IDEA
|
Well, here's a good idea that has seen no activity. Yes, a weighted average calculator would be great...and specifically an area-weighted average would be a nice touch. so how about... - weighted average - area-weighted average - most frequent occurrence Please make summary statistics as expansive and useful as possible.
... View more
08-25-2020
12:30 PM
|
0
|
0
|
1298
|
BLOG
|
Josh, I get this every day or at least 4-5 times per week All, We will be moving forward with a release of My Esri this Wednesday May 27th, at 5pm (PST). Please see the below enhancements and fixes that will be included.
... View more
07-08-2020
10:34 AM
|
0
|
0
|
504
|
BLOG
|
'Associated Fulfillment ID and UNM ID (machine) has been added to the Authorization History page.' what does this even mean?
... View more
06-02-2020
05:34 AM
|
2
|
0
|
504
|
POST
|
three years later and you still can't figure this out? Good lord, how is that possible...this is one of the standard tools that has been in ArcGIS from the beginning.
... View more
04-02-2020
09:41 AM
|
3
|
1
|
1157
|
IDEA
|
Hmmm...maybe this is platform is a good venue for issues like these. I just received notice that ESRI has issued a 10.6 patch for the Lookup (BUG-00011347) and File Deletion (BUG-000113996) issues. Please see ArcGIS (Desktop, Engine, Server) 10.6 File Deletion and Lookup Patch. I applaud ESRI on their quick turn-around on these problems. I got this update from a colleague at ESRI...not sure when the official notice will be sent out. Anyone else get this notice? Brian? via Robin? So props to ESRI on issuing the 10.6 patch and not leaving critical holes in the software. That said, Kory Kramer notes above that there are still related issues in other versions (10.5, 10.5.1, and Pro 2.1) that will require patches. No mention of these on the 10.6 release. And thanks to Curtis Price for the heads up on the 10.5.1 bugs that I have not heard of previously. It is somewhat disconcerting that these issues were not communicated broadly somehow and that the only vehicle for finding these issues is to periodically visit the Technical Support site. It has been encouraging to see emails pop-up in my mail that inform me of fixes to MY bugs...but only mine, not even those from my organizational account. I think I would sign up for an list server of patch releases if there were such a thing...is there such a thing? Especially of serious issues that have been back-ported. I appreciate all the thoughtful responses to this thread...
... View more
06-27-2018
06:35 AM
|
1
|
0
|
432
|
IDEA
|
Here is a note that I recently posted in the Case write-up for a bug we discovered in 10.6. The issue here regards how ESRI resolves issues in the software. In this case, a serious problem with the Lookup command forced us to develop a work-around for those users operating in the 10.6 environment. ESRI realized the critical nature of this bug and responded very quickly...they made the necessary changes and are implementing the fix in 10.6.1. As I note below, by failing to patch the flaw in 10.6, there is now a hole in the software that will remain in perpetuity. This 'Fix in the Next Version' causes me a lot of heartburn...as a developer, I do my best to respond to my clients needs for software that is stable and remains as bug free as possible. I would like to think that ESRI would feel the same. When a critical bug is identified, like this Lookup tool issue (and worse -- like deleting your C: drive [bug 000113996]), it is important not to let this problem remain in the software life cycle. Doing so robs the user of their expectations for reasonable stability in the use of the software. ESRI...please embrace a system where critical patches are resolved in the version of the software that they occur!! While I understand that this case -- and the associated bugs -- are closed, I want to encourage you to address this problem in the version where it occurred, 10.6. the Lookup tool is a critical piece of the tools that we develop using ArcGIS software. By allowing this bug unresolved in 10.6, the work-around that we developed will have to remain in place in perpetuity...we have to at least try to support users in versions going back to 10.3.1. I have to believe that it is in your (ESRI) best interest to provide a patch to existing software with critical flaws like this one and, say, the bug 000113996. Failing to do so leaves a hole in the software that will last for years...10.2 will not retire for another year.
... View more
05-25-2018
06:54 AM
|
23
|
17
|
2316
|