pbat

Well, luckily LDD is pretty easy to use and very intuitive to learn, so there's probably not much need for an elaborated curriculum: Knowing the basic control elements will enable the kids to experiment on their own and just use their creativity. You should presumably start by simply starting up LDD, next explain the distinctions between the different modes selectable on the startup screen (basic mode, mindstorms, extended) and then the respective control elements. For the latter please have a look at the online help, on Windows computers usually located at "C:\Program Files (x86)\LEGO Company\LEGO Digital Designer\Help\en-manual\en-manual.html": It briefly describes the mouse controls, camera controls and the different toolbar icons. When showing the hinge and flex tools, LDD gladly crashs, so you should train the kids to save quite often. If the kids finally know how to save their creations, you can optionally start teaching some advanced building techniques like scaffolding and snot. You definitly should show them how to use templates and groups, as soon as the models acquire a certain size and go beyond "simple". Apart from that, let them just play.

Hopefully I am wrong, but I guess that a new LDD version will not show up before the release of Windows 10 somewhen this summer. I have to admit that this is pure speculation and not based on any proven facts whatsoever, but if I was a software product manager, I would wait until Windows 10 is RTM, and release a new version when I can be sure that it will work on Windows 10 as well. Taking these facts into consideration I do not expect a new LDD update before the end of August. So enjoy the summer and come back this fall... ( -- or enjoy the winter and come back next spring if you live at the southern part of the globe).

Well, first of all, your screenshot does not show up here, only "Posted Image". Next, Win10 is still sort of beta and LDD not tested on Windows 10 nor approved for it: See the "Operating System" paragraph in the "Minimum System Requirements" at http://ldd.lego.com/en-us/download . Thus you can't expecet LDD to work seamlessly, if you try to run it on Windows 10 nonetheless. Moreover, it seems that a Geforce 630 GT is not really supported to run under Windows 10 Preview, since there are no suitable drivers available (http://www.nvidia.co...nd.aspx?lang=en ), not even beta drivers. So please do use a system that meets the minimum requirements: Use a supported Windows or MacOS and a graphic card with appropriate drivers compatible to at least OpenGL 1.1.

When I saw that image without reading any text, I thought "Cool, someone made a Citroën 2CV!" So I was a bit puzzled reading that it shall actually resemble a VW...

We all know that size doesn't matter, do we? No, seriously: LXF files are nothing but zipped xml files, along with a png preview image. What makes LDD crash is not so much the size of these files, but the amount of polygons it has to render: Many bricks result in bigger XML, thus in a bigger LXF file, while polygons do no necessarily correlate with brick count: A synonym for "polygons" is "studs". And there are little parts having more studs (= more polygons) than a 48×48 baseplate. And if your file has as many as 32 of it, it is no wonder it will crash. although its brick count and thus its file size is relatively small. Similar issues have been discussed here on-again-off-again: See for example here and here and here. So how can you fix it if LDD won't open that file any longer? You can try the following approach: Make a copy of your LXF file, rename its extension to "ZIP", unzip the zip file and open the contained LXFML file with a simple text editor like Notepad or whatever text editor you prefer. You'll see typical XML content: Look for a <Brick>-section with a "designID" of "4186" and delete or uncomment everything from the opening "<Brick>"-tag to the next closing "</Brick>"-tag. The "refID" may vary, but a "designID" of 4186 indicates a 48×48 baseplate. Save the file in your text editor, re-zip it, rename the ZIP extensions back to LXF and check if LDD still crashs. If yes, repeat the steps and delete some more baseplates.

Do you use LDD on a PowerPC Mac? The version 2.3.20 is the last one for PowerPC Macs. Although it is still offered for download, it's out of support and won't get any further (brick) updates.

There are several issues with different parts concerning connection, collision and geometry: The geometry of the 98100 2×2 Round Slope Brick W. Knob is somewhat inaccurate: If you put a connector peg like 43093 or 6562 all the way in the 98100's cross hole, you can't attach the result to a technic brick like 3700 due to a collision. If you, however, pull the peg out a bit to avoid that collision, the 98100 won't attach smoothly to the technic brick: There remains a tiny gap between the 98100 and the 3700. It seems as if the cross hole of the 98100 is not stepless and the step increment too big to achieve convenient results. See set 40146 for an example. Of course you can circumvent that issue by doing some scaffolding magic with parts like 2540 and 48729, but the behaviour of cross axles and cross holes in general should be not that obvious coarsely descrete, but at least pretend continuity. By the way, the appearance of the pegs 43093 and 6562 could use some overhaul with regards to sharp corners: Donate those parts some more polygons to make them look more realistic! In LDD, both parts are indistinguishable. In real life, however, 43093 has some friction elements 6562 has not. And on both parts the cross axles are softly rounded and by no way form a 90˚ angle at the end like they do in LDD.   A pair of snowshoes (11187 but also 30284) put back to back should fit into any knob or hollow stud. See for example set 10246.   The bricks without pin 3005, 3065, 3066, 3067, 2453 and 2454 have incorrect collision boxes since they do not allow any parts in their inside, even if there would be no collision. So you can't for example put a 85861 under any of the aforementioned bricks and put any of the following parts through it: Shafts, light sword blades, sticks etc. like 87994, 30374, 4095, 63965, 3957, 30064. There are, however, some exceptions: 3755 behaves correctly, presumably due to its open studs. The same is partly true for some bows like 3307 or 15254: They allow sticks inside their bow, e.g. as needed in set 6259, but not inside their studless parts left and right of their bow. The half bows (2339, 14395, 76768) on the other hand have collision boxes being too strict and thus preventing constructions valid in real life.   The cream on the pie 93568 is both stainable and has a decoration surface.   Although it has no stud ontop, the cupcake 97784 a.k.a. M4 misses a connection point on the top side and should accept round 1×1 plates like 6141 or 85861 inside it. See for example set 3184.

Admittedly it's a bit tricky. Please try the following approach (it shouldn't make much of a difference if you use the Windows or Mac version of LDD): Place a 3176 so that there is no interfering part near it. Make sure its studs show upward. Take a small part such as 6141 and put it upside down into the hole of the 3176, so that the stud of 6141 shows downwards. Put a 58846 (with the corner stud next to the X hole) onto that 6141: It will auto-align to 0 or 90˚, even if you had rotated it to 45˚ before. When it is attached to the 6141, rotate the 58846 to the appropriate 45˚ angle. Delete the 6141 and put instead a second 3176 ontop of the first 3176: It will attach to the 58846 if the angle is exactly 45.000˚. Then clean up and delete the first 3176, so that only the second 3176 and the 58846 finally remain.

Although I was busy recently I finally found some time to update the 42030 Volvo L250F Wheel Loader Model A to the most recent brick version 1564.2 by adding the big bucket. Two motors, however, are still missing.

40146 – Lufthansa Plane – Brick Based Promotions Non Themed – Year: 2015 (LXFML-File, LXF-File) LDD 4.3.8 Brick version: 1564.2 (click for larger image) [Brickset][bricklink][Peeron][Lego.com] Remarks: Prints and stickers are missing (plane) or substituted with similar decorations (minifig torso). The face, however, should fit. The colour 309 Silver Metallic is used instead of the missing Silver Ink. Although the inventory lists a 3624 Mini Cap, the building instruction rather depicts a 12895 Hat No. 3: Uncertain, what is actually correct, I stuck to the inventory. Collision error in step 12: 98100 2×2 Round Slope Brick W. Knob won't attach smoothly against 3700 Technic Brick 1X2, Ø4.9, there remains an ugly gap.

That might be due to the fact that this link is half an eternity old (or rather four and a half years): It sometimes happens on the internet that links get outdated or no longer work when sites are abandoned. And www.nolberger.se seems to be pretty abandoned currently. You might try the Internet Archive Wayback Machine, but the Wantedbricks1.1.zip file is not archived there and thus can't be downloaded there. Maybe boost your post count a bit and as soon as you are allowed to post PMs, send one to Anders Nolberger and ask him directly if he is willing to fix that link or if he has good reason to remove that program: If it is several years old, it maybe doesn't even work anymore with the current LDD release. Meanwhile give the LDD Manager a try, as it is a program with a similar purpose.

First put the 58846 upside down and its stud in the hole of 3176. To being able to do so in LDD, temporarily remove the 4216, rotate the 58846 to a perfect 45 degree angle and put the white 4216 back in place. If you think that was difficult, wait until you'll build the roof shells (books 2 & 3): If you are not super-bulldog, you are likely to get lost in despair -- I at least got almost. And remember to save often, as LDD will probably crash abruptly.

Voilà, I made a LXF file ready for you. Please download it here.

That does not have to be much of a problem: You can install Windows on a Mac, as described here. And you'll find free test versions of Windows here.

Do you happen to use the Internet Explorer? Because that sounds similar to the stuff discussed here. It seems as if the IP.Board software and the IE still do not get along well.

Maybe try running it on Windows. Windows supports .exe files natively. Furthermore, the requirements do not mention any MacOS to be supported by LDD to POV-ray. But why do you open a new thread for that issue? Just use the existing one.

The problem is not so much the angles, but that your layout does not sum up to a multiple of one stud, but to fractions: Either you'll get the correct angles but a gap at one point. Or you'll make the roof line attach, but the angles no longer match.

You probably won't have any luck with the standard roof tiles constructing roof lines with those angles. Have you considered making the roof line with angled plates like 43722 and 43723 combined with 3937 and 3938?

Please check your brick version if it is the most recent 1392 (Help -> About). And make sure to switch to the Extended Mode (View -> New Themes -> LDD Extended). Some parts are not included in Standard Mode but only in Extended Mode (such as 71076 and 71075).

I made an LDD version of the A-model over in this thread: Have a look and enjoy!

42030 - Volvo L250F Wheel Loader (Model A) - Theme: Technic (LXFML-File, LXF-File) LDD 4.3.8, Brick version: 1392 1564.2 (click for larger image) [Brickset] [Bricklink] [Peeron] [LEGO.com] Substitutions: Bricks not included in LDD at the time creating that model were either replaced with similar parts or omitted: The big bucket and two motors are missing. ????? (6065495) replaced by 2850 10721 (6013937) replaced by 2854 ????? (6065490) replaced by 15038 64290 (6028107) replaced by 32525 64871 (4542579) replaced by 32278 6225 (4167842) replaced by 3023 30057 (3005740) replaced by 6141 6225 (4201019) replaced by 3023 13670 (6031821) replaced by 6587 14918 (6092664) replaced by 3942 42022 (4160393) replaced by 41762 74695 (6006140) replaced by 60483 11153 (6037746) replaced by 61678 64289 (4645732) replaced by 40490 64290 (6029578) replaced by 32525 15265 (6055632) omitted added at 2015-01-02 99010 (4652236) replaced by 601948 18274 (6081975) replaced by 63965 64290 (4611705) replaced by 32525 99009 (4652235) replaced by 601948 14486 (6040157) replaced by 58123 99499 (6000564) omitted ????? (6102930) replaced by 58121 99498 (6000566) omitted Remarks: This set relies heavily on stickers. Since LDD does not support them at the time this model was crafted, they were omitted. Keep that in mind when rendering that set. One of the 117 bright blue Conn.Bush W.Fric./Crossale (4206482) is leftover: I double-checked if I missed it somewhere, but have not yet found where it actually belongs. I decided not to replace the big bucket nor the missing motors with custom solutions, since that would look even worse than the current concoction. I'm not certain if the linear actuators 61927 (4638507) are correctly coloured: I used 309 Silver metallic for the moveable parts, but I am uncertain if that's actually right. I'll post the Model B later when it's done.

Can we agree that greed and rapacity is a bad thing? Or do you belong to the sort of people believing that the end justifies the means? It's their damn job to gamble with my money! As long as they are better in gambling than I am, there is no problem with it. The bank always wins. Faites vos Jeux! More than a quarter of a billion bucks of annual income is quite a nest egg, isn't it? Or do you belong to the sort of people subsuming such figures under "peanuts"? And here you exactly hit the bull's-eye: It's not first and foremost about protecting the environment. It's all about raising public awareness, about gaining airtime, Facebook likes and re-tweets -- all to get even more donations from people with a guilty conscience about their ecological footprint. Lobbyism at its best. Or is it astroturfing? Nevermind. At least we have some news in the silly season. By the way: This thread might be long, but in no way tedious: To dismantle your arguments is quite amusing for me. Thanks for being such a fair and balanced discussion partner. I am convinced that the saying is true "A fish rots from the head down". Maybe I am wrong, but please prove me so. I did so. And I wonder if you are on Greenpeace's payroll or just trolling for fun. I agree on that. Let's get back to topic: Should LEGO cut ties with Shell? You drove me so far to yell: Hell no, let's re-release set 1256 . Or better yet, release a new series with "collectible drilling rigs": Brent Spar, Deepwater Horizon and Draupner-E would make a good start... I even wonder when PETA will do down LEGO for cruelly abusing innocent animals in sets like 1370 . No, seriously: If Greenpeace was not that bone-headed and stubborn, but a bit more good-natured [sic!], they would not bash LEGO for its Shell connections from the very past but rather co-promote the current arctic subtheme and thus generate a win-win-situation both for LEGO and Greenpeace's concerns about the arctic: That children learn early that the arctic is an important environment endangered and worth to protect. Although that probably wouldn't result in three million Youtube clicks in three days. But I still guess that "divide et impera" is true and that intransigent extremists such as Greenpeace are barking up the wrong tree, especially when attacking LEGO. At least one thing we have in common ...

If the organisation allows a single individual to do so and if it lacks control mechanisms to prevent such actions, the organisation as a whole fails and not just the one single misguided individual. Why do they have a board of directors if one single individual can dump millions? Sorry, but that's hair-splitting: Yield is the price for risk. No risk no yield, the higher the risk the higher the yield. There is no substantial difference between gambling and investing. Only the degree of risk varies. On page 39 of the most recent annual report, Greenpeace states that 3.8m were lost on forward contracts. Wikipedia defines forward contracts so: "Forwards, like other derivative securities, can be used to hedge risk (typically currency or exchange rate risk), as a means of speculation [...]." Merriam Webster defines "to speculate" as: : to think about something and make guesses about it : to form ideas or theories about something usually when there are many things not known about it : to invest money in ways that could produce a large profit but that also involve a lot of risk "Bet" on the other hand is defined as: : an agreement in which people try to guess what will happen and the person who guesses wrong has to give something (such as money) to the person who guesses right : the money or other valuable thing that you could win or lose in a bet : a choice made by thinking about what will probably happen and "gambling" as: : to play a game in which you can win or lose money or possessions : to bet money or other valuable things : to risk losing (an amount of money) in a game or bet : to risk losing (something valuable or important) in order to do or achieve something Having these definitions in mind, I see no reason, why speculation should be distinct from gambling. And yes, every stock owner is a gambler. That's the essence of capitalism and is not necessarily a bad thing. But as said before, any organisation that lacks proper controlling and does not at least use the four-eye-principle when it comes to spending large amounts of money is as responsible as the misbehaving individual. I'm glad you mention Barings Bank: "Barings' collapse was due to the unauthorised and ultimately catastrophic activities of, it appears, one individual (Leeson) that went undetected as a consequence of a failure of management and other internal controls of the most basic kind. [...]." (21 Jul 1995 : Column 544) If Greenpeace fails to do something simple as monitoring their very own staff, why should someone trust them any longer in the really important topics? Why for God's sake does Greenpeace have to have "a sizeable amount of assets" instead of spending the donations as intended, and that prompt? Only 9% of the annual campaign expenditure were spend on "forests" (p. 40), 7% on "oceans", but 18% on "media & communications", another 7% on "public information and outreach" and 3% on "political, science & business". Do you mind me to subsume these 28% under "propaganda"? This can only be a first step! Killing the messenger is easy, but understanding the message properly is not: They have to implement effective controlling mechanisms! The whole board of directors should be fired, too, IMHO. Really? They dumped 22% (30.3m EUR) on "Marine operations & action support" (p. 40), with the result that one third of their fleet is seized by russian authorities. Sorry, but that's not what I call responsible. You misunderstand me on purpose, do you? If I was a donor for Greenpeace, I would feel stupid to see that from an income of 288.360m EUR only 12m EUR are spent on (rain-)forests, less than 10m EUR on oceans and 4.6m EUR on sustainable agriculture (p.41). In other words: If I donate 1 dollar to Greenpeace, the (rain-)forests benefit with as much as 4.16 cents, the oceans with 3.33 cents and sustainable agriculture with 1.61 cent. More than one third (98.800m EUR out of 288.360m EUR) are used for begging fundraising expenditure. I don't claim other charitys to be any better, but I am not sure if people really know how little money they donate to Greenpeace is actually spent for the environment and how much money just trickles away.

Speculating with giving money is OK as long as I make profit? I guess the people who donated for Greenpeace did so in order to protect the environment (and to silence their conscience), not to let them bet on exchange rates. If I donated to Greenpeace I would be really pissed off reading such news: If Geenpeace is not responsible-minded with regards to money, why should they be with anything else? Maybe they used to be idealists, but nowadays they are nothing but lobbyists spending other people's money in an inefficient way and enjoying an easy life at stupid donors' charge. If all the media report on the questionable assault on LEGO, the headlines on Greenpeace's mismanagement disappear and the populace is likely to forget it. If Greenpeace is clever at something, then to manipulate the public opinion and to guilt-trip somebody. And if they don't want their business of selling of indulgences to stop, the last thing they needed to deal with is to have a bad press. It's not amoral to lose my very own money I worked for hard. But it is amoral to misappropriate donations: Nobody donates to Greenpeace to let them speculate, but to protect the environment. Amoral is to spend other people's money in a thoughtless and ignorant way.

Isn't the poll a bit outdated? Shouldn't we add Schweinsteiger, Lahm, Müller (Thomas, not Gerd), Özil, Khedira, Kroos, Klose and Götze?