Materials List Revisited

[lbuttery]

No software is ever perfect but it would be nice if the more glaring problems could be fixed even if it happens
a little at a time.

Alan:

as a former programmer I agree that no software is "perfect" or ever will be "perfect"

however, applying "band-aid" fixes to the ML is not really a solution

we have to be able to trust it
without trust - it is useless

I am not willing to create a model and then create a ML
then have to verify each and every line each and every time I create the ML

just ain't gonna happen

so until I hear that the majority of chiefers are happy with the ML
and that it only needs a few fixes or work-arounds I ain't even interested in trying it

you can put lipstick on a pig but it is still a pig....

Lew

[gteacher]

..... applying "band-aid" fixes to the ML is not really a solution

we have to be able to trust it
without trust - it is useless...

Lew:
You just summarized the most germane part of about 100+ posts. --- Good Show. Perhaps it does take a programmer to see the problem. At some point we all have to realize the best path is to step back and re-evaluate.

What is being lost is that no one cares what we want. We, as designers, are creating a product for someone else to use. Functionality is the only thing that matters here and Chief’s ML is not functional. Small nudges to solve these problems isn’t going to help.

As designers, we are supposed to be in tune with the needs of our customers. That’s why people value our opinion. That doesn’t seem to be the case here. The focus should be: “how can we make these features an asset to our customers”?

It might be more productive to suggest that some pick up a demo copy of the competition or other BIM software to see what the market needs and trends are, rather than what makes me happy today?

I believe that keeping us “busy” arguing with each other isn’t going to solve much either. Only a cooperative, fresh approach can do that and Chief does already process the nucleus of an innovative solution. But without input and direction, it’s going to take another left turn to a dead end.

[lbuttery]

Gerry:

thanks....

at this time if I needed a material list or an estimate I would out-source the task
or consider third-party solutions like Planswift

CADEST used to be another choice but it appears to be out-dated

Lew

[ALAN MATHEWS]

Maybe we could start with int & ext trim.

Molding polyline works well as they can specify moldings that can be calculated by the ML and multiple trim can be added.
If there was a switch on this dialog to specify int, ext trim, siding & etc. would be helpfull .
That way if this was drawn for ext trim it would go to the correct catagory.

Window and door trim should be listed by there trim profile just like molding polylines. This way ML could be calculated by profile & material.
Also multiple trim for backband etc. this would be able to list different trim for all windows & doors

Lintel & sill should be listed by there molding profiles and multiple trim to provide for stacked trim. may be ext. jambs also so this calculates per window.
If fascia could be specified as a molding also this could be calculated. I think shadow boards work as a molding & work well.

Trim items could be calculated like the current framing cut list as some trim is only available in 16' & 20' lengths such as azek & windsor one.

I think some simple items to fix like these will go a long ways .

Maybe some of you need more expert systems. I did look into Plan Swift briefly but dont Know much about it & if it would fit for me.

Just some of my thoughts.

Corner boards as trim

T alsohanks Al Mathews