Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: Standards for Plan Detail

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I found the same situation as Bill Allen.  Didn't Simpson send out a survey 
within the last 6 - 12 months (or have one on their web site) for you to 
indicate what you liked.  AFAICR, I received a survey form in the mail and 
that if you would return it, you would be put in a pool for an electronic 
camera --- however, there was no place on the form to put you name.

A. Roger Turk, P.E.(Structural)
Tucson, Arizona

Bill Allen wrote:

>>At least the last copy I had I found rather worthless for production
purposes. They are isometric views (similar or identical to those in the
catalog) which make them nearly (since nothing is impossible) impossible to
adapt to construction documents. IMO, their old software which was AutoLisp
driven was much better. However, I believe it cost a lot more to write and
maintain than their current (worthless) format.

Other than that, I don't have an opinion :o).

Regards,

Bill Allen, S.E. (CA #2607)
ALLEN DESIGNS
Laguna Niguel, CA
http://www.AllenDesigns.com

||-----Original Message-----
||From: Peter Higgins [mailto:JillHiggins(--nospam--at)compuserve.com]
||Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 2:00 PM
||To: INTERNET:seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
||Subject: Re: Standards for Plan Detail
||
||
||Off the thread a bit, but Simpson has already drawn all their
||components
||and distributed them on a neat CD ROM complete with ER's
||design values,
||prices, etc. We don't use it a lot here, but I could see someone in
||woodframe construction using it a lot.
||<<