Now I get it...

[autoMick]

I thought it was a bit quaint that Autodesk release autocad versions a half a year in advance... but now I understand the logic. Take 2014 for example - it's not actually meant to be used until 2014. If you do use it, then you do so at your own peril. If you do run into a problem - it won't be fixed until 2014. Looking forward to that hotfix? Wait for 2014. If you want all the features to work then buy a new calendar and start marking off the days...

[Kevin.Spear]

If you're using civil 3d, then you're likely on subscription. And in that case, you can be up to 3 releases behind. You should just stay 3 releases behind and you'll always have the clean working version you want. Why complain and about things you can't control?  

[autoMick]

Me? complain? Never... it's just that no one ever explained to me that I had to pay 2013 prices for software that doesn't work properly, so therefore I should downgrade to 3 year old software. Nothing to complain about really - it's all good.

[Kevin.Spear]

Clearly, you feel strongly about this.  Why use the software? NO ONE IS MAKING you, right? Except maybe your boss (if you're not the boss). If you are the boss, then use anything else. Why not break out the ink and mylar and call it a day?

I know those sound sarcastic, but i am serious.  Don't feel like you have to use what everyone else is using.  Maybe it's not the best tool for you. I don't know your business nor your skill set, only you do.

I hope you find peace....

Kevin

[neilyj666]

i think the OP is making the point that you pay for the most up to date software which invariably has bugs in it when arguably it shouldn't.....

[Kevin.Spear]

So stop paying for the latest version. Keep what you have for as long as you want. Obviously subscription would stop but you'd work in a stable version.

To stay on subscription you are making a business decision that its cheaper than not being on subscription.

Peace.

Sent from my iPhone


Kevin Spear, PE
Synergis Engineering Design Solutions
Civil Solutions Engineer
472 California Road | Quakertown, PA 18951
Main Office: 800-836-5440
Direct Dial: 215-302-3075
Mobile: 267-372-8499
Fax: 215-302-3001
www.synergis.com



This email and any attachments are intended only for the person or entity
to which it is addressed and may contain information which is confidential,
privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. Distribution or copying of
this email or the information contained herein by anyone other than the intended
recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please
immediately notify the sender by return email and please delete and destroy this
email and any attachments.

[fcernst]

"Peace."

Mick, as you can see now he is a Autodesk Reseller.  They come from a different place then us Users, and have different and obvious business goals.

I would like to make a motion to the Discussion Administrator that the Resellers have their own Discussion Group, and Users could visit them there if they choose to. The current situation is realy a conflict of interest issue. 

It needs to be made clear to the Users when they are interacting with the Resellers, and the Users should have a choice if they want to interact with a Reseller.

They also have an inclination to give poor advice to new users, as has been pointed out many times.

My Reseller during our initial training after purchase, advised the class not to use the Interesection Wizard, and actually said to the class it was a "marketing gimmick" from Autodesk. Then he proceeded to demonstrate how to contruct an interesection with feature lines. This was a simple county road 'T" intersection with no curb and gutter.

That just didn't ring true to me as I sat there in that class, so I proceeded to train myself in the use of the Intersection Wizard. I now know that classroom example can be more efficiently handled with the Intersection Wizard.

[neilyj666]

it is a fit for purpose issue , why does Autodesk release the software when it is buggy. it would be interesting to know if other software products (Inventor, Revit etc etc) suffer from annual breaking of existing working features

[Kevin.Spear]

While I agree that progress shouldn't break or inhibit existing workflows.

At least for the AEC industry, there just isn't the financial backing that, say the automotive industry has for its apps. Not an excuse just reality.

Sent from my iPhone


Kevin Spear, PE
Synergis Engineering Design Solutions
Civil Solutions Engineer
472 California Road | Quakertown, PA 18951
Main Office: 800-836-5440
Direct Dial: 215-302-3075
Mobile: 267-372-8499
Fax: 215-302-3001
www.synergis.com



This email and any attachments are intended only for the person or entity
to which it is addressed and may contain information which is confidential,
privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. Distribution or copying of
this email or the information contained herein by anyone other than the intended
recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please
immediately notify the sender by return email and please delete and destroy this
email and any attachments.

[autoMick]

Fred, I see where you're coming from but personally I'm happy to mix it with the resellers. I don't know who they all are, but I'm sure they contribute valuable discussion. All the discussion here is well worth reading in my opinion.

Kevin, I also understand what you're saying, but rather than just make excuses for Autodesk and offer advice to not buy the product, I'd rather that resellers took an active role in promoting key issues to Autodesk and working on a resolution. In my situation, I trialled 2012, then bought 2013 based on the advertised feature set. I clearly went through my requirements with my reseller at the time. I use surfaces a lot. One key thing that was broken in 2013 compared to 2012 was surface transparency. I was promised by Autodesk that it would be fixed in 2014 (only took a year). It was, but now I find out that other things are broken. Sure I could use 2012, but that wasn't what I purchased. I could use 2013 and put up with the glitches (most of which I think I have a work around for now), or I could keep paying subscription and HOPE that 2014 will get fixed soon. I don't care about new features, I just want the features I bought fixed properly.

As for not using C3D. Well, I did a lot of research prior to purchase and determined that it had the feature set that best fitted my work. So that decision has been made. I've invested close to $10K in the software, countless hours in training and head scratching. Got a heap of drawings and templates involved and my clients like my outputs. I'm the boss, no one dictates what I use - I just haven't got unlimited funds and countless hours to swap software and stuff around.

Regards

- Mick

[Kevin.Spear]

I totally get what you guys are saying.  I am part of a reseller now, but do have 20+ yrs of land development and highway work.  

Ask anyone, i don't make excuses for the shortcomings nor do i blow smoke to get people hooked on a purchase.

I am curious, why is the surface transparency SUCH an issue for your documentation? Clearly you use it for something, but what? I ask because i have stopped assuming what people use functionality for.  Blah balh, assuming and all...  🙂

Kevin

[Kevin.Spear]

By the way, i do contact Autodesk when i come across issues. With the beta, i had 2 bugs, one that is still in the software that hasnt been resolved in a few versions; try resetting the annotation scale list. You want an engineering list but get an architectural list.  Yeah, still broken as far as i could tell.

I have also submitted 12 new feature requests this year that address useability in hydrology workflows. These wouldn't be indifvidual features so much as just cleaning up how tasks are done. If you have issues, sign up for the beta, sign up advisory councils, ask your reseller how to get involved if this really matters to you.

Kevin

[autoMick]

Kevin - good to hear of your contribution - like I said earlier, I'm happy that resellers are involved in the forum and appreciate your replies.

Regarding surface transparency, it doesn't sound like a big thing, but is yet another annoying 'feature' (or lack thereof). I run a small enviromental engineering company. A lot of work involves overlaying different data sets to make judgements on the best location for works, setting out concept designs, etc. Some examples of what I use surface transparency for:

- elevation/flood modelling soverlay on aerial photography to help determine best location for flood protection barriers

- slope overlay on aerial photography and drainage to evaluate environmental buffer widths around impoundments

- depth overlay on shallow estuarine waters - dredged channel alignment in relation to marine habitats, etc.

The obvious work around is to expode a copy of the surface, which then can be set to be semi-transparent. This is annoying but workable - so not a huge deal, I just don't understand why it took a whole year to fix this since it was working in 2012.

I have a list of about 10 'procedures' I regularly have to follow to work around inadequacies in C3D. I just wonder which straw is going to break the camel's back?

Regards

- Mick

[fcernst]

"With the beta, i had 2 bugs"

2 bugs... really? This is the problem, and it has been for years. The Beta system set up for Civil 3D has been a complete abject failure for QA/QC control of the product. There is no rigorous testing being completed on the products before release to Customers.

I found 6 serious, now documented, defects with 2013 while just recently setting up for a Road Widening and Overlay project.

I just found 3 bugs in 2014 out of the box, just while playing with it for about an hour. I also confirmed "Known Isuue" defects have been rolled over once agian into the "new" release of the software.

I wouldn't brag about being a part of this Beta test program. The engineering Customers know who the real Beta testers are, unfortunately.  

Edited by
Discussion_Admin

[neilyj666]

I'm beginning to think that the April release is the Beta version and then the users provide free beta testing (and potential loss of productivity) and the Service Pack is the official RTM version....just a thought from a cynical end user

[mcward27]

Maybe the problem is that the only people involved in beta testing the product are the resellers who aren't working on solving day to day engineering problems with detailed accuracy. They're more focused on devising tutorials and lessons for classes and training, not solving specific detailed problems. At least I assume that's what resellers spend time doing with the software. However, I admit, I may be completely ignorant of what they do on a daily basis.

[dgorsman]

I think thats at least part of it - those who have the time for detailed BETA testing on non-production projects are usually not hip-deep in a production project to really test everything.  But there's a number of other things to address, including: the short development cycle, OS compatibility requirements, what constitutes a "correct" process which can vary between users, the necessary gap in knowledge between the developers and end users, and the raw complexity of what the program needs to do.

[fcernst]

"and the raw complexity of what the program needs to do"

Nope. That's not it. It's a lack of product leadership.

• The programming talent is there to handle complexity.
• There is a 10 year body of reference material in this forum for the leadership to refer to for the needed implementations.
• There is a Wishlist to offer direction to Management for addressing Customer needs.
• The release cycle is based on leadership decisions.

But, the biggest things are:

1. The failures of the product's QA/QC program
2. The decision by leadership at each new release cycle, to go ahead and roll over the "Known Issue" defects into the new Product Release, unaddressed time and time again.

[Hammer.john.j]

Autodesk has beta testers for a reason, they have their reasons and rest assured that being a publicly traded company drives a lot of business decisions.....  with that said, at least they've gotten away from changing button icons to justify a release, just saying.

if you don't want to beta test and have real input, don't beta test.  If you don't want to beta test, wait until the 2nd "update" a.k.a. "service pack" comes out and then deploy.

the good news is, some people like to beta test so the rest of us don't.

[autoMick]

Neilyj and 03xtreme - I think you're right... and this is what I was saying in my original post, if you want to use the 2014 version wait until 2014 (when at least one service pack has been released) - otherwise consider yourself as a beta tester. The problem of course is that some problems never get fixed.