I've been meaning to do something like this for a while, ever since I bought a Flip video camera, back in July. Here's a (nearly) 10 minute segment where I talk a little bit about myself.
If you found this interesting (or boring and irrelevant) please say so in a comment. Be sure to let me know if there are further topics you'd like to hear me talk about.
Hi Kean!
I think this is definitly useful but I think you may explore more with this technology.
Do you know Microsoft Channel 9 website?
What about an Autodesk Channel with tech videos not only from you but from other ADN members?
BTW, the video quality is really good. What is this camcorder recording resolution?
Regards,
Fernando.
Hi Fernando,
Thanks for the feedback.
I'm a hug fan of Channel 9 (and have mentioned it in quite a few posts), and would love to see more of this type of video (and on more techncial topics) from members of my team, over time. Watch this space.
I just used the default resolution of the device (640x480), although I did need to post-process using VirtualDub to amplify the audio.
Regards,
Kean
Fantastic! This is a perfect evolution you know. I can't wait to hear more from you and your team. Perhaps a bit down the road we can get some users posting some of their own as well. We can all get to know each other a little better and share info a bit quicker at the same time. Writing those tutorials must be a pain anyway.
Now that I'm on the subject, the discussion.autodesk.com website could use something like this as well.
As far as screen/voice capture software I would recommend camtasia. I've done some tutorials for the folks here at work and they've loved it.
Keep it up,
Jose Madrigal
Thank you - very interesting. You taught me ObjectARX many moons ago in Guildford at a training class, and I still get a kick out of your ARX Smiley application! Looking forward to more.
Cheers
Jon Smith
Jose -
Thanks for the feedback!
We're using Camtasia heavily for our DevTV sessions - it's really a great tool.
Quick videos are very unlikely to replace written posts: I do think they complement each other nicely and that there's a place for both.
Jon -
Yes, I remember teaching you quite clearly, even though it was indeed many moons (and follicles) ago!
I hear regularly from my AEC team that you're one of our most advanced developers (when you ask a question they're almost certain it's a real problem and not something straightforward... and that's a good thing :-).
Kean
Hi Kean,
It's very interesting to know who is behind this blog. I start programming under autocad one year ago and with your blog it's easier to learn autocad .net. (I have 15 years old experience of MDL language developping under MicroStation)
Thanks very much for your Help and the help of your support team (sincerely very efficient help)
What I can say now that it's very fantastic to work with autocad .net
I'm fine to know that you speak French and you know Paris because it's difficult for me to use English language.
Christophe
Very interesting thank now I have a voice to the face. Thank you for all your work and time and effort. Keep up the good work.
Good to see you, again. Last time was at a Dev Days in San Rafael three(?) years ago.
We still do all our stuff w/C++/STL/COM/MFC; lots of custom entities and object behavior - for Civil 3D/Land Desktop/Map -- hence, I'm not Dot Netted.
The predominate explanation I've heard to move from C++ to .Net is that UI is maybe easier to write...but we've had all that nicely standardized for years (although I could still strangle someone at MS at least once a week/month.)
We tend to minimize external API use, whether ObjectArx/Win32/MFC, and try to have portable code. Granted, it's mostly Win32 dependent and perhaps lacks the latest "cool" interface widget, but our code base has to support AutoCAD 2000-latest.
I've poked at your solutions at various times, but always feel that C++ seems/feels/looks better - or that .Net doesn't look persuasively better.
So sell me. Why should we switch to .Net?
Cheers,
Bill Myers
Bill -
This post may be of some help. It doesn't actually answer the question, but it does cover some of the questions I'd ask.
I'm thinking of using your question as the basis for a post, this week. It feels like a good time to talk about some of the innovation I see happening in the .NET platform that is likely to make it increasingly compelling over the next few releases of the framework.
Kean
Kean -
Thank you. You're help is and insights are appreciated.
For us, we often find a custom entity solution provides a more complete and more user-friendly solution. (For example, taking dumb text and making smart labels, or taking limited block functionality and making smart symbols and objects.)
We also find command line user interaction can be limiting and often clumsy, so we look at the desired results and work back to find the most complete solution with the most flexibility in changing the results. Predominately this means putting the behavior with the object/custom-entity.
And most importantly, the solution should behave in a way familiar to the AutoCAD user. This reduces the learning curve and increases the desirability of the custom entity. (And is sometimes the most difficult problem to solve.)
Clearly, our solutions require C++. Although .Net may provide a prettier/easier-to-code UI (although, that could be argued), I still prefer the object be responsible for its interface.
I look forward to reading your take on the .Net directions.
Cheers,
Bill
Leave a Reply to Kean Walmsley Cancel reply