2009-03-11 01:15 PM
2009-06-10 09:15 AM
2009-06-10 12:35 PM
2009-06-10 02:46 PM
owen wrote:I'm going to disagree with you on that point. The
...i think the last thing ArchiCAD needs is MORE specific tools which will inevitably work not quite the way we want and have infuriating discrepancies in behaviour, appearance controls, etc from other tools....
2009-06-10 04:07 PM
Peter wrote:It is exactly these workarounds - using one tool to create an element that the 'real' tool cannot do - that i am trying to avoid. Relying on specific tools for specific elements is exactly the problem we have now and will only get worse with more very specific tools. Graphisoft cannot factor in all the variables and so inevitably we end up with workarounds as the tool does not do what someone needs it to do.
Theonlyway you are going to get the tools working exactly the way you want is to make them more specific to their function...
ArchiCAD is BIM. We use intelligent components to construct a virtual building. Using generic objects that sort-of look like the components we need goes completely against this. I actually want to get away from using a beam to form a bargeboard, or a slab to form a worktop. I want to use a roof edge tool, and a worktop tool.
Peter wrote:This is where AC's new 'Systems' tools would come in, assembling various geometries created by the basic tools into complex assemblies such as timber stud walls, roof framing, curtain walls, etc
I wouldn't bet against that in the future even the wall tool would be split into multiple types. A timber stud wall does not have the same properties and connecting details as a masonry wall, so why do we struggle to force one generic type of wall to solve everything automatically?