@aidus said:

And that's sketchups problem. From now sketchup is not for me. That's really sad.

Sad for who?

@honoluludesktop said:

bmike,
@bmike said:

..........I have access to AutoCAD architecture, so DoubleCAD is not needed,...........
Are you saying that AutoCad "Architect" can read and write SU's skp files? What release do you have access to?

No, but i can import / export DWG and DXF as needed for my workflow.
I'm running Acad Architecture 2009.

Is DoubleCad actually writing a SKP?
In 3D?
Turning ACAD Blocks into components?

Might have to check that out...

@fossa said:

I'll play devils advocate for just a second here. I'm very unimpressed/disappointed with SU development too..but..

Has anyone tried getting Maxon or Autodesk or Modo or any other giant modeler to add features like inferenceing or snaps or basic usable real world units? I bet you won't get very far with them either.

I agree, as was sort of my point.

And, I don't think you can buy (or get for free) a Yugo and be pissed off when the 2010 model comes out that magically they haven't given it the handling and acceleration of a Porsche.

I can demand all I want from AutoDesk. I doubt they'll ever scale back their bloatware and come up with something very user friendly and intuitive any time soon.

The only luck I've had with getting specific changes to software has been with a 3rd party overlay to AutoCAD that I use (and its pricey to set up site licenses $$$$$$$$$!) - and that was when they were relatively small. Now that they cater to more than just a niche market - development for my specific industry has slowed. Its still there, but not what it used to be.

@unknownuser said:

Why not simply donwload the free SK 8, donwload doblecad XT for helping with the dwgs exports and such if needed, buy boltools for 20$, and in the process suport guys like Whaat? Who do you think it's more important to support right now? Plugin developers, that are keeping this (still) alive, or Google, that don't care or respect the user needs unless it's Google earth related? and before you respond count how many plugins you ever used...

I use a handful of plugins, many 'cookieware'.
I may end up buying 1001 bit tools, but I'm not finding it as useful as I thought for my workflow.

I have access to AutoCAD architecture, so DoubleCAD is not needed, but is on my list for when / if I need it in the future.
I also use LayOut more and more, so having angle dimensions is something I could make use of.

Is booltools as cleanly integrated as the solids tools?

Who are these users? What are there needs? A small vocal percentage that post on forums and mail lists? Or a vast majority that use the program in its simplest form?

Google owns it. It is likely that they will continue to develop it as they see fit.
What else is out there that is free (or low cost) - and would do what you want?

@glenn said:

Hey,
Anyone try this test with SU8 yet?
I"m interested to see speed compared to 7.1
Thanks,
Glenn

tried. does not work, get an argument error.
looks like the file / code will need to tweak.

@unknownuser said:

(i don't know if i should laugh or cry...)

and AMAZING!
The post i did 2 years ago still aplies here (http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=14207&start=165#p107667

"This must be a joke...
For the ones saying this was a good release:

New modeling tools: NO
new animation tools: NO
new uv maping tools: NO
new engine that suport more heavy scenes: NO
new engine that do better images and shadows: NO
new (even very basic) ways to simulate diferent light sources from the sun: NO"

But to be fair, in modeling now we can do better bolean operations (too bad there's the script booltools...damn you Whaat ), in animation we now have a litle image preview (i don't even know what to say for this one...), and for maping we can now work even better with google earth (we all know how great quality and professional textures that gives us, unless we're doing it for google earth...is there even someone who does that for a living?).

Soooo...2 years in development for this...lolol

Ha Ha Ha! Even the shadow bug is here too! HA HA HA HA!

This is just getting better and better

so, I guess you'll be spending your $$ on another program and moving on?

the solids tools and extra view back lines would speed my work.
i'm sure i could get the solids tool functionality from rubies... but.

have to think about it.
and see if it is any quicker with geometry.

adding angles to layout is also overdue...

you get the standard 480 minutes of use.
i imagine that there will be a charge for the upgrade as it has jumped from 7.1?? to 8.

@ben ritter said:

How do you get the upgrade? Been on the website but still v.7.

download it. will say 8 when you install.

toolbars

solid tools look like a great addition!

@unknownuser said:

Nothing showing up so far for Mac.

waiting patiently...

go to the link and download. didn't show up in my 'check for updates' either.
should say 8 pro when you open the installer.

SimLab's 3d PDF is working well for me. I use it to send proposals to clients. You are able to set up views, cut sections, etc.

I use the paid version as I am exporting to 3d PDF it all the time.

Would love to see it support layers / sections (direct from SketchUp) camera FOV, and other things...

whoa.
still up.

installing now.

@unknownuser said:

i dunno mike, that looks unnecessarily complicated to me.. here's a fairly simple mitre method: (pretty much the same idea without that box)

shows a mitre on one end then, with an extra line and a little more cleanup, a compound mitre on the other end.

pretty cool technique.
i'm usually mitering several heavy timber components (valley rafters) together - and I try to account for housings and joinery - so when I developed my method i was copying my valley (or hip) components off to the side to so the original was left unchanged, and in place.

i also teach this method to timber frame designers - so it had to be rock solid, even if it involves an extra step or two.

typically we'll trace existing geometry (the ridge, or ridgeline, or the inside face of a housing if dealing with joinery) to create the 'dummy' block. this is then expanded to give us enough real estate to intersect with the part needing the miter or compound cuts... i try to get folks into the habit of seeing this 'in situ' so they understand what is happening to the geometry.

and its not always pretty 45 / 45. when roofs collide (10/12 into a 6/12 for instance) - things can get ugly, especially for a novice designer, afer adding backing cuts / etc.

cool technique though. will keep it in the bag of tricks.

Perhaps this video will help. No audio. Its dated, but worked for getting a friend understanding how to miter a corner of crown molding.

Create a dummy box that is taller than your molding. (you can make it a component if needed)
Rotate the box 45 degrees.
Move it to the corner to start the miter.
Explode the dummy box.
Edit the molding component.
Triple click to select all geometry in the molding.
Right click and select 'Intersect' > with model.
Exit the component.
Delete the dummy block geometry.
Edit the molding component.
Delete the faces you do not need.

Not bad.
Add a car or bike and some blur, and one could come up with a 'GoogleMaps Style'.

I'm a fan of using components for this. When the model gets complicated you can copy a component off to the side for a clear view of it - and any changes you make telegraph through to the original, still neatly in place in your 'house'.

Groups are slightly different - as they are not clones of each other - any changes you make to a group will not affect other copies of that group.

Don't try to model the whole house without groups or components... until you isolate geometry with some form of container (group or component) - it will touch and be 'sticky' to all other geometry it touches.

not quite.

so the guy in the helicopter was able to see it, and everyone else saw a sheet on the ground?

what am i missing?
the software keys to the sheet, and the model is overlaid on the screen, as someone is watching... right?

not trying to be a downer, just trying to see what application this might have in its current form.
it appears one still needs something in the physical world to key the augmented world to...
unless you can geolocate using gps, or other nearby features - wifi, cell towers, street lamps, etc... no?