2015 - Custom Part Catalog Optional Parameter Not Working

[Cadguru42]

Until now I haven't had to do a project in 2015 using a pipe network. When I set my part catalog in 2015 that I've been using for many versions, the custom optional parameter I've created and referenced by labels is no longer working. To see what I've done, look at http://beingcivil.typepad.com/my_weblog/2010/07/assigning-optional-properties-to-a-part-size.html. That blog post is what I did four years ago and it's worked great until now. 

There is no error given in either the part catalog, my label styles, nor in the structure itself. My custom field is called "StructType" and is for the Structure Type. My structure label style still shows that field as an option to label, but it's always blank as the structure object itself no longer has that defined field.In 2015, when I edit the part family and try to add that parameter to the configuration, it's not listed as an option. It is listed in 2014 and earlier, though. 

This worked fine in C3D 2014 and earlier, but no longer seems to work in 2015. My new computer uses Windows 8.1 Pro and thought it might be related to that, so I tested this on another user's computer with Windows 7 and it also has the same problem. 

Has anyone else run into problems in 2015 like this? 

[Cadguru42]

Until now I haven't had to do a project in 2015 using a pipe network. When I set my part catalog in 2015 that I've been using for many versions, the custom optional parameter I've created and referenced by labels is no longer working. To see what I've done, look at http://beingcivil.typepad.com/my_weblog/2010/07/assigning-optional-properties-to-a-part-size.html. That blog post is what I did four years ago and it's worked great until now. 

There is no error given in either the part catalog, my label styles, nor in the structure itself. My custom field is called "StructType" and is for the Structure Type. My structure label style still shows that field as an option to label, but it's always blank as the structure object itself no longer has that defined field.In 2015, when I edit the part family and try to add that parameter to the configuration, it's not listed as an option. It is listed in 2014 and earlier, though. 

This worked fine in C3D 2014 and earlier, but no longer seems to work in 2015. My new computer uses Windows 8.1 Pro and thought it might be related to that, so I tested this on another user's computer with Windows 7 and it also has the same problem. 

Has anyone else run into problems in 2015 like this? 

[BrianHailey]

I've been having issues with the pipe data in Civil 3D 2015. For example, create a new part in your parts list and change the material. Nothing happens. Perhaps it's related to the issue you are having.

[BrianHailey]

I've been having issues with the pipe data in Civil 3D 2015. For example, create a new part in your parts list and change the material. Nothing happens. Perhaps it's related to the issue you are having.

[Cadguru42]

---

@BrianHailey wrote:

I've been having issues with the pipe data in Civil 3D 2015. For example, create a new part in your parts list and change the material. Nothing happens. Perhaps it's related to the issue you are having.

---

I started a SR for this, but also wanted to see if others noticed something similar. I'm probably going to have to add this to the giant list of problems with 2015. I am temporarily getting around the problem by changing my label style to read the description, but we don't want the description to be used for this label. It's pretty pathetic that this kind of thing gets released without real testing, but that's what happens with the idiotic yearly release cycle.

[Cadguru42]

---

@BrianHailey wrote:

I've been having issues with the pipe data in Civil 3D 2015. For example, create a new part in your parts list and change the material. Nothing happens. Perhaps it's related to the issue you are having.

---

I started a SR for this, but also wanted to see if others noticed something similar. I'm probably going to have to add this to the giant list of problems with 2015. I am temporarily getting around the problem by changing my label style to read the description, but we don't want the description to be used for this label. It's pretty pathetic that this kind of thing gets released without real testing, but that's what happens with the idiotic yearly release cycle.

[BrianHailey]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

...but that's what happens with the idiotic yearly release cycle.

---

InfraWorks has a quarterly release cycle.

What would be a good release cycle? How long do you think you should continue to pay subscription without getting anything new? 2 years? 5 years? 20 years? And what would you say if there were product defects after waiting 20 years for the release?

The product developers have limited resources...

Not trying to make excuses, just giving some things to think about.

[BrianHailey]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

...but that's what happens with the idiotic yearly release cycle.

---

InfraWorks has a quarterly release cycle.

What would be a good release cycle? How long do you think you should continue to pay subscription without getting anything new? 2 years? 5 years? 20 years? And what would you say if there were product defects after waiting 20 years for the release?

The product developers have limited resources...

Not trying to make excuses, just giving some things to think about.

[Cadguru42]

---

@BrianHailey wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

...but that's what happens with the idiotic yearly release cycle.

---

InfraWorks has a quarterly release cycle.

What would be a good release cycle? How long do you think you should continue to pay subscription without getting anything new? 2 years? 5 years? 20 years? And what would you say if there were product defects after waiting 20 years for the release?

The product developers have limited resources...

Not trying to make excuses, just giving some things to think about.

---

The "old" way of having releases every 18-24 months was good because it allowed the developers enough time to test for bugs and issues. Once Autodesk switched to the yearly release cycle starting with 2004, that's when problems really started. The productivity tools and most of the other items are a part of the subscription, which is fine if it's within the 2 year cycle and could add "new" features. Look at what's "new" now on the yearly cycle and you'll see very little. Hell, Map 3D had absolutely nothing new except for FDO features being upgraded to connect to newer versions of databases and such. The tiny bit of "new" features that happens yearly can easily be a part of a service pack or product addon while major items, such as the DWG format, new UI schemes, and under-the-hood improvements could be version upgrades. That's how most software is developed and released. 

As for the InfraWorks, you must be talking about the online 360 version. There's no way in hell my workplace will switch to anything cloud based, so what good are tiny, incrimental updates to something online that we'll never use? What's the point of the InfraWorks that's part of the Infrastructure Suite if it's only the online one that gets real updates?

[Cadguru42]

---

@BrianHailey wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

...but that's what happens with the idiotic yearly release cycle.

---

InfraWorks has a quarterly release cycle.

What would be a good release cycle? How long do you think you should continue to pay subscription without getting anything new? 2 years? 5 years? 20 years? And what would you say if there were product defects after waiting 20 years for the release?

The product developers have limited resources...

Not trying to make excuses, just giving some things to think about.

---

The "old" way of having releases every 18-24 months was good because it allowed the developers enough time to test for bugs and issues. Once Autodesk switched to the yearly release cycle starting with 2004, that's when problems really started. The productivity tools and most of the other items are a part of the subscription, which is fine if it's within the 2 year cycle and could add "new" features. Look at what's "new" now on the yearly cycle and you'll see very little. Hell, Map 3D had absolutely nothing new except for FDO features being upgraded to connect to newer versions of databases and such. The tiny bit of "new" features that happens yearly can easily be a part of a service pack or product addon while major items, such as the DWG format, new UI schemes, and under-the-hood improvements could be version upgrades. That's how most software is developed and released. 

As for the InfraWorks, you must be talking about the online 360 version. There's no way in hell my workplace will switch to anything cloud based, so what good are tiny, incrimental updates to something online that we'll never use? What's the point of the InfraWorks that's part of the Infrastructure Suite if it's only the online one that gets real updates?

[Cadguru42]

I just got an email from Autodesk and this is yet another confirmed defect with 2015. <sigh> 

[Cadguru42]

I just got an email from Autodesk and this is yet another confirmed defect with 2015. <sigh>