Author Topic: 2006 & 2007 Enter customization file issue?  (Read 2031 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

KewlToyZ

  • Guest
2006 & 2007 Enter customization file issue?
« on: August 22, 2006, 10:37:52 AM »
2007 & 2006 have an arbitrary issue with customization files it seems.
The CUI editor of course is really unwieldly and convoluted non solution to what honestly wasn't so bad to work with before in mns & mnu files. I can understand adding features but this cui editor is slow and the drag and drop simplicity is not consistent. Often it doesn't work at all and the customization gets lost or doesn't take when I see some of my users try to work with it.
If I open the CAD interface by clicking on a drawing, often I end up stuck in a loop to enter a customization file.
If I open CAD from the desktop shortcut it opens fine. But arbitrarily the loop comes back again opening more than one file at a time. I tried running my routines through the VLIDE but nothing shows me a problem.
It seems really common for people to post about the issue in the AutoDesk forums but noone really has an answer of commonality to the cause other than it is because of the customizations which means the entry of the cui is still flawed after 2 versions. It is enterprise development challenged  :lmao:

Any suggestions from the Guru's here?
I have in use:
Networked directories for the customization menus and block/tool palette locations.
An mnl to reload the custom menu files and lisp routines.
Networked pgp files.
Custom profiles within the AutoCAD desktop shortcuts.
Network target file locations.

All of the above I have made a seperate configuration using everything locally installed except of course the project drawing files and plotter drivers. But the same problem occurs with the "Enter customization file" loop. It is easily solved with an escape key but it just keeps nagging something is wrong.

In addition it seems AcroPlot for making pdf files generates this Enter Customization file error and cant get past it. I'll try some different statements in the mnl and see if it can be resolved.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2006, 01:49:24 PM by KewlToyZ »

KewlToyZ

  • Guest
Re: 2006 & 2007 Enter customization file issue?
« Reply #1 on: August 23, 2006, 02:55:24 PM »
Ok, here goes;

So far the steps to repair:
Add a blank notepad document with the same title as each cui with a dll file extension.
This helped minimize the network traffic with every command invocation as well as Shift or Ctrl key press.

It seems with networked cui files, using a network utility called: Ethreal on the workstation allowed me to see all of the traffic generated while running applications in windows.
When a command is invoked AutoCAD searches its profile paths for all related menu customizations including dll's whether the cui called for them or not.

I removed one customization file referenced from a 3rd network drive of personal folders for each user and placed it locally.
This stopped the "Enter customization file" loop.

Another interesting feature in 2007; Aec object references can be stripped from Architectural Desktop generated files.
Open the drawings with problems in 2007 and Export the file to AutoCAD. This performs the stripping of these AEC objects.

KewlToyZ

  • Guest
Re: 2006 & 2007 Enter customization file issue?
« Reply #2 on: August 24, 2006, 01:16:02 PM »
Another interesting note:
2006 hates these blank dll files.
One good thing, the pdf export in 2007 works very nicely

sinc

  • Guest
Re: 2006 & 2007 Enter customization file issue?
« Reply #3 on: August 24, 2006, 07:16:49 PM »
If I open the CAD interface by clicking on a drawing, often I end up stuck in a loop to enter a customization file.

...

All of the above I have made a seperate configuration using everything locally installed except of course the project drawing files and plotter drivers. But the same problem occurs with the "Enter customization file" loop. It is easily solved with an escape key but it just keeps nagging something is wrong.

In addition it seems AcroPlot for making pdf files generates this Enter Customization file error and cant get past it. I'll try some different statements in the mnl and see if it can be resolved.

This sounds pretty strange.  I have never encountered the "Enter customization file" problem you are describing.  I doubt it has anything to do with AcroPlot, since that seems to be a relatively common application that is actively advertised on all things AUGI.  They seem to be a big corporate sponsor of AUGI or something.  I would expect there to be posts all over the AUGI newsgroups if it was causing a problem (unless someone at AUGI deletes them?  :kewl:).

I can't say the CUI has been a bed of roses.  The editor was so unstable in 2006 that it is the prime reason I've written off 2006 as a "garbage release".  But the old way, with configuration elements sprinkled all over the place, was an absolute disaster.  I would hardly say that it was fine.  Maybe if you do hardly any customizations...

The CUI editor is much better in 2007, but it's really touchy.  You have to set things up in exactly the right way, or you can get into a mess.  The whole mess makes it seem like Autodesk has hired a bunch of junior programmers who don't know how this sort of thing should work.  Of course, it could have something to do with Windows internals, too.  Microsoft is well-known for making poor design choices because it increases cohesion with Windows, which makes it harder for developers to write multi-platform programs.  A win for Microsoft, but a loss for everyone else.

Regardless of whether it's caused by Microsoft's poor design or Autodesk's incompetence, though, we users get to suffer.  The way you setup your Enterprise and Custom CUI files, your company CUI files, your vertical CUI files, and the order and placement of your Partial CUI loads, everything is important.  Unfortunately, since the topic of customization is so complex, I suspect it may be very difficult to pin down your problems via a forum.  Ideally, you would get a guru to come physically into your company to help you with the setup in person.

At some point, I'll have to put together what I've learned about how to setup CUI files.  I might be able to get a short synopsis put together this evening, but I'm not sure.  I'll try.  I've been pretty busy lately.

You pretty much don't do anything directly with MNL files anymore.  But since load order of Partial CUIs is so important, it basically takes a software expert to figure the damn CUI editor out by trial-and-error, and the documentation is so poor that trial-and-error is the only way to figure it out, short of training.  I agree that it's pretty pathetic that after all this time, Autodesk still doesn't seem to understand how to create integrated, vertically-stacked application modules, but that's hardly news...  :ugly:

PS:  Glad you're having good luck with the 2007 PDF creator. I'm finding it to be pretty weak.  It sort of works, but creates files that don't print right on any of our printers, and the file size is immense.  Our more-complex drawings produce PDFs that blow up to many many megabytes when they try to print, and take forever to print if they succeed.

nivuahc

  • Guest
Re: 2006 & 2007 Enter customization file issue?
« Reply #4 on: August 25, 2006, 08:49:45 AM »
At some point, I'll have to put together what I've learned about how to setup CUI files.  I might be able to get a short synopsis put together this evening, but I'm not sure.  I'll try.  I've been pretty busy lately.

<blatant attempt at a not-so-subtle hint>
Sounds like a great idea for an article, sinc:-)
</blatant attempt at a not-so-subtle hint>

KewlToyZ

  • Guest
Re: 2006 & 2007 Enter customization file issue?
« Reply #5 on: August 30, 2006, 01:49:59 PM »
I was able to diagnose the issue causing the Enter Customization File:

I had networked menu's for more or less roamable custom toolbars to follow the NT user around.
At times these drives were not connecting and AutoCAD was looping every command looking for "My_Custom" throughout the profile paths.
Also with 2007 another strange item. I had to make blank dll files for each customization file by opening notepad and saving the blank document as a dll with the same name as each cui file.

KewlToyZ

  • Guest
Re: 2006 & 2007 Enter customization file issue?
« Reply #6 on: August 30, 2006, 03:39:12 PM »
Quote
This sounds pretty strange.  I have never encountered the "Enter customization file" problem you are describing.  I doubt it has anything to do with AcroPlot, since that seems to be a relatively common application that is actively advertised on all things AUGI.  They seem to be a big corporate sponsor of AUGI or something.  I would expect there to be posts all over the AUGI newsgroups if it was causing a problem (unless someone at AUGI deletes them?  :kewl:).
I found it was customization file related. Part of it was fragments I had in place for a few guys looking to make their own custom toolbars. Mostly they wanted to keep as few toolbars open as possible but nobody else would use them the way they did. The rest was a strange network issue with 2007. I ran a network detection program called Ethreal against my AutoCAD start-ups and was shocked by the volume of network traffic being generated searching for every possible format of each customization file.  The solution was to create blank dll files for each cui file name. And I removed the My_Custom reference from the acad.mnl

AEC objects are another network bogging issue as it searches for the Architectural Desktop dbx files with nearly every command invocation.
-exporttoautocad command solved this by binding and stripping this info from the architects files we xref into our other drawings.
1 by 1 I'm trying to knock out network bogging format issues.

Quote
I can't say the CUI has been a bed of roses.  The editor was so unstable in 2006 that it is the prime reason I've written off 2006 as a "garbage release".  But the old way, with configuration elements sprinkled all over the place, was an absolute disaster.  I would hardly say that it was fine.  Maybe if you do hardly any customizations...
Workspaces are terrible as cui components.
They make double versions of ACAD toolbars instead of checking to see if they are on or off. In other words the cui didn't fix the doubled bread crumbs everywhere  :lol:
Also the cui stops updating after a few changes even if it did the change it won't admit it until I close it and reopen it wondering how soon my retirement is coming and dusting off the cobwebs when it finally opens  :lmao:
Quote

The CUI editor is much better in 2007, but it's really touchy.  You have to set things up in exactly the right way, or you can get into a mess.  The whole mess makes it seem like Autodesk has hired a bunch of junior programmers who don't know how this sort of thing should work.  Of course, it could have something to do with Windows internals, too.  Microsoft is well-known for making poor design choices because it increases cohesion with Windows, which makes it harder for developers to write multi-platform programs.  A win for Microsoft, but a loss for everyone else.
Regardless of whether it's caused by Microsoft's poor design or Autodesk's incompetence, though, we users get to suffer.  The way you setup your Enterprise and Custom CUI files, your company CUI files, your vertical CUI files, and the order and placement of your Partial CUI loads, everything is important.  Unfortunately, since the topic of customization is so complex, I suspect it may be very difficult to pin down your problems via a forum.  Ideally, you would get a guru to come physically into your company to help you with the setup in person.
I have to sympathize with any developer.
User friendly source code in today's market is a security risk.
Too many jerks out there who buy the tools to walk out of the store and bash peoples heads in instead of trying to build something other than contempt.
Plug and play became the plug and pay in a short time.
Security through obscurity is not a solution but a cop out and the business as well as the developer pays for it.
Constant security updates are necessary but just as malicious as the security threat exploited.
It's an endless circle and more or less I'm likely singing to the chior here.

Quote
PS:  Glad you're having good luck with the 2007 PDF creator. I'm finding it to be pretty weak.  It sort of works, but creates files that don't print right on any of our printers, and the file size is immense.  Our more-complex drawings produce PDFs that blow up to many many megabytes when they try to print, and take forever to print if they succeed.
Only issues I have noticed were from saving in 2004 format causing the XL OLE spreadsheets to not plot properly unless i change the plot properties to spreadsheet instead of high quality grafix. Also raster images come through in color with no control over the monochrome. I can however adjust the dpi & page size for clarity in the pc3 file. I more or less set up a pc3 file for every sheet size and set the dpi accordingly. Yes PDF gets extremely large and makes a mess of the print spooler in file sizes. DWF has issues as well but not as bad with print spooling over a network.

sinc

  • Guest
Re: 2006 & 2007 Enter customization file issue?
« Reply #7 on: August 31, 2006, 12:03:46 AM »
Workspaces are terrible as cui components.
They make double versions of ACAD toolbars instead of checking to see if they are on or off. In other words the cui didn't fix the doubled bread crumbs everywhere  :lol:
Also the cui stops updating after a few changes even if it did the change it won't admit it until I close it and reopen it wondering how soon my retirement is coming and dusting off the cobwebs when it finally opens  :lmao:

Yeah, the CUI in 2006 was the main reason I loaded up 2007 as soon as I got it.  I was immediately overjoyed that it was now much easier to use the CUI, and how much better it works, even though it still has major issues.  (My initial joy initially turned to disgust, though, for a variety of reasons that are documented in various posts on this site and on AUGI.  Happily, things improved dramatically with SP1, and I now would not use any version except for 2007.)

I'm not really sure what you mean about the Workspaces making double versions of ACAD toolbars...  Workspaces contain nothing but locations of toolbars, and the workspaces are generally not created in the CUI (although you need to go into the CUI to edit the menus in the workspace).  Are you talking about the mess that results from trying to copy a workspace between CUIs on the Transfer tab?

Quote
I have to sympathize with any developer.
User friendly source code in today's market is a security risk.

That is not true at all.  Secure, well-designed, user-friendly code is very possible, just not widely created.  I have been disgusted for years at the garbage most people create.  But then, I spent years writing code in Objective-C using what used to be the NeXT software base, and the NeXT software (still alive today as Apple's WebObjects) was doing things in 1992 that are STILL not possible in Visual-C++ (and never will be).  Most industry analysts state that probably 80% of all software projects fail.  And only a very small fraction are completed on time, on budget, and with the full desired fuctionality.  It's a sad commentary on the profession.  Unfortunately, many of the decisions Microsoft has made have fostered this turn of events, which is one of the reasons Microsoft tends to put me into rants.  But rants against Microsoft serve little purpose, so I've been trying to cut back...   :-)

Quote
Toomany jerks out there who buy the tools to walk out of the store and bash peoples heads in instead of trying to build something other than contempt.

I'm pretty heavily into Obejct-Oriented Design (OOD), and really enjoy programming without writing code.  Unfortunately, no tool yet exists in public for this...  (Rational has made efforts with their Rose product, but it's been hindered for years by their focus on C++...)  In the late 90's, I co-wrote a very nifty prototype of a modelling tool/IDE, though, that worked as a front end for Apple's EOModeler.  Rather amazing stuff.  Object-oriented design of an application in a graphical interface (the ENTIRE application, not just the GUI or enterprise objects); persistent data storage of any object in any relational database available at the touch of a switch; support for any true object-oriented programming language (such as Obj-C, Java, C#, etc., but probably not C++, at least not without a ton of headache and reduced functionality); the ability to open up a window on the internal source code of any object at any time, for those rare times when it's necessary to actually write code...  Unfortunately, around the time the first prototype was starting to get almost usable, Apple dropped their support of Objective-C.  I would really like to get that thing finished and out into the market.   It would completely blow the minds of anyone who is used to the Visual-C++ and MFC (or even .NET) way of doing things.  But now we'd have to rewrite it in Java in order to keep using WebObjects as the core.  The Objective-C/EOModeler Open Source movement has been making progress, though, so maybe that's becoming an option...?  In my mind, I envision a Johnny Mneumonic sort of programming environment, eventually with a VR interface where the objects look like umpteenth-generation Lego blocks, and programming is accomplished by grabbing objects from VR space and shoving them together...   Now THAT'S programming!  :-)

That's all in the future, though, when everyday hardware can handle VR with ease; the version we were writing looked like a more standard GUI application.  But the tool did more than just make development faster and easier.  It also effectively enforced standards, and we were planning on ways to quickly create the 30 or so most common OO design patterns.  If you look at any programming task in the right way, you can break the overall task down into standard pieces.  Looked at the right way, there are probably only roughly 30 of these.  ANY task can be broken down into these same pieces.  It's kind of like DNA - there are only 4 base pairs, but they can be arranged in a huge variety of sequences, resulting in the complete panoply of life.  And these 30 patterns are "tried and true".  Using them not only makes development faster and easeir, it cuts way down on bugs.  So by creating an OO modeling tool that supported round-trip engineering and design patterns, the tool would effectively "teach" good programming at the same time it facilitated it and served as an IDE, and it would help guide the developer into making wise choices.  This sort of thing is something that very few people in the world are even thinking about, but hopefully this type of thinking will become more common in the future.

One big reason so many software projects fail, or the result is filled with so many bugs and problems, is that even today, most people who work in software don't know how to program, let alone create solid designs.  C++ became the standard language of the industry, and C++ is terrible for OOD.  It barely qualifies as an OOPL.  So therefore most software engineers get stunted, and never really get fully into the OO world, despite what they may think.  And then there's the "I can do it better than anyone" mentality, that results in so many people trying to reinvent the wheel, because they think no one else has ever done what they're doing.  That is almost always incorrect.  It's like someone with no civil engineering background trying to design and build a suspension bridge, but for some reason, when it comes to software people think everything is different.  Another big issue is that there is still no centralized body in control of software standards, which is pretty pathetic.  It's the reason why the .CSV file you create in Excel may not be parsed correctly in Autocad, as one example.  This sort of thing should have been taken care of decades ago.

Maybe I am something of a snob.  I don't know.  But the software industry has an 80% failure rate, for no good reason!  That gets me going sometimes, especially since so many people now think that it is "normal" and "to be expected".  I know from experience that it doesn't have to be that way.

Quote
Plug and play became the plug and pay in a short time.
Security through obscurity is not a solution but a cop out and the business as well as the developer pays for it.
Constant security updates are necessary but just as malicious as the security threat exploited.
It's an endless circle and more or less I'm likely singing to the chior here.

Yes, I agree security through obscurity is worthless.  That's why I believe Bush&Co are spouting drivel when they say their counter-terrorism techniques will only work if no one knows about them, and that reporters are working for the terrorists by publishing stories about what the government is doing.

The constant security updates should NOT be necessary.  That's simply another example of the low standards that Microsoft and companies like it have trained users to expect.  The reason for it is the fundamental flaws in the design of Windows.  Sure, some of it comes from the fact that Windows grew out of a single-user OS with limited capabilities, but that doesn't change the fact that Windows is fundamentally flawed.  It would need to be redesigned from the kernel up to really fix it.  From what I hear, Microsoft is not even doing this in the next version of Windows - instead, they decided to make Vista secure by just turning everything off by default.  That is not security, that is denial.  Well-maintained Unix systems have been basically totally secure for years.  The only way to break into them is to gain access in some non-software way, such as by stealing or guessing passwords, or gaining physical access to the machine.  Unfortunately, not many Unix sysadmins know Unix well enough to keep all the holes closed.

But shoot...  I should really be working on getting something like that CUI guide put together, rather than ranting about this stuff.  It serves more purpose.   :-) :-D :lmao:

KewlToyZ

  • Guest
Re: 2006 & 2007 Enter customization file issue?
« Reply #8 on: August 31, 2006, 10:20:59 AM »
Good morning sinc  :-D
Quote
I'm not really sure what you mean about the Workspaces making double versions of ACAD toolbars...  Workspaces contain nothing but locations of toolbars, and the workspaces are generally not created in the CUI (although you need to go into the CUI to edit the menus in the workspace).  Are you talking about the mess that results from trying to copy a workspace between CUIs on the Transfer tab?

Yes I was trying to make shared workspaces for each discipline and the transfer of them leads to doubled toolbars.
More or less I tried to manually go through and edit them out only to find if I removed the double reference it turned them off completely when imported :lol:

Straight up I am a script kitty programmer, terrible! Your probably shaking your head just reading this.
I get familiar with patterns and re-use them.
I try to make the time to develop a higher understanding.
The only constant is the programming languages and environments from one job to the next always changes.
I have out sourced specialized tasks often because quite literally I am trying to reach a deadline for a production process and design.
The other is I just can't find enough documentation to learn the specifics of every platform I am working with joined together.
I learn what I can but my memory becomes swiss cheese for the lack of constants.
Part of the reason is just constant changes in job scope as well as economic employment availability.
I get far enough along in a production environment to have some functionality and then told to focus elsewhere rather than a true development environment. I can only blame myself for being willing to try.
Managers are happy their process works but it will always have expansion limitations without completely re-writing and make them aware of the fact.

The UML (Universal Modeling Language) "Lego style" approach to building applications is always attempted by many programmers/software manufacturers. Truth be told there are some pretty nifty tools but human beings are a creative bunch and always find limitations in a short time when trying to create with them. Also often enough they tend to become a bit sluggish when people take these great tools and find ways to join them together to accomplish their goal that were never intended by the designer. A more streamlined model could have been written always. There is always a better way to do things, that is what makes the art of programming and computer architecture so fast paced.

I'm just curious how soon the instant on & off pc will be here. 40 GB chip for an OS and all programs exist in another space be it a chip or a drive.

sinc

  • Guest
Re: 2006 & 2007 Enter customization file issue?
« Reply #9 on: September 09, 2006, 10:51:53 AM »
Straight up I am a script kitty programmer, terrible! Your probably shaking your head just reading this.

No.  You actually seem to have more understanding of these topics than a lot of full-time developers.

Quote
The UML (Universal Modeling Language) "Lego style" approach to building applications is always attempted by many programmers/software manufacturers. Truth be told there are some pretty nifty tools but human beings are a creative bunch and always find limitations in a short time when trying to create with them. Also often enough they tend to become a bit sluggish when people take these great tools and find ways to join them together to accomplish their goal that were never intended by the designer.

UML falls into that category of a good idea with terrible execution.  Basically, it focuses too much on project design, and has a terrible link to project development.  Much of that comes from the focus on event diagrams, which are particularly worthless and a huge time-sink for many development teams that try to use them.  Another major failure is the focus on round-trip engineering, as opposed to a more "holistic" approach that melds design and implementation into one.  A lot of this seems to arise from "C++ think", where they try to create an OO system that has no run-time component.  The lack of a run-time component is a major failing of C++, and one key reason that it cannot be used for many true OO tasks.  On the other hand, it results in programs that run faster than the equivalent program in a language like Objective-C, which is probably the reason C++ unfortunately became the industry standard.  There was a time when the hardware was just plain insufficient for a true OO language (the ultimate reason Smalltalk never really caught on outside of large universities and the DOD).  However, the hardware has since caught up, and now the limitations of C++ are starting to really show.  Writing a large application in C++ generally takes a much larger team a much longer time, and usually results in a much-buggier product, mainly because of the limitations of C++.  A lot of this came from the design decision to use C structures to implement C++ classes.  Bjarne Stroustrup had a good reason for this decision when he made it, but it is probably the root cause of most of the major problems with C++.

Of course, another major problem is just the entire software methodology that has become commonplace.  Companies create a team of "business analysts", a team of "designers", a team of "implementers", and a "QA team".  These teams are all autonomous, basically operating independently of each other.  Then the idea is that the business analysts give their info to the designers, who do their bit and pass it on to the implementers, who do their bit and pass it on to the QA team, who then give it to the users.  This approach is fundamentally flawed, compounded by a real lack of understanding of things like "proof of concept" and "incremental development".  Net result is a program like Autocad, which has some incredibly well-thought-out functionality compromised by very poor execution, and a real disconnect between the developers of the product and the users of the product.

But there I go, ranting again...   :lol:

Quote
I'm just curious how soon the instant on & off pc will be here. 40 GB chip for an OS and all programs exist in another space be it a chip or a drive.

There used to be computers (Commodore 64, Apple II) that had the OS in ROM chips.  People decided that was a bad idea, though, because it was impossible to update the OS without changing the chips, and bug fixes/improvements to the OS were basically nonexistent.  Moving the OS to a disk eliminated this problem.  But if the programs are on a drive, they must be loaded first.  That means that disk-based systems will never be "instant on".  The best we can hope for is to create a really fast system that loads very quickly.

It seems it might also be possible to add some high-speed flash memory to computers, for storing the OS image.  It should then be possible for the OS (or at least most of it) to be installed to the flash memory, instead of to the hard drive.  Smaller devices, like Cisco routers, have done this for years.  Of course, the OS would still have to be loaded from the flash memory at startup, since programs can't run in flash memory.  But I'm betting that this could be accomplished faster than loading from a drive.  I'm guessing the main reason no one has done this is that (at least until recently) flash memory was very expensive, and not necessarily reliable.  The situation might be different now.  But if you have a fast system, startup time usually isn't really a problem.  I have a system that is far from top-of-the-line (a single-processor Athlon 64 4000+, no RAID), but startup takes maybe twenty seconds to get to the login with Windows XP.  That doesn't seem to be a significant amount of time, at least not so much as to justify such a radical change to the hardware and BIOS.  As flash memory gets cheaper and better, though, this could change.  It would be yet another thing that could go wrong with your computer, and I don't really see a lot of call for it, but who knows?
« Last Edit: September 09, 2006, 10:55:49 AM by sinc »

sinc

  • Guest
Re: 2006 & 2007 Enter customization file issue?
« Reply #10 on: September 09, 2006, 11:08:08 AM »
Good morning sinc  :-D
Quote
I'm not really sure what you mean about the Workspaces making double versions of ACAD toolbars...  Workspaces contain nothing but locations of toolbars, and the workspaces are generally not created in the CUI (although you need to go into the CUI to edit the menus in the workspace).  Are you talking about the mess that results from trying to copy a workspace between CUIs on the Transfer tab?

Yes I was trying to make shared workspaces for each discipline and the transfer of them leads to doubled toolbars.
More or less I tried to manually go through and edit them out only to find if I removed the double reference it turned them off completely when imported :lol:


But to try to get back on topic, yeah that's one of the major failings in the implementation of the CUI.  And I'm still trying to figure out if there is any way to avoid all the unresolved problems with Enterprise CUIs.  I keep finding ways that seem to work, but then I discover it causes another issue (like the Recent Command list that should only appear when right-clicking the mouse suddenly appearing inside of Land Desktop Point menus).  I've found a bunch of things that sort-of work in some situations, but have unintended side-effects, or are very inconvenient from an administrative point of view.  I've started working on a synopsis of the mess, but I haven't had a lot of time to work on it.  I've been, er, swamped lately, and not because I've been spending too much time in the Swamp...   ;-)

The more I dig into it, the more I'm discovering that what you initially said is true.  There is no way to use Enterprise CUIs without issues.  The only way I've found to avoid all issues is to let all users use the Company-wide CUI as the Main CUI.  This has the obvious problem that now all users can edit the CUI.  It also has the problem that the company-wide CUI gets cluttered, and as it gets bigger, Autocad suffers from slower performance for some tasks.

I still think Autodesk is moving down the right path with the CUI, but their execution is very painful...  :|

KewlToyZ

  • Guest
Re: 2006 & 2007 Enter customization file issue?
« Reply #11 on: August 31, 2007, 04:17:20 PM »
One nice thing in 2008.... I can add and edit toolbars on the dashboard. Man this free's up alot more workspace when docked with autohide on the side. Thanks for your thoughts. Always nice to find others to vent with :ugly: