Latest Contributions by ThomasColson

A few more details would help, such as OS, web server version (IIS? Apache?), etc...but I think you're going to get a quicker answer from TS.  ... View more

see last comment in https://community.esri.com/ideas/14004 , you can now do this in 2.2 ... View more

Kory Kramer‌, during your all-night marking as implemented marathon, you may have missed this one....to others, this is implemented, albeit not in an arc map equivalency way: you will need to go into item properties and set the height, there is a reason why you can't do it with the mouse-drag method that a developer explained to me that I don't understand, but it makes sense.... ... View more

Search and replace looks like it's in the "Product Plan" Add basic find functionality to ArcGIS Pro table view! and https://community.esri.com/thread/166541  contains some user-supplied tools that mimic the functionality. ... View more

Does the same thing happen in 2.2? And, do the computers this problem is occurring on meet the requirements in ArcGIS Pro 2.2 system requirements—ArcGIS Pro | ArcGIS Desktop including latest video card driver? Have you changed display mode in Pro Options? Does Troubleshooting Performance Issues in ArcGIS Pro  indicate any video problems when using the display diagnostics mode? (These are all the things TS is going to ask you).  ... View more

A true cartographer (which I am not) will never allow software to determine label placement. I miss the good old days of when one Topo Map author was very meticulous in his contour lines and stream labels, and the guy who did the next quad wasn't.  ... View more

 major.minor.patch versioning scheme link no longer works.  ... View more

I'm not seeing this, but I have a suspicions. Care to zip and post your shapefile(s) to this thread? ... View more

"For one, we expected most Pro users to upgrade to the latest release more quickly because the upgrade process would be easier for Pro than ArcMap—that is, users could install a new version of Pro on top of an existing one rather than uninstall, reinstall, and reconfigure as is required with ArcMap." Robert Garrity the opposite is reality in all organizations with large numbers of users and distributed IT support. In most cases any version changes first have to go through an extensive vetting process (security review, does the software delete stuff off the C drive (like Patching vs fixing in the Next Version ), white listing via desktop environment managers), then a limited deployment to see what else breaks (regression testing), then finally, a org-wide deployment. Specifically, with 2.2 out this week, it won't even get on my support teams computers for at least a month as I have to figure out all the differences between 2.1 and 2.2 and make sure I have the support resources to help them through those differences, update internal documentation, not to mention getting it installed on a clean OS image and doing all of the security scans. "... users could install a new version of Pro": What users? I've asked this question several times, and haven't really seen an answer: Where does ESRI get the impression that all Pro users will have the necessary administrative rights to install Pro updates/upgrades?. 2 years ago ESRI acknowledged in https://community.esri.com/community/gis/applications/arcgis-pro/blog/2016/08/19/announcing-arcgis-pro-131-update that "We're aware that there might be cases where an organization opts to control updates, preventing end users from downloading and installing updates". Might? What market research has indicated that any organization allows users full admin control to their workstation? There are a few out there, but that is definitely the outlier. Same Post  from Curtis Price  "The in-app update capability is not viable for us as the vast majority of our users do not have administrative access to their machines. ", yet same lack of response. Most users not having admin rights to their workstations is also discussed in Create cloned conda environment as user  So the two concerns I just illustrated lead to my 3rd more serious concern "...and the releases would be more frequent and incremental in contrast to the more monolithic ArcMap releases of the past" with emphasis on the word "Frequent". So now I'm going to introduce "Where does ESRI get the impression that IT people suddenly have more time on their hands to install Pro updates 2-4 times per year?". As both a systems administrator and GIS support analyst, I struggle just to get Arcmap upgraded every other version, and that's after a major release and a few service packs which I slipstream into the admin install. I have to get all the laptops back from the field, explain to supervisors why their folks won't be able to use their computer for a day, troubleshoot about 25% of some GPO issue that's preventing me from upgrading in the first place. There are very few people among the thousands of desktop users that have the permissions to install the software. In other words......deploying and upgrading GIS software in the "real world" doesn't exactly pan out like it does in the ESRI test lab. I'm going to venture that your solution will be "just give users admin rights to upgrade their own pro". That idea has the glide slope characteristics of a Cadillac driven off a bridge. Can you imaging the version control nightmare that will introduce? I have some users that would be happy to still have 9.3 on their desktop, and some go through great lengths to prevent an upgrade (My laptop is in the shop....). Virtualization Pro has even less of a chance of happening (I just made what I was sure going to be a yes-answer pitch for http://www.esri.com/~/media/Files/Pdfs/partners/hardware/DellArcGISforDesktopVirtualizationAppliance.pdf which turned into "You're crazy for even suggesting that! Look at the cost! Do you think we work for an organization that prints money?  (Ummm.....yes?)".  "....we needed to consider limited resources and the level of effort of building and maintaining a site ". Clearly there hasn't been much consideration of the limited resources an organization has in deploying more frequent upgrades. Case in point: the whole ArcGIS Pro Publish Services To ArcGIS Server saga. Some feedback I got on that was "Why can't you just install the whole enterprise stack with Portal? It's so easy!". Again, not in an environment where, actual story, getting approval to install software to download Wildlife GPS collar data is now in year 2 of a paperwork battle.  There continues to be a lot of daylight between ESRI assumptions of user needs and environments and what is reality, I really hope that gap shrinks as we get closer to Arc Map end of life and having to make a decision to continue with Pro, given IT policies for software control.  Those policies are not unique. I work with colleagues in other orgs that could be considered your biggest customers, and their IT polices are the same. In many instances we share the polices via common GPO's and STIGS.  Throwing bricks at Napoleonic-strict Mickey Mouse IT rules is also not a solution. We have learned long ago to be part of the IT infrastructure advancement, not a complaining barrier nor a "We're going to ignore your rules" rogue user. Hope ESRI can join that solution.   I'm glad to see that updating the help site is in the cards and I have no reason to not anticipate ArcGIS Pro Help should start showing version numbers (e.g. 1.0-2.1.2) being "In Product Plan" which is great news. Bigger picture though, we're looking a what I love to call a Catch-22 here: Why would I switch my users from Arc Map to Pro based on the points above? So someone in ESRI is looking at some counter "number of Pro's installed this week", and, seeing that number low, concludes there is no "demand". Perhaps if upgrading to Pro was a bit more attractive than it is now, "demand" would be greater.  ... View more

SDE 10.6 SQL 2014 ENT, FC Storage type is Geography. I'll try to get a video going.... ... View more

I'll see if any one else on GN can confirm the behavior, then log a case next week, unless you want to, but do keep the thread posted so TS isn't getting the same call twice.  ... View more

Well, belay that. I get the same error on versioned and un-versioned SDE feature classes, and just on calculate geometry. I can make all other field calculations. Another thing I missed during Beta.... Seems like a bug... ... View more

Is the SDE feature class versioned, are you direct editing against the SDE? If it is versioned, what version are you editing?  ... View more

I'm not seeing that...how did you get to 2.2? Upgrade, or clean install? (Guess what tech support is going to ask you to do....). What is the source of the data, FGDB, SDE, Shapefile, Feature Service, Offline Feature Service in SQLite Mobile Geodatabase? What options do you have set here: ... View more