Trimble Business Center

A New Version has appeared...and, once again, meh.

I am a 10 plus year veteran TBC user. Every day, all day.

I am wondering yet again with the release of a new version how/why basic suggestions for improving the TBC interface and experience never seem to be acted upon? We get all kinds of obscure, never hear requests for, cool new features but basics... almost never (unless it's a bug fix dressed up as an improvement).

Specific examples: Layer Manager. More than 5 years ago numerous requests were made to improve the function/interface after it was introduced. It remains 'mickey mouse' in its interface and functionality.

A Surface Manager similar (well, hopefully better than the actual layer manager) to the Layer Manager

Why do we have to rely upon 3rd party developers to get functionality that is so basic to using software in the 21st century (simple example: a "dark" mode for the interface)?

How about consistent, full 4K monitor support?

Over the years I have put  many suggestions for improvements and not once have any been acted upon in spite of widespread forum support.
I'm pretty sure I am not alone in thinking this.

Ok, rant over. Back to work...

Marshall

Hi Marshall,

We're interested in your proposed "Surface Manager" functionality. Curious what you would envision a hypothetical "Surface Manager" doing. Is it just putting surfaces into groups like how the current Layer Groups work or is there more to it? Let us know! I'm wondering if some of our current commands such as Map Objects – TBCANZ could be extended to work for surface classification requirements. Please let us know what you require.

Cheers,

------------------------------
https://tbcanz.com/anz-toolbox/
------------------------------

Yes similar to how you can have layer groups, have a surface groups so they are not all lumped into when when dealing with  A LOT of surfaces. I wouldn't even mind have georeferenced images be able to put into groups. When dealing with 100 images it gets bloated.

And to your point Marshall about having to buy 3rd party software, even civil3d has addons you can buy that make QOL better, IE Carlson.

Erik: Totally agree on the geo-referenced images manager idea.

C3D: has anyone from TBC's development looked at AutoDesk interfaces? They are beautiful. Yes, there are third party add-ons for C3D, I agree, but the core product is pretty damn clean as it stands.

Maybe one day...

Yes, similar to the layer manager; organize groups of surfaces, change attributes, colours, transparencies, set default display attributes etc. Think layer manager for surfaces.

BUT: make the columns auto-fit width, make the interface 'sticky' once adjusted, allow it to minimize (without having to buy another screen to leave it open), give it an interface that matches the rest of TBC. You know, all the things proper software does in 2024.

Marshall, 

I could not agree with you more in regard to the layer manager being far less than spectacular. I wish they'd just reimplement the layer manager from Terramodel. That one worked great and had the super useful lock and snap settings. I also wish drafting in TBC wasn't so weird. Trimble ought to buy SmartDraft and they'd be set. I mean sure they'd have to convert the operations from LISP to IronPython, but if they had the functionality that is in SmartDraft I would probably never even open up C3D (as I am not a fan of its bloat, sluggishness, and instability).

Mark

------------------------------
Mark Macfarlane
------------------------------

I would love to see a better Scan Data Manager.  Something that would allow you to manage scans that are not registered together.  Something that allowed you to rename groups of scans all at the same time instead of the generic imported point number they come with.  Something where you could quickly change colors of any of the scans you would like to.  I am sure there are more things that would make categorizing and organizing scans convenient, but that is my low hanging fruit.

I've just updated from version 5.90 to 2024.00, skipping 2023 entirely.

You're right, core TBC hasn't changed much in years, and the actual issues are not addressed at all (such as the ability to graphically edit horizontal alignment, fix drafting/plotting, fix the utility module, improve the abysmal graphics performance, and make snapping more reliable).

There isn't much fixing, just adding.

But...

We asked for connectivity with Connect, and we got it.

We asked for connectivity with Trimble Stratus / Propeller, and we kinda got it via WMS.

We got reference surfaces and reference lines (just as we had in Terramodel in 2003 or earlier).

We constantly receive updates for the TBC module ANZToolbox, which is extremely useful. For example, the recently released attributes editor, 3D object modelling, and even good old-fashioned reporting. Functionality-wise, it seems like we can completely skip other packages right now.

Marian: all true. The connectivity thing is important and getting more so. Don't get me started on graphics performance!

Personally, I gave up on WorksManager (here it's known as "did you manage to get it working?"). When you read from Trimble (just last week) that it had server issues and that it can't handle peak loads etc. without crapping itself I can't trust it. I set up my own instead.

The other surveyors in the company use Access. They don't use the Connect interface. Too buggy and inconsistent when you are in and out of cell service as you work.

It's amazing to me that given the requests for basic, simple improvements (like the Layer Manager) that it NEVER happens. Who at TBC development looks at that layer manager utility and thinks it's "wow, isn't this great?". Perhaps they just never have to use their own software?