Undefine QSAVE.
Then use the code below to redefine QSAVE to save the drawing and then
export the drawing. For a production solution, you'd want to add error
correction to capture the filedia change. The "exported version" is
preceeded with ACAD- so you don't really need to worry about duplicate file
names. You could also beef this routine up by creating a subdirectory for
exported files and have them go there automatically...
(defun C:QSAVE()
(command ".qsave")
(setvar "filedia" 0)
(command "AecExportToAutoCAD2004" "")
(setvar "filedia" 1)
(princ)
)
"AndrewT" wrote in message
news:5329846@discussion.autodesk.com...
The programming of the routine would be a challenge to make it run as
transparently as possible.
I'll take some time to consider the export to Autocad suggestion. My
first thought is I wouldn't want multiple versions of the same drawings
floating around. Too big a risk of a user accidentally deleting the
real file instead of the exported one. But we may be able to come up
with a fool proof method to avoid this. It would also take extra time
and steps to export each drawings. Might as well just manually plot it
to dwf instead.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Andrew
pkirill wrote:
> Auto-plotting might be problematic and possibly annoying to the user - but
> along those lines, what about redefining the save commands to also
> automatically export to AutoCAD? _AecExportToAutoCAD2004
>
>
> "AndrewT" wrote in message
> news:5329732@discussion.autodesk.com...
> That makes sense. But it is very difficult from a financial standpoint
> to justify buying software that has to be shelved for six months before
> it can be used, especially with a yearly release cycle. And even more
> so when we know how useful the new features will be. But as you said,
> that brings up a whole other topic about subscription.
>
> I am a designer and do my own drafting as well as CAD management so I
> see the benefits of upgrading sooner than later. I also hear engineers
> express their frustration on a regular basis so I understand where they
> are coming from. I was hoping to come up with a solution that would
> satisfy everyone. One idea was to look for or develop a routine that
> would automatically generate a dwf file each time a drawing is saved.
> That way the dwf would be as current as the working drawing, wouldn't
> take any additional time to generate manually, and the engineer would
> always be able to open, view and plot. The problem is I haven't found
> such a utility and we don't have a programmer on staff. But paying
> someone to develop a routine may be our best solution to meet everyone
> needs.
>
>
> pkirill wrote:
>> I understand what you're saying. However, I look at like this: if the
>> object
>> enablers aren't ready, then the solution isn't ready. By the time the
>> enablers are ready for this release, the next release is right around the
>> corner. Since the OJ's are the bottleneck, you might consider starting
>> your
>> upgrade cycle with them. You're only looking at an initial lag of a few
>> months, then you're back on track so subscription still makes sense...
>> (well, that's probably another topic)
>>
>> "AndrewT" wrote in message
>> news:5328149@discussion.autodesk.com...
>> I'm looking for some feedback from people who have dealt with a similar
>> scenario as follows:
>>
>> I work for a consulting MEP engineering firm. We use Building Systems
>> and have been on subscription from day one of the product release. The
>> Autodesk Building Systems devision does a great job incorporating and
>> fine tuning as many features in each release as they can. I also do
>> beta testing so I know the new features before the product is officially
>> released. Because of these factors, we like to upgrade as quickly as
>> possible after doing final testing and customization. The problem we
>> have run into is with the release cycle of object enablers. All our cad
>> and design staff use ABS but a few of the engineers, which include the
>> owners, are not cad literate. These people rely heavily on TrueView to
>> check job progress, view and print drawings, etc. It has been five
>> months since our upgrade and still can't use TrueView because of the
>> lack of object enablers. So what is happening is the engineers are
>> having to go to the cad staff and pull them off what they are currently
>> working on to have them open a drawing to view on screen or print. This
>> is much more time consuming than having the ability to do it themselves.
>>
>> It comes down to 2 basic options for us:
>> 1. Continue the way we are and upgrade asap and deal with compatibility
>> issues as they arise.
>> 2. Delay our upgrades in the future until everything is compatible.
>> (Which in turn makes me question staying on subscription)
>>
>> Neither scenario is ideal because they both cause a decrease in
>> production. Postponing upgrades has a bigger loss in production overall
>> but the compatibility issues mostly affect the people higher up in the
>> company whose time is worth more and have more influence in decision
>> making. How have others in similar situations come to a decision?
>>
>> Thank you for your time.
>>
>> Andrew
![Autodesk Design & Make Report](https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/1350519iCB55845EBFC43016/image-size/large?v=v2&px=999" "Autodesk Design & Make Report")