Suggestion: Manual

[pmccutcheon]

There seems to be a lot of complaints and hand wringing about the manuals

Suggestion: the old VIA17 manuals were fairly decent. I'm sure at least 90% still applies to AE2006. Why not just post the old manual in PDF format, with a proviso/caveat that this is "old" information.

Helps out the users, easy to do for developer, everybody happy

[Anonymous]

now this sounds intresting if youve invested the time and effort into doing a training mannual then why dont you create a pdf and post it i would be intrested in it as youve had experiance pre autodesk days

and i am sure quite a lot of people out there would also be intrested

so autodesk has had elctrical for a few years yet but still hasnt got round to a comprehensive manual doest sound to bright to me

i mean all those meertings and planning sessions on how to intregrate the software and feature devlopement they must have notes on what they were doing or do they just make it up as they go along ?

so the datra out there at autodesk next step get it in a format for us workers here !!!!

i like manuals i also like pdfs and help files but i do love a good manual you can sit and read while you have the program running on your computer

its like this we run 3 other electrical desgn packages that do the same functions as acade

they are supplied with exahstive technical manuals which go from the novice to the black arts of progamming etc

so my point is quite simple if you opposition are doing it give me a good reason why you are not doing it

[Anonymous]

You seem to have totally missed the point.
I have used the mechanical acad program for years.
When I started years ago I did not go to an authorised reseller to get a
training course I was
given a copy of the comprehensive training manual by my employer at the time
and instructed to work my way through the myriad of examples and develop a
hands on working knowledge of the product.
As I gained further experience I moved onto more complex functions and work
arounds, always able to refer to the manual if I got stuck.
We used the product not only to produce 2D and 3D drawings but also to
produce electrical schematic wiring diagrams.
Now I agree that the electrical schematics I produced had no inbuilt
intelligence insomuch as I could not use automatic wire numbering and bill
of materials functions etc but I could produce a competent drawing and
create my own symbols stored in a unique symbol library and all this in what
was basically a mechanical drawing package.
Years later I "upgrade" to what is marketed as a cost effective "out of the
box" electrical drawing solution. I feel that I am justified in pointing
out through this forum that the package has not lived up to my expectations.
I am not whining as you suggest. I am pointing out as a customer, that I am
not happy with the standard of the manual supplied with this product and I
take as my reference the manual supplied with the 2005 mechanical ACAD
product I have also purchased.
I think that it is wrong for you to personalise this issue. I and I am sure
everyone else, who have contributed to this discussion, have made comments
that are designed to bring about a change of heart on this issue by the
people at Autodesk for the benefit of new users, after all if nobody raises
the issue, then the powers that be at Autodesk will assume that there is no
problem.
It is sometimes difficult for users who have grown up with the product to
see the most basic problems that are faced by new users, but as an
experienced electrical engineer migrating from mechanical acad to the acade
product I have encountered fundamental problems and far too often the topic,
not to mention the solution, is not covered in either the manual supplied or
the help files.
I do not expect to have to go to a third party supplier to learn how to use
the functions of the package I expect appropriate reference material to be
supplied with the product.
I agree that third party providers are useful when you want a fast track
training solution but they are not a replacement for investment in the
training and support literature.
After all if the correct documentation can be supplied with the mechanical
package why can't it be supplied with acade?
I notice that you yourself have used the forum to get answers from Nate and
alike on problems you could not solve. Imagine that instead of a helpful
suggestion or solution from Nate you had a reply advising you to go on an
advanced training course with some third party provider!
In furthering this issue I am trying to raise problems that I have
encountered when migrating to this product from the mechanical version and I
am trying to get answers as to why this product is being treated differently
to the mechanical product.
The reason I place great emphasis on a comprehensive training manual /
tutorial is that when you are a new user you don't know what questions to
ask. If you don't have detailed experience of the autocade functions and how
they relate how can you formulate a sensible series of questions?

Finally. It would be nice to hear something from the acade support team
themselves.
Are we going to have a revised comprehensive manual (in whatever format)?

If so When?

Will it be available to acade 2005 users who have not chosen to upgrade as
yet?

Regards,
David Sims


wrote in message news:5001143@discussion.autodesk.com...
This is for all who replied:
All help systems provide a certain level of information. Once you understand
the system, it is easier to find the basic information you are looking for.
If you want more, try an Authorized Training Center and get the level of
training you feel you need to properly use the product. When you buy a car,
the manual doesn't tell you what to do if you have a squeaky breaks or why
the car pulls to the left. You have to look elsewhere to get that depth of
information you feel you need. You think this is unique to Autodesk? Think
again. This is a business model that is prevalent all over. Now, Autodesk
may be in the process of developing something more inline with what was
suggested here but to what level or depth should they go? That is and will
be, a third party process in ALL areas of business. That is why there are
Authorized Training Centers, etc. To start with the base info and take it to
the nth level to satisfy the eager learner.
If you really want a help file-training manual, send Autodesk a spec on what
should be in the manual and how you want it layed out. Book, webbased, help
file, whatever. Maybe they will do something about it, but it doesn't do you
any good to whine about it in discussion groups. Does this sound too harsh?
Get over it. Life's too short, be part of the solution because if you're not
part of the solution, you're part of the problem.


wrote in message news:5001143@discussion.autodesk.com...
This is for all who replied:
All help systems provide a certain level of information. Once you understand
the system, it is easier to find the basic information you are looking for.
If you want more, try an Authorized Training Center and get the level of
training you feel you need to properly use the product. When you buy a car,
the manual doesn't tell you what to do if you have a squeaky breaks or why
the car pulls to the left. You have to look elsewhere to get that depth of
information you feel you need. You think this is unique to Autodesk? Think
again. This is a business model that is prevalent all over. Now, Autodesk
may be in the process of developing something more inline with what was
suggested here but to what level or depth should they go? That is and will
be, a third party process in ALL areas of business. That is why there are
Authorized Training Centers, etc. To start with the base info and take it to
the nth level to satisfy the eager learner.
If you really want a help file-training manual, send Autodesk a spec on what
should be in the manual and how you want it layed out. Book, webbased, help
file, whatever. Maybe they will do something about it, but it doesn't do you
any good to whine about it in discussion groups. Does this sound too harsh?
Get over it. Life's too short, be part of the solution because if you're not
part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

[Anonymous]

I have just noticed that I have not referenced my reply.
My reply was to CAWaugh
Regards
David Sims
"David Sims" wrote in message
news:5009234@discussion.autodesk.com...
You seem to have totally missed the point.
I have used the mechanical acad program for years.
When I started years ago I did not go to an authorised reseller to get a
training course I was
given a copy of the comprehensive training manual by my employer at the time
and instructed to work my way through the myriad of examples and develop a
hands on working knowledge of the product.
As I gained further experience I moved onto more complex functions and work
arounds, always able to refer to the manual if I got stuck.
We used the product not only to produce 2D and 3D drawings but also to
produce electrical schematic wiring diagrams.
Now I agree that the electrical schematics I produced had no inbuilt
intelligence insomuch as I could not use automatic wire numbering and bill
of materials functions etc but I could produce a competent drawing and
create my own symbols stored in a unique symbol library and all this in what
was basically a mechanical drawing package.
Years later I "upgrade" to what is marketed as a cost effective "out of the
box" electrical drawing solution. I feel that I am justified in pointing
out through this forum that the package has not lived up to my expectations.
I am not whining as you suggest. I am pointing out as a customer, that I am
not happy with the standard of the manual supplied with this product and I
take as my reference the manual supplied with the 2005 mechanical ACAD
product I have also purchased.
I think that it is wrong for you to personalise this issue. I and I am sure
everyone else, who have contributed to this discussion, have made comments
that are designed to bring about a change of heart on this issue by the
people at Autodesk for the benefit of new users, after all if nobody raises
the issue, then the powers that be at Autodesk will assume that there is no
problem.
It is sometimes difficult for users who have grown up with the product to
see the most basic problems that are faced by new users, but as an
experienced electrical engineer migrating from mechanical acad to the acade
product I have encountered fundamental problems and far too often the topic,
not to mention the solution, is not covered in either the manual supplied or
the help files.
I do not expect to have to go to a third party supplier to learn how to use
the functions of the package I expect appropriate reference material to be
supplied with the product.
I agree that third party providers are useful when you want a fast track
training solution but they are not a replacement for investment in the
training and support literature.
After all if the correct documentation can be supplied with the mechanical
package why can't it be supplied with acade?
I notice that you yourself have used the forum to get answers from Nate and
alike on problems you could not solve. Imagine that instead of a helpful
suggestion or solution from Nate you had a reply advising you to go on an
advanced training course with some third party provider!
In furthering this issue I am trying to raise problems that I have
encountered when migrating to this product from the mechanical version and I
am trying to get answers as to why this product is being treated differently
to the mechanical product.
The reason I place great emphasis on a comprehensive training manual /
tutorial is that when you are a new user you don't know what questions to
ask. If you don't have detailed experience of the autocade functions and how
they relate how can you formulate a sensible series of questions?

Finally. It would be nice to hear something from the acade support team
themselves.
Are we going to have a revised comprehensive manual (in whatever format)?

If so When?

Will it be available to acade 2005 users who have not chosen to upgrade as
yet?

Regards,
David Sims


wrote in message news:5001143@discussion.autodesk.com...
This is for all who replied:
All help systems provide a certain level of information. Once you understand
the system, it is easier to find the basic information you are looking for.
If you want more, try an Authorized Training Center and get the level of
training you feel you need to properly use the product. When you buy a car,
the manual doesn't tell you what to do if you have a squeaky breaks or why
the car pulls to the left. You have to look elsewhere to get that depth of
information you feel you need. You think this is unique to Autodesk? Think
again. This is a business model that is prevalent all over. Now, Autodesk
may be in the process of developing something more inline with what was
suggested here but to what level or depth should they go? That is and will
be, a third party process in ALL areas of business. That is why there are
Authorized Training Centers, etc. To start with the base info and take it to
the nth level to satisfy the eager learner.
If you really want a help file-training manual, send Autodesk a spec on what
should be in the manual and how you want it layed out. Book, webbased, help
file, whatever. Maybe they will do something about it, but it doesn't do you
any good to whine about it in discussion groups. Does this sound too harsh?
Get over it. Life's too short, be part of the solution because if you're not
part of the solution, you're part of the problem.


wrote in message news:5001143@discussion.autodesk.com...
This is for all who replied:
All help systems provide a certain level of information. Once you understand
the system, it is easier to find the basic information you are looking for.
If you want more, try an Authorized Training Center and get the level of
training you feel you need to properly use the product. When you buy a car,
the manual doesn't tell you what to do if you have a squeaky breaks or why
the car pulls to the left. You have to look elsewhere to get that depth of
information you feel you need. You think this is unique to Autodesk? Think
again. This is a business model that is prevalent all over. Now, Autodesk
may be in the process of developing something more inline with what was
suggested here but to what level or depth should they go? That is and will
be, a third party process in ALL areas of business. That is why there are
Authorized Training Centers, etc. To start with the base info and take it to
the nth level to satisfy the eager learner.
If you really want a help file-training manual, send Autodesk a spec on what
should be in the manual and how you want it layed out. Book, webbased, help
file, whatever. Maybe they will do something about it, but it doesn't do you
any good to whine about it in discussion groups. Does this sound too harsh?
Get over it. Life's too short, be part of the solution because if you're not
part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

[cawaugh]

One question came to me as I read your response. I wonder how many years did it take for that mechanical manual to become the comprehensive manual that it did? Anyway, David, if you are going to AU, look me up. I'll be at most Electrical sessions. There are several Electrical types out there that would like to get together to chat and possibly link up with the Electrical people. In regards to your comment: "If you don't have detailed experience of the autocade functions and how they relate how can you formulate a sensible series of questions?", goes for the Autodesk people as well. They are relatively new to the product and do not know ALL the right questions to ask either. That is why it is up to superusers and those who have used this product a long time, to work with the Electrical people on getting things better documented. Superusers and any others, need to participate in beta testing and other conferences (AUGI and so on) so that this info can be put INTO a comprehensive manual. The depth of that manual can only go so far due to ever changing scenerios of use, so there is a point where it needs to stop at. Yes, a manual is needed that goes deeper but how deep is the real question. Some will be happy and some will not be, with whatever depth a manual goes to. If the powers that be at Autodesk decide that the ROI does not warrant an more indepth and comprehensive manual, then so be it. I'm not going to wait around for one or decide not to use, in my view, the best Electrical package out there. Decide what you want but life's too short to wait for anything. As I said earlier, if a person is not part of the solution...

[Anonymous]

Nicely put you reflect my views totaly here

[Anonymous]

I agree with David.
I was new to electrical 2006 an autocad alike, and it was very difficult for me to get started on anything moderately complex, not covered int the "getting started".
If it´s in the software, i expect it to be documented. Not just as a reference guide for someone who knows what he´s looking for, but also as a good manual for the rookie. As David said, i did not know what questions to ask. Personally I disagree with the "Buy it from me, learn it from someone else" policy.
And I also agree on hoping for a reply from the ACE team.

Regards.
Alejandro.

[cawaugh]

Personally I disagree with the "Buy it from me, learn it from someone else" policy as well. Im many applications that I use, sometimes the only way to get the info I needed was to either take a class, buy a third party "Bible" on the subject OR learn it myself by trial and error and whatever else I could scavenge from the help files/manuals because they did not go deep enough into the product. There has been enough replies here that maybe the folks at Autodesk will listen to the staff that runs the Electrical software and get them the resources they need to create a more thorough manual. In the mean time, keep plugging! 🙂

[Heather S \(Autodesk\)]

Hi everyone,

We are constantly looking at the Help and the Getting Started guide to see how we can improve customer experience with AutoCAD Electrical. I started a thread titled "Need help? Have a great idea?" so that I could gather information from you all regarding issues/wishlist items/suggestions as a means of improving the documentation provided with AutoCAD Electrical. The request for a printed manual has been added to my list of things to investigate.

CAWaugh made an excellent point in that without constructive feedback, we are unable to pinpoint what you want to see in a manual. Are there specific tools in AutoCAD Electrical that you would like to see highlighted? Are there workflows that you are currently struggling with?

amt_controls made the comment that "It's very time consuming trying to find questions in the help files. And most of the questions are not there" - can you tell me what you were looking for and could not find in the Help? Without feedback, I'm unable to know what areas you as users are struggling with and subsequently which areas I need to focus on improving.

As always, if you have any more suggestions/questions/comments, feel free to post them.

Heather Schwartz
Autodesk/ AutoCAD Electrical (DSS)

[Anonymous]

Hi All,

It's clear that we have fallen short of some of your expectations with our
current documentation for AutoCAD Electrical. We recognize the issue and
will be building a plan soon to address your concerns and needs. We want to
be wholly focused on making AutoCAD Electrical a smooth and simple
transition from AutoCAD. This applies to both the product as well as the
documentation. I do not have all of the answers yet on what the plan will
look like but I will share as much of it as I can as soon as I have
information.

As we build this plan, we would like as many customers as possible to be
part of the process to make sure as many viewpoints as possible are
represented. If you are interested in being part of the process, please
send me your contact information.

Thanks,
Scott Reese
Product Manager - AutoCAD Electrical
Autodesk, Inc.
scott.reese@autodesk.com


"David Sims" wrote in message
news:5009234@discussion.autodesk.com...
You seem to have totally missed the point.
I have used the mechanical acad program for years.
When I started years ago I did not go to an authorised reseller to get a
training course I was
given a copy of the comprehensive training manual by my employer at the time
and instructed to work my way through the myriad of examples and develop a
hands on working knowledge of the product.
As I gained further experience I moved onto more complex functions and work
arounds, always able to refer to the manual if I got stuck.
We used the product not only to produce 2D and 3D drawings but also to
produce electrical schematic wiring diagrams.
Now I agree that the electrical schematics I produced had no inbuilt
intelligence insomuch as I could not use automatic wire numbering and bill
of materials functions etc but I could produce a competent drawing and
create my own symbols stored in a unique symbol library and all this in what
was basically a mechanical drawing package.
Years later I "upgrade" to what is marketed as a cost effective "out of the
box" electrical drawing solution. I feel that I am justified in pointing
out through this forum that the package has not lived up to my expectations.
I am not whining as you suggest. I am pointing out as a customer, that I am
not happy with the standard of the manual supplied with this product and I
take as my reference the manual supplied with the 2005 mechanical ACAD
product I have also purchased.
I think that it is wrong for you to personalise this issue. I and I am sure
everyone else, who have contributed to this discussion, have made comments
that are designed to bring about a change of heart on this issue by the
people at Autodesk for the benefit of new users, after all if nobody raises
the issue, then the powers that be at Autodesk will assume that there is no
problem.
It is sometimes difficult for users who have grown up with the product to
see the most basic problems that are faced by new users, but as an
experienced electrical engineer migrating from mechanical acad to the acade
product I have encountered fundamental problems and far too often the topic,
not to mention the solution, is not covered in either the manual supplied or
the help files.
I do not expect to have to go to a third party supplier to learn how to use
the functions of the package I expect appropriate reference material to be
supplied with the product.
I agree that third party providers are useful when you want a fast track
training solution but they are not a replacement for investment in the
training and support literature.
After all if the correct documentation can be supplied with the mechanical
package why can't it be supplied with acade?
I notice that you yourself have used the forum to get answers from Nate and
alike on problems you could not solve. Imagine that instead of a helpful
suggestion or solution from Nate you had a reply advising you to go on an
advanced training course with some third party provider!
In furthering this issue I am trying to raise problems that I have
encountered when migrating to this product from the mechanical version and I
am trying to get answers as to why this product is being treated differently
to the mechanical product.
The reason I place great emphasis on a comprehensive training manual /
tutorial is that when you are a new user you don't know what questions to
ask. If you don't have detailed experience of the autocade functions and how
they relate how can you formulate a sensible series of questions?

Finally. It would be nice to hear something from the acade support team
themselves.
Are we going to have a revised comprehensive manual (in whatever format)?

If so When?

Will it be available to acade 2005 users who have not chosen to upgrade as
yet?

Regards,
David Sims


wrote in message news:5001143@discussion.autodesk.com...
This is for all who replied:
All help systems provide a certain level of information. Once you understand
the system, it is easier to find the basic information you are looking for.
If you want more, try an Authorized Training Center and get the level of
training you feel you need to properly use the product. When you buy a car,
the manual doesn't tell you what to do if you have a squeaky breaks or why
the car pulls to the left. You have to look elsewhere to get that depth of
information you feel you need. You think this is unique to Autodesk? Think
again. This is a business model that is prevalent all over. Now, Autodesk
may be in the process of developing something more inline with what was
suggested here but to what level or depth should they go? That is and will
be, a third party process in ALL areas of business. That is why there are
Authorized Training Centers, etc. To start with the base info and take it to
the nth level to satisfy the eager learner.
If you really want a help file-training manual, send Autodesk a spec on what
should be in the manual and how you want it layed out. Book, webbased, help
file, whatever. Maybe they will do something about it, but it doesn't do you
any good to whine about it in discussion groups. Does this sound too harsh?
Get over it. Life's too short, be part of the solution because if you're not
part of the solution, you're part of the problem.


wrote in message news:5001143@discussion.autodesk.com...
This is for all who replied:
All help systems provide a certain level of information. Once you understand
the system, it is easier to find the basic information you are looking for.
If you want more, try an Authorized Training Center and get the level of
training you feel you need to properly use the product. When you buy a car,
the manual doesn't tell you what to do if you have a squeaky breaks or why
the car pulls to the left. You have to look elsewhere to get that depth of
information you feel you need. You think this is unique to Autodesk? Think
again. This is a business model that is prevalent all over. Now, Autodesk
may be in the process of developing something more inline with what was
suggested here but to what level or depth should they go? That is and will
be, a third party process in ALL areas of business. That is why there are
Authorized Training Centers, etc. To start with the base info and take it to
the nth level to satisfy the eager learner.
If you really want a help file-training manual, send Autodesk a spec on what
should be in the manual and how you want it layed out. Book, webbased, help
file, whatever. Maybe they will do something about it, but it doesn't do you
any good to whine about it in discussion groups. Does this sound too harsh?
Get over it. Life's too short, be part of the solution because if you're not
part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

[Anonymous]

although an acceptance of the problem with platitudes of
" we will address the issue" seems fine to you

i would like a clear statement of when a new manual is being issued

i.e.

is it Autodesk's intention to issue an interim manual before the release of acade 2007

and will all us users who have purchased acade 2006 will be getting this manual

heres a clear statement from me

as i own my own company and pay for the software myself
i will not be paying for any more AutoCAD software upgrades until
this situation is resolved to my satisfaction

which mean 2 X acade licenses
2 X acad 2006 licenses
1 x AutoCAD lt licenses
are now on hold until further notice

[Anonymous]

Hi Maomuckmar,

Fair enough. As stated, I don't have the answers you're looking for at this
point but we will develop a plan of action. We'll be working with those
customers who have shown an interest to provide input and validate the plan.

In the meantime, if you or any of your users have questions about the
software, feel free to post them in this discussion group and we will get
them answered.

Thanks,
Scott

wrote in message news:5010488@discussion.autodesk.com...
although an acceptance of the problem with platitudes of
" we will address the issue" seems fine to you

i would like a clear statement of when a new manual is being issued

i.e.

is it Autodesk's intention to issue an interim manual before the release of
acade 2007

and will all us users who have purchased acade 2006 will be getting this
manual

heres a clear statement from me

as i own my own company and pay for the software myself
i will not be paying for any more AutoCAD software upgrades until
this situation is resolved to my satisfaction

which mean 2 X acade licenses
2 X acad 2006 licenses
1 x AutoCAD lt licenses
are now on hold until further notice

[Anonymous]

Here is a simple one, for ACE team and friendly users alike.

When i drive a panel layout from a schematic list, i seem to not be able to get te subitems from the multicatalog. They are important for my layout.

Is this the function of ASSY/SUBASSY? I couldn´t find information about it in the help file. And I DID post this as a topic here a few days ago:

Help with Assemblies
Posted by: Alejandro79
Date: Oct/28/05 - 14:32 (ADT)

The reply came from a friendly user called dougmcalexander and did got me going, but unfortunately for me did not convey all the information i was looking for or cleared all my doubts about it. In those two weeks i did not receive a response from the staff. To take it further, i replied to his reply with (i qoute):

"Reply From: Alejandro79
Date: Nov/02/05 - 08:22 (AST)
Reply
Re: Help with Assemblies
That´s excelent! Thank you, i will try it right away.
Does it only work for BOM reports? Or can you use it for a panel layout "from schematic list"?

Saludos.
Alejandro.

© Copyright 2005 Autodesk, Inc. All right"

Wich ends with more questions, as in "I have more doubts about this", and since 2/11/2005 are left unanswered. At any rate, it is great to have this comunity of friendly folks to help each other, I think it is not their job to do so. So basically, i´m still waiting for an answer on the subject.

Another question i´d still like to have answered is a much simpler one:

WHY??? Why not issue a printed manual or a good user manual in pdf like all of the other products? Maybe a good honest straightforward answer to us would bring a lot more peace to the subject. Is it to cut costs? To make shipping cheaper? To prevent piracy on the pdf documents?
If it was just a marketing move i think it was not a very good one.

Just wanted to know your thoughts on the matter.

Regards.
Alejandro.

[Anonymous]

Hi Alejandro,

The behavior from 2005 to 2006 changed, I believe due to user request. In
2005, the schematic to panel pick list showed multiple instances of a
schematic device if it carried additional catalog information. This confused
some users. Now, in 2006, a schematic device does not show up multiple times
if it carries multiple catalog numbers. This makes it cleaner and easier to
understand for some user but it appears to thwart what you want to do.

Perhaps we need to add a toggle to the dialog to allow users to flip the
display so it can show either a single listing (as it does for 2006) or show
multiple listings (as it did for 2005). Does this make sense? Does it appear
that I am not understanding what you're describing here? Please let me know.

thanks,
Nate Holt.




wrote in message news:5010748@discussion.autodesk.com...
Here is a simple one, for ACE team and friendly users alike.

When i drive a panel layout from a schematic list, i seem to not be able to
get te subitems from the multicatalog. They are important for my layout.

Is this the function of ASSY/SUBASSY? I couldn´t find information about it
in the help file. And I DID post this as a topic here a few days ago:

Help with Assemblies
Posted by: Alejandro79
Date: Oct/28/05 - 14:32 (ADT)

The reply came from a friendly user called dougmcalexander and did got me
going, but unfortunately for me did not convey all the information i was
looking for or cleared all my doubts about it. In those two weeks i did not
receive a response from the staff. To take it further, i replied to his
reply with (i qoute):

"Reply From: Alejandro79
Date: Nov/02/05 - 08:22 (AST)
Reply
Re: Help with Assemblies
That´s excelent! Thank you, i will try it right away.
Does it only work for BOM reports? Or can you use it for a panel layout
"from schematic list"?

Saludos.
Alejandro.

© Copyright 2005 Autodesk, Inc. All right"

Wich ends with more questions, as in "I have more doubts about this", and
since 2/11/2005 are left unanswered. At any rate, it is great to have this
comunity of friendly folks to help each other, I think it is not their job
to do so. So basically, i´m still waiting for an answer on the subject.

Another question i´d still like to have answered is a much simpler one:

WHY??? Why not issue a printed manual or a good user manual in pdf like all
of the other products? Maybe a good honest straightforward answer to us
would bring a lot more peace to the subject. Is it to cut costs? To make
shipping cheaper? To prevent piracy on the pdf documents?
If it was just a marketing move i think it was not a very good one.

Just wanted to know your thoughts on the matter.

Regards.
Alejandro.

[Anonymous]

Hi Alejandro,



The simple answer to why we don't ship a detailed user's manual today is
that one doesn't exist beyond the current Getting Started Guide that ships
with the product. When we launched AutoCAD Electrical to the market, there
was a trend in the software industry to move away from shipping detailed,
hard copy, printed manuals with software and include the details in the
electronic help system instead. So, at that point our strategy was to
deliver a smaller printed book (Getting Started Guide) to help new users get
up and running with the software and then users would be able to find the
more detailed information they need in the help system.



In hindsight, we recognize that the current strategy falls short of meeting
expectations. We are developing a plan to address these concerns. If you
send me your contact information, we will keep you in the loop and review
the plan with you as it develops to make sure we are accurately addressing
your requirements.



Thanks,
Scott

scott.reese@autodesk.com





wrote in message news:5010748@discussion.autodesk.com...
Here is a simple one, for ACE team and friendly users alike.

When i drive a panel layout from a schematic list, i seem to not be able to
get te subitems from the multicatalog. They are important for my layout.

Is this the function of ASSY/SUBASSY? I couldn´t find information about it
in the help file. And I DID post this as a topic here a few days ago:

Help with Assemblies
Posted by: Alejandro79
Date: Oct/28/05 - 14:32 (ADT)

The reply came from a friendly user called dougmcalexander and did got me
going, but unfortunately for me did not convey all the information i was
looking for or cleared all my doubts about it. In those two weeks i did not
receive a response from the staff. To take it further, i replied to his
reply with (i qoute):

"Reply From: Alejandro79
Date: Nov/02/05 - 08:22 (AST)
Reply
Re: Help with Assemblies
That´s excelent! Thank you, i will try it right away.
Does it only work for BOM reports? Or can you use it for a panel layout
"from schematic list"?

Saludos.
Alejandro.

© Copyright 2005 Autodesk, Inc. All right"

Wich ends with more questions, as in "I have more doubts about this", and
since 2/11/2005 are left unanswered. At any rate, it is great to have this
comunity of friendly folks to help each other, I think it is not their job
to do so. So basically, i´m still waiting for an answer on the subject.

Another question i´d still like to have answered is a much simpler one:

WHY??? Why not issue a printed manual or a good user manual in pdf like all
of the other products? Maybe a good honest straightforward answer to us
would bring a lot more peace to the subject. Is it to cut costs? To make
shipping cheaper? To prevent piracy on the pdf documents?
If it was just a marketing move i think it was not a very good one.

Just wanted to know your thoughts on the matter.

Regards.
Alejandro.

[Anonymous]

Scott, I would like to take exception to your statement that a manual doesn't exist. When Autodesk purchased VIA / WD, part of that purchase would have been the existing manual. Since said purchase, Autodesk has chosen deliberately to not provide a manual. How difficult would it have been to expound on the existing manual from VIA / WD?

I have been using AutoCAD since 1993, and only recently with the advent of ACAD-E have I ever taken issues with lack of documentation. I, like others here, have more experience than my local re-seller when questions arise regarding ACAD-E.

Keep in mind as well, running to these forums whenever a question arises is not necessarily the easiest for all. I have to justify my internet usage.

My current bible is the Rev. 16 Wiring Diagram users guide. It has been more useful and informative than the class through my re-seller. It is also becoming woefully out of date. With no explanation as to the updates / benefits / changes, it has been exceedingly difficult for me to manage / train the Electrical department I am a part of.

I pay for the updates for the software, now I have to pay more for training? Beyond what I have already taken? The training that is not available that I have seen?

Shame on Autodesk.

At least when I was using Promis-E, I had up-to-date manuals, and free phone support, by professionals better trained in the curriculum than I.

[Anonymous]

Hi Envirex,

Good clarification regarding the VIA WD documentation. My point was
regarding an up to date version of that manual that matches the current
AutoCAD Electrical software. I agree that the VIA documentation should
certainly be part of the discussion moving forward.

Thanks,
Scott


wrote in message news:5011399@discussion.autodesk.com...
Scott, I would like to take exception to your statement that a manual
doesn't exist. When Autodesk purchased VIA / WD, part of that purchase
would have been the existing manual. Since said purchase, Autodesk has
chosen deliberately to not provide a manual. How difficult would it have
been to expound on the existing manual from VIA / WD?

I have been using AutoCAD since 1993, and only recently with the advent of
ACAD-E have I ever taken issues with lack of documentation. I, like others
here, have more experience than my local re-seller when questions arise
regarding ACAD-E.

Keep in mind as well, running to these forums whenever a question arises is
not necessarily the easiest for all. I have to justify my internet usage.

My current bible is the Rev. 16 Wiring Diagram users guide. It has been
more useful and informative than the class through my re-seller. It is also
becoming woefully out of date. With no explanation as to the updates /
benefits / changes, it has been exceedingly difficult for me to manage /
train the Electrical department I am a part of.

I pay for the updates for the software, now I have to pay more for
training? Beyond what I have already taken? The training that is not
available that I have seen?

Shame on Autodesk.

At least when I was using Promis-E, I had up-to-date manuals, and free phone
support, by professionals better trained in the curriculum than I.

[rta53]

I still have my Via manual also. Nice that it is spiral bound too. Scott, it seems to me that the support for this product was better before it was purchased by Autodesk. It was nice to have phone support that I could depend on when I really needed it. I like to be as self-sufficient as possible but sometimes you get to a point where you are just spinning your wheels and getting no where and you need help. Via was very helpful when I needed them and sometimes you can't wait hours or even days to get help.

As far as the trend to move away from printed manuals, certainly this has been going on in the industry, but we're not talking about word processors that cost a hundred bucks or so. We're talking about software that has a huge learning curve and costs companies thousands of dollars. Wouldn't you agree that there is a difference here?

[Anonymous]

Hi rta53,

Yep, I do agree. One of our first tasks with this project is to investigate
exactly what all of the other Autodesk products are delivering and determine
which approach seems to be most helpful to users.

Others have made mention of AutoCAD and AutoCAD Mechanical but only made
mention that they ship manuals but haven't commented on how helpful they
are. I would be interested to hear if anyone has an opinion on this.

From most of the posts on this group, it sounds like the VIA WD manuals were
viewed as pretty effective.

Happy Thanksgiving!!

Thanks,
Scott


wrote in message news:5021170@discussion.autodesk.com...
I still have my Via manual also. Nice that it is spiral bound too. Scott, it
seems to me that the support for this product was better before it was
purchased by Autodesk. It was nice to have phone support that I could depend
on when I really needed it. I like to be as self-sufficient as possible but
sometimes you get to a point where you are just spinning your wheels and
getting no where and you need help. Via was very helpful when I needed them
and sometimes you can't wait hours or even days to get help.

As far as the trend to move away from printed manuals, certainly this has
been going on in the industry, but we're not talking about word processors
that cost a hundred bucks or so. We're talking about software that has a
huge learning curve and costs companies thousands of dollars. Wouldn't you
agree that there is a difference here?

[Anonymous]

its about time
the penny has finally dropped

i thought the first task would have been when you bought the software house would be to integrate the documentation with your own current standards but that would be me doing it

as to manuals
you've had a long standing relationship with a product that is now in direct competition

so you've already got good electrical manuals lying around as templates

now as any good company knows and does and this includes from making widgets to airplanes

most large corporations have a department where you test the oppositions products / disassemble and check for innovations that you can apply to your own product

so unless autodesk is being so pig headed to the point it cant accept an competing company may have a good idea

then i would assume there is a department in the vast autodesk empire that has copies of other peoples electrical design software

and guess what with those other products come extensive user manuals

so that would be my first port of call

as to my ideal manual

written by the same guys who wrote the promis e manual (776 Pages there and a separate getting started manual of 100 pages)

but cut up in a format like the old eplan 4 manuals which was a boxed set of manuals
broken down by relevant sections

book 1 installation guide
book 2 schematic drawing
book 3 terminal and cables
book 4 databases and forms
etc etc etc

but that is unrealistic as its pretty obvious to everybody that you just hope this problem will go away by adding more to the on line help files

me at this point i would settle for the wscad 5 manual which was a pdf of 852 pages long

and if after all that you are to lazy to cash down the info i have the wscad and promis e manuals i pdf format that i could upload

[Tim_L]

For my two cents worth, I wish there was a manual also. I started with Via about 10 years ago. When hired my employer told me “Here is your workstation, here is your manual, you have one week until you start your first schematic design”.

Even though I am now using 2004 electrical I still keep the Via 6 literature on my desk for reference. I wonder if I can find a Via 17 manual on ebay? ha