Here is one more Star*Net data conversion question. I'm trying to recall which if the conversion utilities that Ron Sawyer wrote, that for TDS-format measurement data or that for Carlson's variation of the same, was the smoother. By "smoother", I mean needs the least intervention or editing to produce a ready-to-run Star*Net file.
The Leica Star*Net converter seems to have some problems, but the Leica Viva DC can output in both .RW5 and .RAW formats. So, short of buying both converters, I'm trying to figure out which is the better choice. Are there any Star*Net users with experience on the subject?
My most recent experience with StarTDS is seven years old now, but it was pretty much flawless. It would convert either the .RW5 or the .RAW, users choice.
Kent-
We run the STAR*TDS routine on our TDS RAW files on nearly every project. It is nearly seamless- the only thing we typically have to treak is resections. and that is only a minor issue.
I don't know anything about Carlson so I can't give you a comparison.
> the only thing we typically have to treak is resections. and that is only a minor issue.
Yes, that was what I thought I remembered, that there was something about how resections were logged in TDS that needed intervention.
Do you have to edit the TDS-format input file or the Star*Net conversion?
I run the .raw file right out of the data collector, then make my edits on the .dat file. The newer(est) version of TDS (4.8.4 I believe) seems to come thru star*TDS better than the version from about 3-4 yrs ago.
I have some trouble with StarTSC and resections. The conversion program terminates and identifies the line in the .dc file it can't parse. No dat file to edit is created, so no fix there is possible.
The fix is to open the .dc file (Trimble raw data) in a text editor,delete the offending line, then re-run StarTSC. That is usually does it.
We just didn't do resections back in the day I was using TDS, so I can't comment there.
> The fix is to open the .dc file (Trimble raw data) in a text editor,delete the offending line, then re-run StarTSC. That is usually does it.
Hmm. That would get old real fast, I'd think.
> We just didn't do resections back in the day I was using TDS, so I can't comment there.
I use them pretty heavily in what I do. I guess that I'll need to be sure to make sure that some resection data is in whatever DC file gets converted.
Star*TDS works well TDS RAW files except that I find that I have to uncheck most of the boxes including the one which automatically figures out which ones are measurement records.
That isn't much of a big deal because my files aren't that huge and it's an opportunity to look over the raw data anyway.
Maybe the question should be, how many different versions of these converter programs are floating around with varying levels of bug fixes? I guess if you were to subscribe to the MicroSurvey maintenance plan, you could be sure you had the latest version and request a bug fix for any problems you found. They seem to be actively fixing bugs and making new releases for Star*NET and the the associated converters.
> They seem to be actively fixing bugs and making new releases for Star*NET
I'm glad that MicroSurvey is maintaining Star*Net, but I'm curious about what bugs they're actively fixing. I haven't run into any with the release I've been using for nearly 10 years.
> I'm glad that MicroSurvey is maintaining Star*Net, but I'm curious about what bugs they're actively fixing. I haven't run into any with the release I've been using for nearly 10 years.
Yes, Version 6 Pro is pretty much rock solid. I've never found a bug and it never crashes.
What the folks at MicroSurvey are evidently doing is:
- figuring out how to write it to run in a somewhat more recent flavor of Windows than XP Pro, and
- writing a new input editor (I'm not kidding about that). Notepad is apparently way too simple. The new editor is planned to assign different colors to different data types! That way, I assume, a person editing a Star*Net input file won't have to be able to distinguish the letters "D" and "DV" from, say, "M", or even "C" or "P" or "PH". I can't imagine how I've been able to run Star*Net effortlessly all these years without that vitally necessary capability.
Better get a color copier/scanner for archiving your reports now!
Color coding will be lost on the color blind 😉
> Better get a color copier/scanner for archiving your reports now!
>
> Color coding will be lost on the color blind 😉
I've already told the folks at MicroSurvey what a dumb idea I think the color-by-data type editor is.
Have you done computer programming in recent times? Most IDE's have the ability to color code data types and structures. This is pretty standard. But you're right, it probably isn't necessary for a language and syntax as simple as Star*NET.
As for the bug fixes, would you even know what was fixed between versions of Star*NET before MicroSurvey bought it? I had never seen release notes nor a website for that matter. Microsurvey is obviously producing both.
> Have you done computer programming in recent times? Most IDE's have the ability to color code data types and structures. This is pretty standard. But you're right, it probably isn't necessary for a language and syntax as simple as Star*NET.
>
I'm not doubting for a minute that all sorts of fancy editors are possible. You could make an editor that played a little tune when you ran the cursor over different data types or you could have an animated graphic march across the screen and point to some syntax error. But why?
Part of the power of Star*Net is that it doesn't have all these junk features. It just does what it's supposed to do and does it without an orchestra of bells and whistles.
