He should never have debated a creationist in the first place. But hats of to him for thoroughly dealing with it so well.

I have had many argument with family and friends who seems to think that science proves things. That subject x is "just a theory" and not proof.

In reality, science works by failing to disprove a point. It doe not claim omniscience as new data and evidence is always updating new finding. As Karl Popper noted science doe not prove things, but rather disproves things.

The US seems to be the worst at not believing in evolution... it boggles the mind.

@arcad-uk said:

If I wanted super pro now then I would be looking at other products. Trimble aren't going to make the major changes you are looking for any time soon. They are well placed in the market without risking competition from more adept or specialised software by raising their price.

Apologies for missing your post. I just don't see how some of the frequently requested improvements can be attained with only the $95 yearly upgrade. Perhaps some of them can and I'm hoping the next release is a major improvement on many fronts. I agree that SketchUp's success in becoming an industry standard is twofold: Its really easy to learn and it is inexpensive. A winning combination no doubt.So Yes Trimble is unlikely to mess with this winning combination, but i still suspect that they have long term plans that will significantly improve it.

@slbaumgartner said:

But I believe that a significant portion of them would pay a modest amount to get the features that are disabled to create free/Make out of Pro (I would). You have to keep in mind that most of these people are non-professionals who don't need to make formal, architectural-grade documents for clients using Layout, nor are they artists who want to do esthetic presentations by creating their own styles. So, Layout or Style Builder may be huge to you, but it is largely irrelevant to these people. And one way to provide a middle-priced product would be to unbundle these items, which are effectively separate applications in the first place. Even if a small fraction of the free/Make users buy in, something is always greater than nothing; it would be a source of new revenue for Trimble.

On reflection you are right. There are certainly 2/3rds more casual users than Pro users and I guess most have little use for Layout...which is a shame as it really is a great presentation tool and for the most part under utilized by the design industry.

Hopefully that too will change overtime.

@solo said:

@gilles said:

Rhino+Flamingo+Penguin+Bongo - 1 695 €

I can pay $10 and see more animals at the zoo.

Too funny, but seriously if you are prepared to pay thousands for a rendering/animation software like Lumion, why wouldn't you pay the same for dream come true version of SketchUp with all the bells and whistles included? What would you cough up for this to become a reality.

@rich o brien said:

Imagine a Free version with Plugins disabled. That'd shake shit up.

I agree Rich and was very surprised that the Make version did not dumb down further to encourage more Pro users. But with supposedly 30 million unique activation's last year and about 2.5 million using it regularly every week, the actual plug-in downloads are far below what I would expect, especially for all the free plug-ins.

So, either SketchUp users are, for the most part completely ignorant of plugins, or have little use for them or a combination of both.Maybe this will change due to the easier installation process that sketchucation and Trimble have both provided.

We have what 200,000 members right here on Sketchucation, perhaps half of them using SketchUp pro regularly and yet the highest download I can find for any of the plug-ins is under 10K, I would have thought there would be significantly more in numbers.
So, I would doubt disabling extensions for Maker users, is going to shake things up that much.

@slbaumgartner said:

At the opposite end of the spectrum, I've often wondered why Trimble doesn't introduce a mid-price version, for example SketchUp pro without Layout and Style Builder. If even a small fraction of the free/Make users chose to upgrade to this product, it would be a substantial amount of income.

I doubt that many more licenses would convert to pro, simply for a lower price by losing Layout. Sketchup is already cheap at $600. Yes, I know in some parts of the world that is a huge amount of money but layout is a HUGE part of SketchUp and a part that I really hope continues to evolve.

@cotty said:

There are two ways to increase the profit, higher price or more user, why not choose the second?

An important change here was the limitation of commercial work to the PRO version.

I hear ya on both points but, I don't think more users are a real possibility as long as the make version is available and that version should remain, as it is used in thousands of classrooms all over the globe to enable kids to enjoy building in 3D.

I also can't see how Trimble are going to make your second point stick. People can continue to use previous versions which allow for free commercial use.

@mike lucey said:

Folks these days, particularly in the architectural field, are not too keen to part with cash simply because the work levels in many countries have plummeted. So it looks like the current price is the ceiling!

As for the case of SketchUp Ultra at $1500. I imagine many current professional users could well be interested in such an application. But DI think there would need to be a number of flavours, Arch, Eng, Product Design etc.

I image the development costs would run into several millions and take at least 18 to 24 months, if not longer. Let's say for argument that the development costs would be $5,000,000. In order to break even, sales would need to reach 3,333+ copies! That's quite a lot of heads but again maybe not considering that SketchUp is now a standard.

Quote John Bacus”Thanks to Trimble, we’ll be able to continue to [highlight=#ffff40:33pno2b8]make SketchUp into the tool that we—and you—have always hoped it would become[/highlight:33pno2b8]. With a strong wind at our backs and plenty of sunshine ahead, this voyage just keeps getting more exciting

Quote by Trimble on acquisition “enhance our ability to extend our existing market applications including the cadastral, heavy civil, and building and construction industries.”

How can a company pay a reported 90M for SketchUp only to have it languish as a "low end -cad type" modeling software? Surely Trimble and the SKP team have much bigger plans for it.

Trimble have the means to make this happen especially if they want to live up to the quotes by John Bacus and the acquisition quote? Surely they do

If SketchUp was improved, how much would you be prepared to pay for it? I have read hundreds of posts relating the needed and expected changes but little in what price would we be willing to pay for such improvements.

If SketchUp was reconfigured, into a super pro version, let’s for the moment, imagine a multi core, 64 bit support with most of the best plug-in as standard native tools (whilst dreaming, why not throw in soft shadows as well as quads, ruby 2.0, real circles and arcs and control of different line weights and colors Yes, I want it all too

So, at what price point would we have to arrive at, for Trimble to make our dreams become a viable reality? How much more would you be prepared to invest on an improved super pro version?

Why would Trimble improve SketchUp? When for the most part, the biggest innovations have come from the talented and selfless SketchUp ruby community (some of whom are now thankfully part if the SketchUp team).

Unless it could gain a much larger license fee, what incentive does Trimble have to make it so? Surely the $95 yearly upgrade is not enough profit to induce such needed changes.

SketchUp is low priced in comparison to many other programs with hundreds of thousands of users using the free version. There is not that much difference between the free and pro version to persuade many to turn pro. But there are, I bet tens of thousands of pro users, who would prefer a super pro version and be prepared to pay for it.

I would pay up to $1,500+ for a super version if it could become what we all want it to be.
What’s your expenditure ceiling and what would you need to see included to warrant that price?

Well that was surprisingly painless. just deleted V8 same problem. So deleted v2013 and re installed and all is 100 % well and good.

All my plugins and other folders of concern were retained and bugspalts have vanished and icons showing up as 2013 Yyaaaaaay so happy !!

My Sketchup files, for some reason, are changing their icon files switching from v8 icon to 2013 version and back again. Seems to happen all on its own after a few hours between the two types of icons. I never use V8, only 2013 (Latest version)

If I check the properties when the icon is showing v8 and click on properties it shows as 2013 version. However, i always get a message saying I need to get the newer version if I double click to open file

If I double click on a file when it is showing 2013 version, it bugsplats. I have to right click > open with 2013 and it opens, but I almost always get a bug splat when closing the file. It save the file ok, but it always bugsplats. I always send the report in with details and just get a no solution to this problem message.

I have updated all my drivers, all administrations are under my control. I'm using windows XP with the latest version of 2013.

I have noticed today that my sketchup exe file which i think was usually in the plugins folder, is now located in the 2013 section along with all the other files and not where I used to see it :plugins. Should I move it over back into the plugins file?

I'm thinking of deleting v2013 and starting over and have copied all my materials, styles,etc so I do not lose all those files when I re install sketchup. I had stupidly deleted the 2013 sketchupprowen.exe file from my download section.

so do i simply re-download from trimble and put in my certificate number and all will be well??

will i have to reinstall all my plugins one by one or can i simply paste in the save copies from my 2013 version?

lastly, should I just remove v8 as well? I'd like to keep it if possible.

Any help and guidance would be most appreciated... Thank you

Rashad

Not sure if this has been posted here B4.....Over 800 seamless tiled textures provided by Patrick Hoesly.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/zooboing/collections/72157622668797999/

A great collection.
http://zooboingreview.blogspot.com/

@wo3dan said:

Alphabetic order up or down gives two options.
Visibility order (visible=)up or down forms the other two..

Aha I got it now.... Sorry to waste your time folks, I feel like a dummy now. I had my layer box not wide enough so I was pressing the visibility option all the time, not realising that the( name) panel to the left was an actual panel... thinking it was just a header for all the layer names...sheeesh
Maaaan, almost two years using sketchup and such a basic thing ...... anyhoooo, all is well now and I learned something new today ...Always a good thing

Thanks for setting me straight... :O)

Thanks for looking Geerit and Tig... I have no issues now when I copy it, it works just fine as it does for you, but all day yesterday, it just turned into Quasimodo for some unknown reason.

As to the layers moving in the panel, I did check both options with the same result the unchecked layer moves in either option.

Below are named layer ...notice movement of Car entry

then when set to visible layers, you'll notice the same effect of movement of car entry in layer panel

This only started happening recently....should I remove all my plug-ins to see if this could be the culprit?
Or am I missing something?.... thanks again.

Sorry don't know how to put these into the post...but hope they save your monitor :O)

Annsi, Thanks for looking.Good to know you don't have the same problem. I have an Intel 965 Express chipset family. Never had problems B4 and it has handled large models with up to 10 million faces...

I recopied the model and now ( after 6 times of trying all of which were deformed) the model displays just fine- No problems when shadows turned on...... Weird. I have no explanation for this!

Thanks again.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=89QXO1Y6

The model can be downloaded from the above link (3.17MB)

Model is not far away from origin.

Interested to see if anyone else gets the same problem when turning on shadows.

Also, for some reason my layers lists, recently, seems to move around ie if I turn off a layer it moves that layer down to the lowest part of the panel & if turned back on, it moves back up to where it was B4- weird.

Thanks for taking a look.... much appreciated.

Hi Solo :O)

Nope, no Cad involved. I had simply just copied the house from an earlier model I had made in order to rework some elements of the house.

When turning on shadows the model becomes completely deformed.

If I save a copy in Version 7, problem is solved with no deformation when turning on shadows,but it retains the same deformed properties if I saved a copy in 8.

I have never experienced this b4 but have seen it happen very occasionally in other peoples models.

Just wondering what could cause this?

I just picked up this book yesterday. Highly recommended mainly for seeing such a diverse usage of sketchup and seeing how each author went about things was illuminating.

Thank you so much for taking the time to explain how you did this.... it was a real eye opener for me. I tried doing this myself...and just have to laugh at my attempts now having seen your way of doing this...Amazing and thanks again.

@solo said:

Finally, a real senator, a man elected by the people, for the people. Mr Sanders I salute you!!

And he is neither Republican nor a Democrat, he is independant and has the balls to stand up to both sides.

[flash=600,400:3fbquv47]http://www.youtube.com/v/VVqwgDiQvOM&feature=player_embedded[/flash:3fbquv47]

Good to see, but the fact remains,that the government from its inception, by the framers and Madison in particular, was always about "protecting the minority of the opulent against the majority"

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/yates.asp
Has the full text and the particular "quote" is 2/3 rds of the way down.

Here is a snippet as it's somewhat hard to find
James Madison
"The man who is possessed of wealth, who lolls on his sofa, or rolls in his carriage, cannot judge of the wants or feelings of the day laborer. The government we mean to erect is intended to last for ages. The landed interest, at present, is prevalent; but in process of time, when we approximate to the states and kingdoms of Europe; when the number of landholders shall be comparatively small, through the various means of trade and manufactures, will not the landed interest be overbalanced in future elections, and unless wisely provided against, what will become of your government? In England, at this day, if elections were open to all classes of people, the property of the landed proprietors would be insecure. An agrarian law would soon take place. If these observations be jsut, our government ought to secure the permanent interests of the country against innovation. Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. The senate, therefore, ought to be this body; and to answer these purposes, they ought to have permanency and stability. Various have been the propositions; but my opinion is, the longer they continue in office, the better will these views be answered."

Nothing has changed.... It was always thus. :O(

My previous ruby file didn't even have the ./ to delete.in that script... tried for days to make it work.

Cleared up now with this one ..Many Thanks :O)

I did that the first few times with no success... tried it again, and lo and behold....success. Yipeeeee

Big thank you Bjanzen.....

(www.srww.com)

Found the above in a search, seems like a lot of work :O)

There must be something easier, using layout, to accomplish to scale printing.... what am I missing?