and a clear attempt at hijacking alot of time and hard work for Trimble's benefit. This will become only more so when the commercial Trimble "bolt-on's" appear -- at which point the free plugins become loss leaders for drawing in the users.
If the extensions warehouse clearly stated on the main page that anything not made by the SketchUp team is a completely separate entity from Trimble, and required separate financial support (via donations), then I would be alot less skeptical. However, as it stands the uneducated user is left to attempt to discern these facts for themselves... rather murky don't you think?
If I were a developer I would only put commercial plugins on the Extensions Warehouse... if that.
Best,
Jason. -
@frederik said:
In the beginning it was also restricted to be for non-commercial work only...
Personally I do not see how they will enforce this restriction...i doubt they're too set on 'enforcing' the non-commercial policy..
the non-commercial thing is aimed at the honest people out there of which there are plenty.. there are people that use suFree in a commercial environment because google let them.. but, now that it's not allowed, they'll buy the software.. (or quit using it)
Advertisement