It's official - the next motherfucker that comes into my office and so much as mentions the word 'Revit' is getting thrown out of my goddamned window. If they e-mail or call and mention 'Revit', I will go to where they are (and there is nowhere on this fucking Earth they can hide from me), drag them kicking and screaming to the nearest window equivalent to the height of the one in my office, and throw them out (or through) it.
Now - it's not so far that they would be killed by the impact (unless I tossed them out head first - which I'm going to save for the next motherfucker that thinks they can threaten me with my job for not sucking the Revit cock), but they would definitely find themselves coming to terms with a few broken bones, and the distinct impression that I'm the one guy who they should've definitely never even remotely considered fucking with.
I don't give a fuck if they want to use it all day long and wallow in their own shit - all it has managed to do since it's inception is destroy any goodwill that I might've otherwise been able to muster towards these people whose entire existence seems to be to stab me in the back, pull the rug out from underneath me, and throw me under the bus (often all at once). They have mistaken my typically easy-going and laid back nature for weakness, and while I've managed to straighten out a few people on that particular misconception, others just don't take a fucking hint.
I keep thinking about picking up a set of taser-knuckles (I saw them at a pawnshop one day, brilliant fucking idea if there ever was one), so I'm ready for the next Revit dick-socket who comes in here thinking I have any fucks left to give about their cock-suckery. A couple thousand volts (and some additional 'convincing' afterwards to guarantee they keep their fucking mouths shut) might be just the thing to bring a little reality crashing into their little worlds.
It's unfortunate that some people only understand violence - I've tried reasoning with them, and attempted to work out a compromise, but they've been sucked too far into the Revit quagmire to be appealed to with logic. If they had approached this differently from the get-go, they might've even been able to talk me into playing part-time footsie with the Revit dick, but instead all they've done is waste my fucking time.
And I'm fucking over it.
Saturday, June 29, 2013
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
Revit Ain't Shit But Hos and Tricks.
Okay - now this Revit version shit that I was complaining about is finally starting to really drive me directly UP THE FUCKING WALL.
It's bad enough having to hunt down what fucking version of this fucking software a model is saved in - but then you run across the problem of "I'm sitting here staring at the fucking thing for half an hour while it 'temporarily upgrades' all of the linked files".
I'm not even trying to work in this model - although it turned out to be a good fucking thing that I did look at it, because in between when I was nice enough to populate the piece of shit with fucking light fixtures and now, they had managed to delete two fixtures in a back corridor (leaving it completely empty except for an exit light and an HVAC plenum that was placed right in the middle of where one of the fucking lights should have been.
I said 'what the fuck ever' and slapped a fucking light where there was fucking room so I wouldn't have to fucking waste a mechanical designer's fucking time to have to open their fucking file (not actually sure what happens if you haven't upgraded your file and you have an upgraded file linked in - I'm sure it's not good, which means the only other option is to stare at Revit while it 'permanently' upgrades your file).
I also moved a can light that was living in the exact same location as an HVAC plenum - but wasn't throwing up any errors. Not a big deal right? Well - actually, we had already had a complaint on a previous job from the same owner about lighting coordination. The argument about what software I'm using is a moot fucking point because I had populated that model with my lights too, but due to more HVAC plenums, and ceilings that were rotated the wrong fucking way in a corridor, they couldn't fit a 2'x4' light.
Another simple solution - use a 2' x 2', but if we're going to just rig this shit together in the field anyway - then WHY IN THE FUCK WASTE TIME MODELING IT ALL IN 3D? If they are going to ignore the location of my fixtures or delete them, then what the fuck is the point? Just yesterday I had somebody call and act like I hadn't put lights into their fucking model. In this case I had an Electrical model - which they had referenced, but which (for some reason or another) wasn't allowing them to see all of the lights.
I was already in my model fixing all of the various changes that I had wasted my time modeling in 3D to begin with, and they told me that I only had two light fixtures in an area. I sent them a snip (I love the fucking snip tool) showing that I indeed had nine lights, but they 'could not see them'. They ended up wasting several peoples time (in addition to mine), and ended up pulling a dickless piece of shit 'Revit Guru' into the mix to finally figure out what was wrong with their fucking model.
Then they came back and said there weren't lights in another room, where they had changed their ceiling height, and (of course) nothing in my linked file changed jack-diddly-shit, because this software (on top of sucking so fucking hard that I'm amazed it's not in porn) isn't being used in a way that allows us to actually coordinate, and instead just ends up being a clusterfuck of the Architect modifying the ceilings, me playing 'where's waldo' and chasing their fucking changes, and fuck fuck fuck the fuck.
On top of those fucking problems, yet another fuckhead starts giving me shit because I haven't been Reviting up his bullshit project that I hadn't heard a peep out of in over two months. It was the last straw yesterday - because I was already buried past my fucking eyeballs right now because of incompetence and shitty communications/scheduling (and working on YET ANOTHER completely unrelated project - in ACAD thank fucking god, but still being run into the ground by a fucking idiot).
I'm ready to eviscerate the next shit-eating Revit fuckhead who calls, e-mails, or comes into my office. It's a waste of time, a waste of effort, and is steadily grinding away at my ability to concentrate or give a fuck about anything - and it's going to get someone's fucking ass beaten so badly, they will beg for death.
It's bad enough having to hunt down what fucking version of this fucking software a model is saved in - but then you run across the problem of "I'm sitting here staring at the fucking thing for half an hour while it 'temporarily upgrades' all of the linked files".
I'm not even trying to work in this model - although it turned out to be a good fucking thing that I did look at it, because in between when I was nice enough to populate the piece of shit with fucking light fixtures and now, they had managed to delete two fixtures in a back corridor (leaving it completely empty except for an exit light and an HVAC plenum that was placed right in the middle of where one of the fucking lights should have been.
I said 'what the fuck ever' and slapped a fucking light where there was fucking room so I wouldn't have to fucking waste a mechanical designer's fucking time to have to open their fucking file (not actually sure what happens if you haven't upgraded your file and you have an upgraded file linked in - I'm sure it's not good, which means the only other option is to stare at Revit while it 'permanently' upgrades your file).
I also moved a can light that was living in the exact same location as an HVAC plenum - but wasn't throwing up any errors. Not a big deal right? Well - actually, we had already had a complaint on a previous job from the same owner about lighting coordination. The argument about what software I'm using is a moot fucking point because I had populated that model with my lights too, but due to more HVAC plenums, and ceilings that were rotated the wrong fucking way in a corridor, they couldn't fit a 2'x4' light.
Another simple solution - use a 2' x 2', but if we're going to just rig this shit together in the field anyway - then WHY IN THE FUCK WASTE TIME MODELING IT ALL IN 3D? If they are going to ignore the location of my fixtures or delete them, then what the fuck is the point? Just yesterday I had somebody call and act like I hadn't put lights into their fucking model. In this case I had an Electrical model - which they had referenced, but which (for some reason or another) wasn't allowing them to see all of the lights.
I was already in my model fixing all of the various changes that I had wasted my time modeling in 3D to begin with, and they told me that I only had two light fixtures in an area. I sent them a snip (I love the fucking snip tool) showing that I indeed had nine lights, but they 'could not see them'. They ended up wasting several peoples time (in addition to mine), and ended up pulling a dickless piece of shit 'Revit Guru' into the mix to finally figure out what was wrong with their fucking model.
Then they came back and said there weren't lights in another room, where they had changed their ceiling height, and (of course) nothing in my linked file changed jack-diddly-shit, because this software (on top of sucking so fucking hard that I'm amazed it's not in porn) isn't being used in a way that allows us to actually coordinate, and instead just ends up being a clusterfuck of the Architect modifying the ceilings, me playing 'where's waldo' and chasing their fucking changes, and fuck fuck fuck the fuck.
On top of those fucking problems, yet another fuckhead starts giving me shit because I haven't been Reviting up his bullshit project that I hadn't heard a peep out of in over two months. It was the last straw yesterday - because I was already buried past my fucking eyeballs right now because of incompetence and shitty communications/scheduling (and working on YET ANOTHER completely unrelated project - in ACAD thank fucking god, but still being run into the ground by a fucking idiot).
I'm ready to eviscerate the next shit-eating Revit fuckhead who calls, e-mails, or comes into my office. It's a waste of time, a waste of effort, and is steadily grinding away at my ability to concentrate or give a fuck about anything - and it's going to get someone's fucking ass beaten so badly, they will beg for death.
Wednesday, June 12, 2013
Re-Reviting
Not surprisingly, I ended up having to go back into someone else's project again to fix what appeared to be a major oversight on the part of someone on my team that is out on vacation (if you were to listen to the architect anyway - chances are the designer busted his ass to get all of the information he could onto the drawing, only to be nonchalantly tossed under the bus when he's not here to defend himself).
I complain about having to revisit jobs - especially other people's jobs. Mainly because you have to start by trying to recall (or infer) what design criteria, thought processes, etc. were taking place when the project was being developed. You can't just start going through them willy-nilly, otherwise what looks like a 'mistake' or 'omission' (at first glance) can actually turn out to be what was a hotly contested, deeply discussed, considered, reconsidered, and finally compromised on issue (or more likely, was designed correctly, and someone bitched about having to pay money for it to be built correctly).
Now - when I work on a project, I don't keep immaculate notes on every single decision that gets made, and while memory is far from perfect - I can usually pull out my dead-tree folder, refer back to e-mails, and piece it back together fairly quickly. What's funny is when someone comes through telling me that I need to change X and Y, move Z, etc. - and I get to shut them down with 'Actually - there are reasons we did the things we did, and unless those reasons have changed (which is possible), then I'm not doing anything'.
I'll probably dedicate my next post to what I call 'The Loop', which is a mysterious, ever changing and shifting exclusive information base, but for now let's get back to fixing what I am assured were 'mistakes' with my co-workers drawings. I had already made a few 'last minute' changes to the project after he left on vacation, and despite being in Revit, it was only a moderate pain in the ass.
What I was being asked to do sounded extremely simple - correct the lighting package being used for the anchor store at a strip mall. Basically (for the uninitiated), companies that regularly put their stores into strip malls or other buildings that they are leasing put together a letter outlining the specifics of what the landlord is responsible for providing (otherwise they will get a completely empty shell).
In most cases the requests are simple - specific light fixture/lamp manufacturers, finishes, HVAC requirements, etc., but (as with most things) if this information isn't passed along to the designers (even after they ask for it - repeatedly), then the only thing they can do is make their best guess and move on, which is what it looked like what happened in this case.
So I open the project, wait for it to load, and go to work trying to figure out how to de-clusterfuckize the goddamned thing. Even the projects I have 'done' in Revit still use CAD fixture schedules (and I tag the fixtures with text), but this guy had managed to get his light fixtures to schedule and tag - all the Revit way. This was great - right up until the point where only one of the tenant spaces that the schedule referred to was changing. I spent a few minutes trying to see if I could manipulate the families to get what I needed, and then said 'fuck this', and dumped the schedule out to ACAD.
Or at least tried to - the header came out, but no schedule. I thought about trying to figure out how to get the schedule to export - but between needing to get this project (and the half a dozen other projects that it was fucking holding up) done, and not wanting to pay for a new monitor after I punched a hole in the old one, I said 'fuck the dumb shit' and manually re-created the whole goddamned schedule in ACAD, labeled it for the tenant spaces that were staying the same, and then created a new one with the owner's requested fixtures - imported them both back into the Revit model, and 'voila'.
This prevented me from having to re-tag any of the fixtures, but then I start looking around and noticing actual mistakes - first was that all of the exit lights had been labeled (or scheduled) backwards, so the edge-lit LED signs were in the back-of-house areas, while the injection molded 'el cheapo' kind were being prominently displayed in the customer showroom (easy fix). Then I added a few notes and tags to clarify some other pieces of information that I felt had been omitted/overlooked.
As usual - a big part of what annoys me in Revit is how people use it as carte blanche to stop giving a fuck about standards - even though my ACAD electrical drawings are slightly different than other designers in the firm, they all tend to communicate the same information (albeit in slightly different ways) but it's generally all there. Not so when it comes to Revit - while I attempt to make my drawings look as close to my ACAD drawings as to be almost indistinguishable, other people just slap the Revit on it, and call it a day.
The information that we are trying to convey hasn't changed, the importance of key pieces of information definitely hasn't changed - and while Revit isn't preventing anyone from taking the extra steps necessary to make sure that this information is communicated clearly and effectively, if a designer is struggling to get even basic information onto the drawings, then more complicated pieces of information are going to get overlooked or lost in the oversimplification process as Revit attempts to quantify the Electrical Engineering discipline.
Back in the early days of the Revit virus, I complained about a number of things that were apparently 'overlooked' in the development of the software - and was met (by Autodesk, other designers, etc.) with a standard 'well, Revit doesn't do it like that' response. Every discipline was running into similar problems, and if they couldn't find a 'workaround' then 'good enough' had to suffice.
The sad part is that I can guarantee, on top of adding ridiculous amounts of time and stress to the design process, that any benefits realized by having a 3d model of the project have been vastly overwhelmed by the amount of confusion, mistakes, and other problems that have been generated by designers and modelers who spent all of their time fighting Revit, rather than using their mental capacity to head off these problems by applying STANDARDS to their projects.
I'm sitting here looking at drawings of another Revit project - this one is just a simple swap of HVAC equipment (the new equipment has to be connected before the old equipment can be disconnected though). I'll be curious what kind of a clusterfuck this thing will be once I open it and start working on it - my money is on 'Mongolian'.
I complain about having to revisit jobs - especially other people's jobs. Mainly because you have to start by trying to recall (or infer) what design criteria, thought processes, etc. were taking place when the project was being developed. You can't just start going through them willy-nilly, otherwise what looks like a 'mistake' or 'omission' (at first glance) can actually turn out to be what was a hotly contested, deeply discussed, considered, reconsidered, and finally compromised on issue (or more likely, was designed correctly, and someone bitched about having to pay money for it to be built correctly).
Now - when I work on a project, I don't keep immaculate notes on every single decision that gets made, and while memory is far from perfect - I can usually pull out my dead-tree folder, refer back to e-mails, and piece it back together fairly quickly. What's funny is when someone comes through telling me that I need to change X and Y, move Z, etc. - and I get to shut them down with 'Actually - there are reasons we did the things we did, and unless those reasons have changed (which is possible), then I'm not doing anything'.
I'll probably dedicate my next post to what I call 'The Loop', which is a mysterious, ever changing and shifting exclusive information base, but for now let's get back to fixing what I am assured were 'mistakes' with my co-workers drawings. I had already made a few 'last minute' changes to the project after he left on vacation, and despite being in Revit, it was only a moderate pain in the ass.
What I was being asked to do sounded extremely simple - correct the lighting package being used for the anchor store at a strip mall. Basically (for the uninitiated), companies that regularly put their stores into strip malls or other buildings that they are leasing put together a letter outlining the specifics of what the landlord is responsible for providing (otherwise they will get a completely empty shell).
In most cases the requests are simple - specific light fixture/lamp manufacturers, finishes, HVAC requirements, etc., but (as with most things) if this information isn't passed along to the designers (even after they ask for it - repeatedly), then the only thing they can do is make their best guess and move on, which is what it looked like what happened in this case.
So I open the project, wait for it to load, and go to work trying to figure out how to de-clusterfuckize the goddamned thing. Even the projects I have 'done' in Revit still use CAD fixture schedules (and I tag the fixtures with text), but this guy had managed to get his light fixtures to schedule and tag - all the Revit way. This was great - right up until the point where only one of the tenant spaces that the schedule referred to was changing. I spent a few minutes trying to see if I could manipulate the families to get what I needed, and then said 'fuck this', and dumped the schedule out to ACAD.
Or at least tried to - the header came out, but no schedule. I thought about trying to figure out how to get the schedule to export - but between needing to get this project (and the half a dozen other projects that it was fucking holding up) done, and not wanting to pay for a new monitor after I punched a hole in the old one, I said 'fuck the dumb shit' and manually re-created the whole goddamned schedule in ACAD, labeled it for the tenant spaces that were staying the same, and then created a new one with the owner's requested fixtures - imported them both back into the Revit model, and 'voila'.
This prevented me from having to re-tag any of the fixtures, but then I start looking around and noticing actual mistakes - first was that all of the exit lights had been labeled (or scheduled) backwards, so the edge-lit LED signs were in the back-of-house areas, while the injection molded 'el cheapo' kind were being prominently displayed in the customer showroom (easy fix). Then I added a few notes and tags to clarify some other pieces of information that I felt had been omitted/overlooked.
As usual - a big part of what annoys me in Revit is how people use it as carte blanche to stop giving a fuck about standards - even though my ACAD electrical drawings are slightly different than other designers in the firm, they all tend to communicate the same information (albeit in slightly different ways) but it's generally all there. Not so when it comes to Revit - while I attempt to make my drawings look as close to my ACAD drawings as to be almost indistinguishable, other people just slap the Revit on it, and call it a day.
The information that we are trying to convey hasn't changed, the importance of key pieces of information definitely hasn't changed - and while Revit isn't preventing anyone from taking the extra steps necessary to make sure that this information is communicated clearly and effectively, if a designer is struggling to get even basic information onto the drawings, then more complicated pieces of information are going to get overlooked or lost in the oversimplification process as Revit attempts to quantify the Electrical Engineering discipline.
Back in the early days of the Revit virus, I complained about a number of things that were apparently 'overlooked' in the development of the software - and was met (by Autodesk, other designers, etc.) with a standard 'well, Revit doesn't do it like that' response. Every discipline was running into similar problems, and if they couldn't find a 'workaround' then 'good enough' had to suffice.
The sad part is that I can guarantee, on top of adding ridiculous amounts of time and stress to the design process, that any benefits realized by having a 3d model of the project have been vastly overwhelmed by the amount of confusion, mistakes, and other problems that have been generated by designers and modelers who spent all of their time fighting Revit, rather than using their mental capacity to head off these problems by applying STANDARDS to their projects.
I'm sitting here looking at drawings of another Revit project - this one is just a simple swap of HVAC equipment (the new equipment has to be connected before the old equipment can be disconnected though). I'll be curious what kind of a clusterfuck this thing will be once I open it and start working on it - my money is on 'Mongolian'.
Monday, June 10, 2013
Take-Off Eh!
I've probably mentioned it before, but talking about actual full-blown 3d conduit layout in a project reminded me of another falsification peddled by the Revit-elite - that anyone with a functioning brain would use Revit for 'take-off'.
For the uninitiated, 'take-off' is what happens once a set of construction documents (remember those?) are completed (remember that?), and in order to make sure that the bids are realistic, somebody sits down and acts like they are the contractor, and attempts to estimate what the building will cost to build - as appointed.
You hear people throw around dollar/square-foot numbers all the time - many (if not all) of which are whipped directly out of that persons rectal-calculator. You can get a rough idea, especially once you've actually seen a few projects from conception to completion, but there are too many variables - and people are way too willing (just like when we are designing the project) to say 'oh - it's just like that other project we did'.
The key word there is 'like'. If it's 'like' the other building in that it has a floor, walls, roof, windows, and all of the other things that make a building a building, then yes, it could be considered to be 'like' the other one - but unless you are willing to hang your hat on it being *exactly like* the other building, you better not start handing out even rough estimates without educating yourself a little bit.
Between what the codes require, what the owner/architect wants (which may vary wildly, not agree, and is subject to change on a daily basis), and what is necessary to accomplish all of the tasks necessary to take a design from conception to completion, and take a site from whatever state it is currently in, to a completed building (with a certificate of occupancy) that you can drive up in front of, walk into, turn on the lights/hvac/plumbing, and use it for whatever purpose it was intended for - there are huge differences in every single building that gets built.
Even simple boxes that we crank out all of the time - someone does a rough-estimate, bases what they think they can afford to do on that, then reality kicks in, and we wasted half of our time designing and drawing/modeling shit that should have never been in the project to begin with. If you ever hear someone say they can do 'X' for '$X/s.f.' - unless they are willing to agree to pay the difference (and get that in writing), tell them that they need to fuck off.
Enter Revit - and every archidoodlehead thinks they can:
1. Slap together a model.
2. Magical rainbows and sparkle ponies.
3. Have an accurate idea of what it will cost to build the building.
The fact is - attempting to use the glorified spreadsheet that is Revit as an actual spreadsheet fails just as badly as trying to use excel would be for 3d design. The first thing that any intelligent person does to a Revit model before attempting to use it for take-off is print the CD's out, and then turn off Revit (or preferably have someone else do it - so you don't have to spend half an hour opening, re-opening in the right version, etc.).
A set of .pdfs makes it easier to review files at any time - and is an absolute must-have (even when not working in Revit), *BUT* has to be kept religiously updated, or changes/revisions to the working file do not get passed along. I always make .pdfs of signed/sealed drawings, but I almost always refer back to the working drawings anyway - in ACAD this is a non-issue, because opening a file doesn't require hunting down the right version of the software (as long as what you are using is newer), and the file will be open before your dick rots off.
Maybe continued use of ACAD has given me an unrealistic expectation of speedy access to my working files - and usually if I'm viewing it, it probably means someone dropped the ball (maybe even me) and tweaks (small or large) to the design are going to be necessary. I've already been into an electrical ACAD file this morning that didn't belong to me - and was able to get the information I needed in seconds, and then open a mechanical ACAD file to cross-check it in only a few more seconds.
And in the (very likely possibility) that I have to fix it, I will be done before the Revit splash screen would even have time to pop up.
For the uninitiated, 'take-off' is what happens once a set of construction documents (remember those?) are completed (remember that?), and in order to make sure that the bids are realistic, somebody sits down and acts like they are the contractor, and attempts to estimate what the building will cost to build - as appointed.
You hear people throw around dollar/square-foot numbers all the time - many (if not all) of which are whipped directly out of that persons rectal-calculator. You can get a rough idea, especially once you've actually seen a few projects from conception to completion, but there are too many variables - and people are way too willing (just like when we are designing the project) to say 'oh - it's just like that other project we did'.
The key word there is 'like'. If it's 'like' the other building in that it has a floor, walls, roof, windows, and all of the other things that make a building a building, then yes, it could be considered to be 'like' the other one - but unless you are willing to hang your hat on it being *exactly like* the other building, you better not start handing out even rough estimates without educating yourself a little bit.
Between what the codes require, what the owner/architect wants (which may vary wildly, not agree, and is subject to change on a daily basis), and what is necessary to accomplish all of the tasks necessary to take a design from conception to completion, and take a site from whatever state it is currently in, to a completed building (with a certificate of occupancy) that you can drive up in front of, walk into, turn on the lights/hvac/plumbing, and use it for whatever purpose it was intended for - there are huge differences in every single building that gets built.
Even simple boxes that we crank out all of the time - someone does a rough-estimate, bases what they think they can afford to do on that, then reality kicks in, and we wasted half of our time designing and drawing/modeling shit that should have never been in the project to begin with. If you ever hear someone say they can do 'X' for '$X/s.f.' - unless they are willing to agree to pay the difference (and get that in writing), tell them that they need to fuck off.
Enter Revit - and every archidoodlehead thinks they can:
1. Slap together a model.
2. Magical rainbows and sparkle ponies.
3. Have an accurate idea of what it will cost to build the building.
The fact is - attempting to use the glorified spreadsheet that is Revit as an actual spreadsheet fails just as badly as trying to use excel would be for 3d design. The first thing that any intelligent person does to a Revit model before attempting to use it for take-off is print the CD's out, and then turn off Revit (or preferably have someone else do it - so you don't have to spend half an hour opening, re-opening in the right version, etc.).
A set of .pdfs makes it easier to review files at any time - and is an absolute must-have (even when not working in Revit), *BUT* has to be kept religiously updated, or changes/revisions to the working file do not get passed along. I always make .pdfs of signed/sealed drawings, but I almost always refer back to the working drawings anyway - in ACAD this is a non-issue, because opening a file doesn't require hunting down the right version of the software (as long as what you are using is newer), and the file will be open before your dick rots off.
Maybe continued use of ACAD has given me an unrealistic expectation of speedy access to my working files - and usually if I'm viewing it, it probably means someone dropped the ball (maybe even me) and tweaks (small or large) to the design are going to be necessary. I've already been into an electrical ACAD file this morning that didn't belong to me - and was able to get the information I needed in seconds, and then open a mechanical ACAD file to cross-check it in only a few more seconds.
And in the (very likely possibility) that I have to fix it, I will be done before the Revit splash screen would even have time to pop up.
Two Thousand Fourteen
Another day of kicking ass with ACAD, and wasting time with Revit.
I was getting some error messages today - I believe it was when I would close ACAD 2013 (which is still on my machine obviously - and opening some files from explorer seemed to select it rather than 2014). It wasn't hurting anything, so I basically ignored it - everything I did with ACAD 2014 was smooth as silk, and thank fucking god, because I ran it (and myself) through the wringer.
One minor annoyance about the 2014 release, when the programs are pinned to the taskbar, they almost appear to be open, even when they are not - because the icons are kind of shiny looking. I've already bitched about how stupid Autodesk is about updating their 'look' rather than fix their fucking software, so I'll leave it at that for now.
I happened to notice a 'sample systems project' in the 2014 released that looked almost like (gasp) a power riser diagram!?! Granted, with as little as I give in fucks about Revit at this point, it's entirely possible it was in a previous version, and while it is drawn in 3d, complete with 3d conduit fittings, it does appears to be an actual attempt to display the panels, their relative locations (in space), and interconnection. I had always assumed it was possible to do a power riser in an 'elevation' view (apparently our architects stick a wall out in space for various details), but without any intuitive way to put one together, I wasn't about to waste my time (for dubious gain).
If you want to waste your time, you can open the sample systems project, and see one oddball panel/transformer off to the right of the rest - and if you go into a 3d view you will see they are rotated 90 degrees away from the rest of the panels (the way it is oriented in the building). I'm assuming it could be displayed like the others - at least in this view, and that it is probably unnecessary to have 3d fittings and crap for a schematic that they are going to go build (and there is no telling exactly how they are going to build it in most cases - going the 'extra mile' often ends up getting you kicked in the teeth).
Now - we do some projects that are heavily geared towards showing specific conduits routed in specific ways. We have one huge project (in Revit) that is a never ending maze of shifting and intertwining pipes, ducts, electrical conduits, cable trays, etc. - routed through service tunnels in a large-scale facility. Our firm is not doing the actual electrical design, but was hired (in a sort of round-about way) to do the 3d Reviting. It keeps one employee busy almost full time (although I'm not sure if we are making enough money on the project to justify that - and as I've mentioned previously - much of their time is taken up staring at Navisworks going 'wtf?).
I can almost guarantee the first thing that will happen when this projects gets out in the field, is the realization will hit that they (for some unforeseen reason) everything will have to be shifted around, and ends causing everything else to be re-routed manually, with all of that careful planning gone to shit. You can call me a pessimist all you want, but reality seems to agree with me - the vast majority of the time.
I realized that the 'sample system' for electrical resembles a 3d plumbing riser more than it does anything in the electrical realm. The difference being that plumbing has to be able to show the proper slopes, and is a whole hell of a lot harder to tweak and cram into places (same with HVAC ductwork). That is one of the main things that escapes people - most of my conduits are small, easy to route (or re-route), and electricity flows uphill. There are usually only a handful of large conduits (mainly service entrance, and maybe a few distribution panel feeders) in any given project, and they still aren't as hard to modify when necessary (although I've seen a few cases where they just flat-out screwed the electrical contractor - and no amount of 3d design would have had any affect).
Anything more than schematic design in most cases is an exercise in redundancy - even after it is an exercise in futility.
I was getting some error messages today - I believe it was when I would close ACAD 2013 (which is still on my machine obviously - and opening some files from explorer seemed to select it rather than 2014). It wasn't hurting anything, so I basically ignored it - everything I did with ACAD 2014 was smooth as silk, and thank fucking god, because I ran it (and myself) through the wringer.
One minor annoyance about the 2014 release, when the programs are pinned to the taskbar, they almost appear to be open, even when they are not - because the icons are kind of shiny looking. I've already bitched about how stupid Autodesk is about updating their 'look' rather than fix their fucking software, so I'll leave it at that for now.
I happened to notice a 'sample systems project' in the 2014 released that looked almost like (gasp) a power riser diagram!?! Granted, with as little as I give in fucks about Revit at this point, it's entirely possible it was in a previous version, and while it is drawn in 3d, complete with 3d conduit fittings, it does appears to be an actual attempt to display the panels, their relative locations (in space), and interconnection. I had always assumed it was possible to do a power riser in an 'elevation' view (apparently our architects stick a wall out in space for various details), but without any intuitive way to put one together, I wasn't about to waste my time (for dubious gain).
If you want to waste your time, you can open the sample systems project, and see one oddball panel/transformer off to the right of the rest - and if you go into a 3d view you will see they are rotated 90 degrees away from the rest of the panels (the way it is oriented in the building). I'm assuming it could be displayed like the others - at least in this view, and that it is probably unnecessary to have 3d fittings and crap for a schematic that they are going to go build (and there is no telling exactly how they are going to build it in most cases - going the 'extra mile' often ends up getting you kicked in the teeth).
Now - we do some projects that are heavily geared towards showing specific conduits routed in specific ways. We have one huge project (in Revit) that is a never ending maze of shifting and intertwining pipes, ducts, electrical conduits, cable trays, etc. - routed through service tunnels in a large-scale facility. Our firm is not doing the actual electrical design, but was hired (in a sort of round-about way) to do the 3d Reviting. It keeps one employee busy almost full time (although I'm not sure if we are making enough money on the project to justify that - and as I've mentioned previously - much of their time is taken up staring at Navisworks going 'wtf?).
I can almost guarantee the first thing that will happen when this projects gets out in the field, is the realization will hit that they (for some unforeseen reason) everything will have to be shifted around, and ends causing everything else to be re-routed manually, with all of that careful planning gone to shit. You can call me a pessimist all you want, but reality seems to agree with me - the vast majority of the time.
I realized that the 'sample system' for electrical resembles a 3d plumbing riser more than it does anything in the electrical realm. The difference being that plumbing has to be able to show the proper slopes, and is a whole hell of a lot harder to tweak and cram into places (same with HVAC ductwork). That is one of the main things that escapes people - most of my conduits are small, easy to route (or re-route), and electricity flows uphill. There are usually only a handful of large conduits (mainly service entrance, and maybe a few distribution panel feeders) in any given project, and they still aren't as hard to modify when necessary (although I've seen a few cases where they just flat-out screwed the electrical contractor - and no amount of 3d design would have had any affect).
Anything more than schematic design in most cases is an exercise in redundancy - even after it is an exercise in futility.
Thursday, June 6, 2013
Ding Ding Ding Goes The Revit...
I've bitched before about all of the meaningless, annoying, and otherwise esoteric sounding error messages that Revit vomits onto the screen - but there is a far worse, and considerably more annoying aspect to Revit: the 'ding'.
When you receive a 'ding' it means you are trying to do something that Revit doesn't want you to do - and so you get 'dinged' for it.
I have watched even highly experienced users attempting a simple task, and having Revit ding at them a half-dozen times before they are able to complete it because it requires you to remember a specific order for commands and selections that isn't always logical or consistent ('create similar' for example requires you to select an item first, then initiate the command - for no apparent reason).
There is nothing more frustrating than wanting to make that simple change, under pressure, and have a goddamned box ding at you over and over for no apparent reason other than 'Sorry Dave, Revit Can't Let You Do That'.
This is mainly what I am talking about when I describe the Revit interface as obtuse and unintuitive. It's a running joke among all of the Revit users that I know, but it's not even remotely funny - especially when it involves me spending valuable time and mental energy trying to convince a program to just let me lay out my fucking shit and get on with my fucking life.
When I am asked about 'why u not use tha revitz? it's tha shiznit!', it's impossible to properly express my disgust without first taking the person by the face and bouncing their fucking head off of my desk two or three times.
Any attempt at listing off specific issues gets met with vague hand waving, oversimplification, and a lack of comprehension of what it is I am even talking about. It's no different now than it was when Revit was first introduced - people who don't do my job telling me how to do my job with software that hinders my ability to effectively do my job.
It's comical that most of them agree with me on almost all of the limitations and shortcomings of Revit (although some require a little pressure to admit it). It is probably easier for an Architect to overlook some of these, since when you see the result of their 3D designs, it is impressive - but again, it's all basically rendering.
They are constantly (and I mean constantly) having to fake things in - usually requiring several attempts, and then they have to remember what they faked in (and god help you if you open someone else's model and don't know what's what).
It's not uncommon for a project to stall at some point - the owner has to go blow someone to get the money, the architect realizes that they've designed something that the owner can't afford (even after their throats are sore), or there is a problem with the property they have purchased: 'it seemed like such a good deal - I couldn't believe that the entire property was taken up by easements, right-of-ways, and had previously been a landfill'.
At any rate, we're left with a project dangling - and in a lot of cases, once the jizz clears, the people working on the second (or third, or fourth) attempt aren't the same people who started it. I've had several architects try to take over another persons job, and because there ARE NO FUCKING STANDARDS FOR THE GODDAMNED SOFTWARE (and everyone is allowed to pretty much take off in their own direction - as long as they are 'reviting' - which is partially an office problem, but still one that I hold Revit accountable for), they are stuck with a shitty model, bloated, lagged... the... fuck... out..., and any place it does look good, it's wrong.
That last point seems to escape some people - it doesn't matter how pretty your model looks if it's FUCKING WRONG, and the more elaborate a model gets the harder it is to make tweaks without causing a domino effect. This has led to the occasional designer choosing to start from scratch rather than trying to unclusterfuck somebody else's half-assed shit (or at least wishing they had by the time all was said and done). Of course, those of us who are waiting on a simple goddamned set of plans so we can get started get fucked in the interim either way.
There are ALWAYS delusions about how far a project was along before it stalled, how easily all of the information that was previously discussed will be recalled and applied, and (of course) how much of that information has changed drastically in the interim, while nobody was in the loop to catch it. It can easily be the same as starting over.
Pulling up older projects - whether to unstall, revise, or in order to get information from them is the next problem - as I have been railing about, the version they are created in, and the inability to simply open the file without first converting - it can make even a 5 second change take 1/2 an hour (or, even better - finding out that you attempted to open it in an older version of Revit only to have it load for 5 minutes before telling you that someone has already converted the file to a newer version).
Someone I was complaining to online suggested putting the Revit release in the file name. That's great - if anyone does it (or changes it when the version changes - which I can almost guarantee would dick with the way files are cross-linked) but nothing addresses the fact that after a certain point we will be forced to convert every single file that we need to open, no matter how simple the change, or even just to look at the goddamned thing.
And that's if the fucking thing doesn't eat itself when trying to convert, or throw up a stack of meaningless error messages that basically add up to 'you are fucked'.
Or - it might just ding at you.
Next time: I attempt to set up Revit 2014 for 'Electrical Design' (whatever the fuck that is).
When you receive a 'ding' it means you are trying to do something that Revit doesn't want you to do - and so you get 'dinged' for it.
I have watched even highly experienced users attempting a simple task, and having Revit ding at them a half-dozen times before they are able to complete it because it requires you to remember a specific order for commands and selections that isn't always logical or consistent ('create similar' for example requires you to select an item first, then initiate the command - for no apparent reason).
There is nothing more frustrating than wanting to make that simple change, under pressure, and have a goddamned box ding at you over and over for no apparent reason other than 'Sorry Dave, Revit Can't Let You Do That'.
This is mainly what I am talking about when I describe the Revit interface as obtuse and unintuitive. It's a running joke among all of the Revit users that I know, but it's not even remotely funny - especially when it involves me spending valuable time and mental energy trying to convince a program to just let me lay out my fucking shit and get on with my fucking life.
When I am asked about 'why u not use tha revitz? it's tha shiznit!', it's impossible to properly express my disgust without first taking the person by the face and bouncing their fucking head off of my desk two or three times.
Any attempt at listing off specific issues gets met with vague hand waving, oversimplification, and a lack of comprehension of what it is I am even talking about. It's no different now than it was when Revit was first introduced - people who don't do my job telling me how to do my job with software that hinders my ability to effectively do my job.
It's comical that most of them agree with me on almost all of the limitations and shortcomings of Revit (although some require a little pressure to admit it). It is probably easier for an Architect to overlook some of these, since when you see the result of their 3D designs, it is impressive - but again, it's all basically rendering.
They are constantly (and I mean constantly) having to fake things in - usually requiring several attempts, and then they have to remember what they faked in (and god help you if you open someone else's model and don't know what's what).
It's not uncommon for a project to stall at some point - the owner has to go blow someone to get the money, the architect realizes that they've designed something that the owner can't afford (even after their throats are sore), or there is a problem with the property they have purchased: 'it seemed like such a good deal - I couldn't believe that the entire property was taken up by easements, right-of-ways, and had previously been a landfill'.
At any rate, we're left with a project dangling - and in a lot of cases, once the jizz clears, the people working on the second (or third, or fourth) attempt aren't the same people who started it. I've had several architects try to take over another persons job, and because there ARE NO FUCKING STANDARDS FOR THE GODDAMNED SOFTWARE (and everyone is allowed to pretty much take off in their own direction - as long as they are 'reviting' - which is partially an office problem, but still one that I hold Revit accountable for), they are stuck with a shitty model, bloated, lagged... the... fuck... out..., and any place it does look good, it's wrong.
That last point seems to escape some people - it doesn't matter how pretty your model looks if it's FUCKING WRONG, and the more elaborate a model gets the harder it is to make tweaks without causing a domino effect. This has led to the occasional designer choosing to start from scratch rather than trying to unclusterfuck somebody else's half-assed shit (or at least wishing they had by the time all was said and done). Of course, those of us who are waiting on a simple goddamned set of plans so we can get started get fucked in the interim either way.
There are ALWAYS delusions about how far a project was along before it stalled, how easily all of the information that was previously discussed will be recalled and applied, and (of course) how much of that information has changed drastically in the interim, while nobody was in the loop to catch it. It can easily be the same as starting over.
Pulling up older projects - whether to unstall, revise, or in order to get information from them is the next problem - as I have been railing about, the version they are created in, and the inability to simply open the file without first converting - it can make even a 5 second change take 1/2 an hour (or, even better - finding out that you attempted to open it in an older version of Revit only to have it load for 5 minutes before telling you that someone has already converted the file to a newer version).
Someone I was complaining to online suggested putting the Revit release in the file name. That's great - if anyone does it (or changes it when the version changes - which I can almost guarantee would dick with the way files are cross-linked) but nothing addresses the fact that after a certain point we will be forced to convert every single file that we need to open, no matter how simple the change, or even just to look at the goddamned thing.
And that's if the fucking thing doesn't eat itself when trying to convert, or throw up a stack of meaningless error messages that basically add up to 'you are fucked'.
Or - it might just ding at you.
Next time: I attempt to set up Revit 2014 for 'Electrical Design' (whatever the fuck that is).
Tuesday, June 4, 2013
Autodesk 2014 Products
Welcome to the future motherfuckers!!!
Time to toss out that dusty old 2013 software, and load up some shiny new products - and see what they broke (er.. I mean... 'upgraded') this time!
One fairly impressive download and install later, and 'TADOW!!!', it's next goddamned year bitches!!!
Opening up ACAD 2014 I was moderately impressed. I never import settings, but they apparently listened to their users, because not only did they opt for a BLACK background (rather than the washed out gray bullshit that was the 2013 default), but they also ran the crosshairs out to the edges of the screen, and a few other options were set just like I like them.
Within about 15 minutes I had the Ribbon 86'ed, all of the other b.s. cleared off. The tabs feature is redundant, and takes up an inordinate amount screen real-estate - so I ditched it (ctrl+tab lets me scroll through my drawings, and I can always tile the windows). Within another 15 minutes, I had all of the settings the way I like them, QAT loaded up with my tools, and everything else stripped back, clean, and ready for business.
When I was done, I amused myself by flipping back and forth betwen 2013 and 2014, because they are identical now (with the exception of the new logo in the upper left hand corner). I have been using it all day today, with no problems. I'm sure I'll run across an odd setting or two in the next couple of days that needs tweaking, but as far as I can tell they managed to NOT FUCK IT UP, so kudos to the Autodesk Autocad development team - keep up the good work!
The amusing part was that besides ACAD, the upgrade dumped 5-6 other shortcuts on my desktop (mostly ACAD for other disciplines, plus Navisworks, and something called 'Raster Design' - whatever the fuck that is).
But - no Revit shortcut.
I had to go to my start menu (not sure what you would do if you had Windows 8 - see previous post), and drag a shortcut out to the desktop. That was my introduction to 2014 Revit - it seemed to say 'we are embarrassed by this piece of shit'. I opened it and looked at it for a few seconds, closed it, and went back to working in ACAD.
Today I had to open someone elses Revit file - of course Revit '14 tried to open and convert the fucking thing (seriously?), so I had to kill it, manually start Revit '13, and load. I'm not sure when I will have a chance to actually give it a whirl - but I will make sure to dedicate an entire post to ripping it a new asshole.
Speaking of assholes, I had a passive-aggressive little Revit bitch send me a whiny e-mail today, complete with dismissive attitude, gross over-simplification, and (as always) no clue as to what the fuck they are talking about. I didn't let him know he was getting to me though - I just responded in my cheeriest tone, and let them be puzzled.
Next time (barring a job change) it's time to put Revit 2014 on the chopping block. I will honestly shit a brick if they have fixed, improved, or added a single thing that resembles useful electrical tools, improves presentation graphics, or otherwise makes the Revit experience into anything other than a high-speed drill to the cranium.
Fuck.
Time to toss out that dusty old 2013 software, and load up some shiny new products - and see what they broke (er.. I mean... 'upgraded') this time!
One fairly impressive download and install later, and 'TADOW!!!', it's next goddamned year bitches!!!
Opening up ACAD 2014 I was moderately impressed. I never import settings, but they apparently listened to their users, because not only did they opt for a BLACK background (rather than the washed out gray bullshit that was the 2013 default), but they also ran the crosshairs out to the edges of the screen, and a few other options were set just like I like them.
Within about 15 minutes I had the Ribbon 86'ed, all of the other b.s. cleared off. The tabs feature is redundant, and takes up an inordinate amount screen real-estate - so I ditched it (ctrl+tab lets me scroll through my drawings, and I can always tile the windows). Within another 15 minutes, I had all of the settings the way I like them, QAT loaded up with my tools, and everything else stripped back, clean, and ready for business.
When I was done, I amused myself by flipping back and forth betwen 2013 and 2014, because they are identical now (with the exception of the new logo in the upper left hand corner). I have been using it all day today, with no problems. I'm sure I'll run across an odd setting or two in the next couple of days that needs tweaking, but as far as I can tell they managed to NOT FUCK IT UP, so kudos to the Autodesk Autocad development team - keep up the good work!
The amusing part was that besides ACAD, the upgrade dumped 5-6 other shortcuts on my desktop (mostly ACAD for other disciplines, plus Navisworks, and something called 'Raster Design' - whatever the fuck that is).
But - no Revit shortcut.
I had to go to my start menu (not sure what you would do if you had Windows 8 - see previous post), and drag a shortcut out to the desktop. That was my introduction to 2014 Revit - it seemed to say 'we are embarrassed by this piece of shit'. I opened it and looked at it for a few seconds, closed it, and went back to working in ACAD.
Today I had to open someone elses Revit file - of course Revit '14 tried to open and convert the fucking thing (seriously?), so I had to kill it, manually start Revit '13, and load. I'm not sure when I will have a chance to actually give it a whirl - but I will make sure to dedicate an entire post to ripping it a new asshole.
Speaking of assholes, I had a passive-aggressive little Revit bitch send me a whiny e-mail today, complete with dismissive attitude, gross over-simplification, and (as always) no clue as to what the fuck they are talking about. I didn't let him know he was getting to me though - I just responded in my cheeriest tone, and let them be puzzled.
Next time (barring a job change) it's time to put Revit 2014 on the chopping block. I will honestly shit a brick if they have fixed, improved, or added a single thing that resembles useful electrical tools, improves presentation graphics, or otherwise makes the Revit experience into anything other than a high-speed drill to the cranium.
Fuck.
Windows 8 Hate
Let's take a break from pointing out the many grievous sins and shortcomings of Autodesk Revit for a minute, and focus some much needed disgust at the latest droppings from Microsoft.
I have yet to actually set foot in 'Windows 8', so I will suspend final judgement for a future entry - but if the various reviews I have read/viewed are any indication, that's going to be one motherfucking brutal post.
I've used just about every operating system ever developed (DOS/OSX/iOS/Win3.11/95/98/ME/NT/2K/XP) and when Win7 was installed on my work desktop, I found it to be a pleasant, stable, and reliable O/S - mainly because they DIDN'T FUCK WITH ANYTHING.
All of my programs ran exactly like they always had - which (as I've probably mentioned before) is what an OS is suppose to fucking do. Anyone who sits around 'using' their OS has some kind of mental defect.
In fact, with the exception of occasional maintenance, optimization, drivers, etc. - the only time I think about my OS is when it stops doing it's job of staying the fuck out of the way, and allowing me to focus on the task at hand.
Win7 does exactly that - and looks pretty sharp while doing it.
Now, enter Win8.
At first glance - this thing looks patently retarded. Most reviewers compared the 'Modern UI' (originally called 'Metro', but someone must've informed Microsoft management of the connotations of that word) to a tablet or cellphone. This is a fair comparison - especially since 'apps' (previously 'widgets'?) are available for Win8.
The 'charms' bar (basically just another menu bar) adds to the similarity between Win8 and a phone by allowing you to share things, etc., but as many have pointed out - most 'power users' could give two fucks and maybe (on a good day) half a shit about this cutesy interface.
Fortunately they were smart enough to keep a desktop, which can be toggled to (although the 'Modern UI' is apparently the default, requiring you to switch to your desktop every time you boot (oh, and that's after you go past another 'start' screen, choose your account, and log in), but got rid of the 'start' menu.
The lack of a 'start' menu isn't necessary a deal killer to me (as long as I can access everything that I need), and apparently there is a 3rd party solution that will bring it back (for $5 - you might've heard me rail before on the subject of having to purchase 3rd party software to make an obscenely overpriced piece of software do what it should have the capability of doing right out of the box).
One thing that sounded iffy to me was the inability to have multiple windows open at the same time - apparently it can only have two (in a 70/30 split), and the rest of the time each window takes up the WHOLE FUCKING SCREEN.
For a tablet or phone user - getting to have two apps viewable at the same time is a major upgrade. On a desktop or laptop on the other hand - it should get someone at Microsoft's favored hand slammed in a desk drawer repeatedly. I mean - what in the entire fuck?
This brings me to something I noticed when reading various comments on the reviews - almost the exact same brand of apologetics used by Revit dick sockets to defend their bullshit. It could be argued that I (and others like me) are simply resistant to change - however this line of reasoning gets shut the fuck down quickly, because I don't resist change - however I absolutely refuse to accept change for change's sake.
The touch-screen functionality is a moot point, because Win7 already works with a touchscreen - my friend has one on his laptop, but it doesn't get used much because you 1) get fucking fingerprints all over your goddamned screen and 2) you can't fucking see what you are doing because your goddamned fingers are in the fucking way.
On a desktop machine, exactly how much of your day do you want to spend reaching for the screen (or sitting so close to it that it destroys your vision)? It is obvious from the comments of most of the people (as usual) that they don't actual *DO* anything with their computers (or their tablets/phones for that matter, besides using them to compensate for tiny dicks).
One astute observation that someone made was that the Metro UI (I'm going to call it that) actually had less in common with a smartphone, and was instead more of a ripoff of the Wii 'channels' UI (with some added functionality).
While I consider this kind of interface to be extremely stupid, and an attempt to dumb down computers to the lowest common denominator (i.e. morons who fuck with their goddamned phones all day long) most of the arguments against it were moot since you can switch to the desktop (but again - you can't just make this the default.
Next time 2014 Autodesk Products!!!
I have yet to actually set foot in 'Windows 8', so I will suspend final judgement for a future entry - but if the various reviews I have read/viewed are any indication, that's going to be one motherfucking brutal post.
I've used just about every operating system ever developed (DOS/OSX/iOS/Win3.11/95/98/ME/NT/2K/XP) and when Win7 was installed on my work desktop, I found it to be a pleasant, stable, and reliable O/S - mainly because they DIDN'T FUCK WITH ANYTHING.
All of my programs ran exactly like they always had - which (as I've probably mentioned before) is what an OS is suppose to fucking do. Anyone who sits around 'using' their OS has some kind of mental defect.
In fact, with the exception of occasional maintenance, optimization, drivers, etc. - the only time I think about my OS is when it stops doing it's job of staying the fuck out of the way, and allowing me to focus on the task at hand.
Win7 does exactly that - and looks pretty sharp while doing it.
Now, enter Win8.
At first glance - this thing looks patently retarded. Most reviewers compared the 'Modern UI' (originally called 'Metro', but someone must've informed Microsoft management of the connotations of that word) to a tablet or cellphone. This is a fair comparison - especially since 'apps' (previously 'widgets'?) are available for Win8.
The 'charms' bar (basically just another menu bar) adds to the similarity between Win8 and a phone by allowing you to share things, etc., but as many have pointed out - most 'power users' could give two fucks and maybe (on a good day) half a shit about this cutesy interface.
Fortunately they were smart enough to keep a desktop, which can be toggled to (although the 'Modern UI' is apparently the default, requiring you to switch to your desktop every time you boot (oh, and that's after you go past another 'start' screen, choose your account, and log in), but got rid of the 'start' menu.
The lack of a 'start' menu isn't necessary a deal killer to me (as long as I can access everything that I need), and apparently there is a 3rd party solution that will bring it back (for $5 - you might've heard me rail before on the subject of having to purchase 3rd party software to make an obscenely overpriced piece of software do what it should have the capability of doing right out of the box).
One thing that sounded iffy to me was the inability to have multiple windows open at the same time - apparently it can only have two (in a 70/30 split), and the rest of the time each window takes up the WHOLE FUCKING SCREEN.
For a tablet or phone user - getting to have two apps viewable at the same time is a major upgrade. On a desktop or laptop on the other hand - it should get someone at Microsoft's favored hand slammed in a desk drawer repeatedly. I mean - what in the entire fuck?
This brings me to something I noticed when reading various comments on the reviews - almost the exact same brand of apologetics used by Revit dick sockets to defend their bullshit. It could be argued that I (and others like me) are simply resistant to change - however this line of reasoning gets shut the fuck down quickly, because I don't resist change - however I absolutely refuse to accept change for change's sake.
The touch-screen functionality is a moot point, because Win7 already works with a touchscreen - my friend has one on his laptop, but it doesn't get used much because you 1) get fucking fingerprints all over your goddamned screen and 2) you can't fucking see what you are doing because your goddamned fingers are in the fucking way.
On a desktop machine, exactly how much of your day do you want to spend reaching for the screen (or sitting so close to it that it destroys your vision)? It is obvious from the comments of most of the people (as usual) that they don't actual *DO* anything with their computers (or their tablets/phones for that matter, besides using them to compensate for tiny dicks).
One astute observation that someone made was that the Metro UI (I'm going to call it that) actually had less in common with a smartphone, and was instead more of a ripoff of the Wii 'channels' UI (with some added functionality).
While I consider this kind of interface to be extremely stupid, and an attempt to dumb down computers to the lowest common denominator (i.e. morons who fuck with their goddamned phones all day long) most of the arguments against it were moot since you can switch to the desktop (but again - you can't just make this the default.
Next time 2014 Autodesk Products!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)