Preference Poll
Sorry to do this, but I am not a Facebook user (and NO, I do not want to join), but I do want to weight in on the preference poll.
My first choice for improvement would be a better Raster Engine.
Second choice, multi-core support
Third, hatch trim. Not really interested in the other choices.
Comments
-
Thanks for starting this John. I too have no desire to join Facebook, but would like to vote for multicore support as choice #1. Second for me would be multileader (or something close to it.) Keep up the great work Bricscad!
0 -
I just struck a couple of multileaders from an Acad system - I can't explode them or cut & paste the text. They don't even stay put.
0 -
I also have no use for Facebook but would vote for multiple core support.
0 -
No Facebook for me, either. My vote would be for multiple core support. Second would be hatch trimming.
0 -
Good thread, can I vote for items not on the list...
1./ Layer property viewport overrides
2./ Annotative scaling and MSLTSCALE
3./ Hatch trim
4./ multi-core support
0 -
No Facebook for me either!!!!
1. Hatch trim
2. dialog box for array command (like acad 2012)
3. multi leaders
4. multicore support
0 -
Hello,
My wish-list requests (these are not really mine, but what users in India want) :
- Fast, powerful raster engine (capable of importing 200+ MB JPG and being able to work in DWG)
- Full support for MLINE, with MLINE editor as well.
- Align viewports (like in Express Tools)
- And the most important of all wishlists, a fix for all the small bugs and inconsistencies in Bricscad and the Lisp-related bugs as well.
Regards
Rakesh Rao
Blog: http://rakeshrao.typepad.com0 -
My 3 features are :
1. full blown solid + surface modelling (sweep, loft, blend, Surfaces (analytic and NURBS) slice solid with Surface etc.)
2. Lisp IDE
3. C# .NET API for Solids and Surfaces ........
0 -
- Align viewports (like in Express Tools)
Hey, I think I might have one of those laying around, I'll look for it this weekend
0 -
How about express tools in general? Overkill and Extrim are the ones my staff asks for the most.
0 -
Not interested in facebook also. For me SELECT SIMILAR is number one on my list. I am a landscape designer and keeeping control of block counts is sooo easy in ACAD and sooo bad in Bricscad almost to an extent that makes me think of going back to ACAD by pure nesesity. Love everything else about Bricscad though.
Oh yeah EDITABLE HATCH
Cheers:)
0 -
Overview of the features suggested on Facebook
Parallelization (use of multiple processor cores)2314 %New raster engine169 %Printing of hidden line views42 %Page Setup manager127 %Hatch trim3320 %Creation of Dynamic Blocks2918 %Align a viewport in space (ALIGNSPACE)53 %Better and faster (3D) snapping127 %STL printing31 %Better toolbars (relocation)148 %More attractive User Interface42 %Palettes31 %Native Mac OSX versions21 %Stability and speed when displaying large drawings10
0 -
I was just thinking about how I would like to see the return of a few behaviours in Bcad which perhaps were originally different from Acad, such as:
Select both lines to chamfer simultaneously
Uniform method of selecting across commands, ie entity first / command first or preferably either choice
The Properties pallette to default to 'disappeared'
Running snaps to be ignored within lisp routines
Then I wondered how many on the list of desired features (none of which concern me much) are just prioritising Bcad's further conformity with Acad?
I found Intellicad, then Bcad, due to disenchantment with Acad. Apart from pursuing the morphing dwg format, the concept of following Acad's lead tends to have a disappointing ring for me.
0 -
John,
I had the same thoughts. I too started out with IntelliCAD, but hated its performance. AutoCAD is the undisputed leader in CAD software both in features & market share. However that comes at a cost, and the value that Bricscad brings to the table by taking the familiarity & functions of Acad at a reasonable price has made me a believer. And though I haven't had to use it, the responses to support issues from the Bricsys folks is something Autodesk could learn to mimic.
Just my 2 cents.
0 -
Not exactly my point, Doug. I started with Acad 1.5 I think, swapped to Icad in 1998 from R13. It was said Acad vers were like Star Trek movies - only the even numbers were any good. So Icad was acceptable by standards at the time, and refreshing for its variety.
Sure Acad features will always be asked for, but market share doesn't prove it's the best in every way. Some really nice operating features have been trampled in programs like Generic Cadd, mainly because of slavish industry demands for dwg format often from people who don't even use the software.
I accept the need for a standard format, but many saw the file format and the program to create it as inseparable. Even today I see the doubt in their faces when I say I don't use Autocad. I don't believe Acad has ever had a great user interface.
0 -
Daniel,
Any luck with the ALIGNSPACE command for Bricscad?
- Rakesh Rao
- http://rakeshrao.typepad.com0 -
HI,
haven't looked yet, I'll dig into it this weekend : )
0 -
Just out of curiosity: what is ALIGNSPACE supposed to do?
I'm using the following small lisp to align viewports, wrote that ages ago (I think for r13), and it still works for me...
(defun C:MVALIGN ( / cvp kwd p0 p1 p1p p2 p2p) ;(setq *error* jyg_err) (setq cvp (getvar "CVPORT")) (cond ((= 1 (getvar "TILEMODE")) (alert "\nOnly valid in layout mode") (exit) ) ((= 1 cvp) (setq p0 (getpoint "\nPoint align: ")) (command "_mspace") ) (t (setq p0 (trans (trans (getpoint "\nPoint to get aligned with: ") 1 2) 2 3 ) ) ) ) (initget 1 "x y") (setq kwd (getpoint "\nPoint to align or x/y for axis to align):")) (cond ((= "x" kwd) (setq p1 (getpoint "\nPoint to align (x-axis): ")) ) ((= "y" kwd) (setq p1 (getpoint "\nPoint to align (y-axis): ")) ) (t (setq p1 kwd)) ) (if (= cvp (getvar "CVPORT")) (progn (alert "\nInvalid\nPoints must not be in same model viewport") (exit) ) ) (setq p1p (trans (trans p1 1 2) 2 3)) (cond ((= "x" kwd) (setq p2p (list (car p0) (cadr p1p))) (setq p2 (list (car (trans (trans p2p 3 2) 2 1)) (cadr p1))) ) ((= "y" kwd) (setq p2p (list (car p1p) (cadr p0))) (setq p2 (list (car p1) (cadr (trans (trans p2p 3 2) 2 1)))) ) (t (setq p2 (trans (trans p0 3 2) 2 1))) ) (setvar "ORTHOMODE" 0) (command "_pan" p1 p2) ;(setq *error* nil) (princ))
@ John:
I think I get your point. I started on acad r10, followed the development with pleasure until r15 (although dropping of the UNIX platform annoyed me), but then lost touch and interest - subsequent releases were getting evermore bloated, without really adding much of what I was waiting for (turned to rhino instead).
I like Bricscad for being still lean, while offering me what I really need in 2d. I would hate the program to follow acad's path blindly. The feature vote left me quite unenthusiastic, since it basically just asks which acad feature should be copied next. What I would like to see is discussion about how to implement certain needed functionality (keeping in mind that compatibility has to be paramount for Bricsys), e.g. the whole polyline/hatch implementation in acad is such a mess that it cries for someone to make it better (look at archicad to see a decent one). Rather than a poll, I would like to see another forum along the windows and linux ones (named "General discussion" or similar), devoted to the future direction of the program, not cries for help.
0 -
Yes Knut that's what I mean. This forum can be used for creative suggestions, but I suspect most of the best innovation would still come from the software developers.
Many users want Acad similarity, or perhaps that's users' employers. But I suspect there are as many who don't care what Acad does if they have an alternative which is nicer to use even if it takes a little getting used to. New steps in Acad take getting used to as well - I find old users tend to stick with their old ways, new users are learning anyway.
0 -
Hi,
We started the poll with the first five features. All other features now listed were suggested and added by our users.
Sander
0
