New in MicroStation CONNECT Edition Update 16 blogs

stuartw said:

and have to say that there is not one new/improved feature that we are likely to use!!

What is an information value of this statement?

stuartw said:

Is there a list of what has been fixed in this version.

It's available at standard place: In MicroStation wiki. Using search, it's simple to find it.

Regards,

  Jan

Jan Šlegr said:

What is an information value of this statement?

Just a statement of fact. There is nothing in the new/improved that we are likely to use.

Definitely, the "voting" system for suggestions, appears broken.
I too am from the Intergraph IGDS, days, with a decade of AutoCAD thrown in, and AutoDesk took a long time, but eventually fixed their attention to what users REALLY wanted, instead of focusing on a vocal minority.
I say, bring back Early release testing, and have a panel of selected people, with a variety of disciplines, to decide on features.
Because to me, it seems just a game of "what is simple that we can crow about".
E.g.
Text is still very much broken (if you have to ask, you'll never get it)
The promise to create a proper NOTE tool never eventuated (almost a decade of broken promises now)
Tab between fields in PROPERTIES never worked as expected (TAB should traverse between text entry fields, NOT the field title)
And so on...And why should we need to bring these up repetitively?

Element templates still broken, RGB colors still broken, text styles broken, Flood method broken, missing text justification none broke standards checker for DWG files and so on. All these issues are easy fixable if took some time to talk with users and look at the complete  workflow.

This looks broken too - 

Oto said:

Element templates still broken, RGB colors still broken, text styles broken, Flood method broken, missing text justification none broke standards checker for DWG files and so on.

Share defect numbers. As you know, when no defect number is assigned, no problem exists ;-)

The defect number can be used to ask support and / or dev team for details and status, and also to create Service Ticket to be assigned to the same defect.

Oto said:

All these issues are easy fixable

My experience with complex software development (e.g. boxed advanced product, developed for years by more people) is that whether anything is fixed or not does not depend too much on complexity, but it's always a mixture of inputs like importance, expected technical/UX/business/... impact, available resources etc.

Oto said:

This looks broken too - 

What exactly is broken? I see just ribbon...

Regards,

  Jan

Looks too blue to me - 

Jan Šlegr said:

Share defect numbers. As you know, when no defect number is assigned, no problem exists ;-)

It is like reported at least 3 times, first with v8i, then CE beta, then CE and is is waste of time as it is not so related to specific defect but the whole workflow. Not to mention duplicated with ideas section. Each "defect" is small nuisance but it renders some workflows impossible. Like missing text justification none renders Standards checker unusable with DWG. Enhancement 716377 and Enhancement 657808 ar not considered as defect so get low priority.

Looks too blue to me - 

Jan Šlegr said:

Share defect numbers. As you know, when no defect number is assigned, no problem exists ;-)

It is like reported at least 3 times, first with v8i, then CE beta, then CE and is is waste of time as it is not so related to specific defect but the whole workflow. Not to mention duplicated with ideas section. Each "defect" is small nuisance but it renders some workflows impossible. Like missing text justification none renders Standards checker unusable with DWG. Enhancement 716377 and Enhancement 657808 ar not considered as defect so get low priority.