Yes, understood it has to be one object, and apparently, it also had to be a closed spline.
Intersecting open splines do not seem to work (Boolean button doesn’t stay depressed unless the splines are closed objects),
like a trim with NURBS would do.

Max 2012
Windows 7 64 SP1

Well, I think it’s like, the “Intersection” of 2 (sp)lines would yield a single point as would “Subtraction” yield only a single line split in two. Neither of which would make much sense given there are other tools to “Break” lines and “Create” points, so I think its safe to say it only works on faux volume, ie. closed splines. Going to see what union does with open splines does though :)

EDIT: Nope union open doesn’t work either - but that’s what CrossInsert does…

Max 2009, 2010 32/64
VistaP 64 SP1
Intel Q9550 8GB
ATI 4870x2
Patriot 128GB SSD

I would have thought that after creating closed areas in the intersecting spline objects
(making them one by attaching) it would be possible to use the closed areas as Booleans,
but I cannot as seen in this movie.

Max 2012
Windows 7 64 SP1

	Attachment
10240_pJFEcIgvSPnwcPNYaeHu.swf

YES! Melting point showed exactly what is happening to me. Actually union is more stable, subtraction would be much worse. Rects have only 4 vertexes and are simple, I think there’s the problem, circles and other objects with more vertexes are more “stable”. Will Autodesk ever fix those “minor” problems, or are they gonna be on the bottom of the list forever? I mean SINCE MAX 5! Come one guys! Basic usability!

Thanks MeltingPoint for such a vivid demonstration. What about other points I made?

2xAMD Opteron 275, 4GB RAM, Tyan K8WE, 8800 GTX, MAX 2009 64 bit on Vista Ultimate 64

1) Agreed

2) Never seen it

3) Zooming in that far is pushing Max’s precision limits to breaking point - do you really need to that accurate? If there’s no way you can see a difference when rendering (making a wall accurate to 0.01mm when the wall is 10M long) then attempting to be that accurate is pointless. Max is not Autocad - different rules apply.
Yes I’ve seen it happen, yes it would be nice if they fixed it, but it’s not exactly a showstopper.

4) No idea. No Vista here, nor will there be for many years. I have 1 copy of XP - purchased after Max 2009 was released - and if 2009 would install (as 2008 did) on Win 2K I still wouldn’t have a copy. I see no benefit in updating something as fundamental as the OS where stability is of absolute paramount importance. Anyone who does, just because it’s the “latest and greatest” is asking for trouble - and in the case of Vista, getting it - in large doses.

ps. If you’re looking for “things they should fix”, try this one for size.

Max 4.2 through 2013.
XP-64 (SP2)
NVidia 9800GTX-512 (Driver 266.58).
Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz, 8Gb Ram, DX9.0c.

3. It’s not the precision (although I hate when my lines aren’t nicely aligned), it’s when I zoom in and want to move it jumps away that I can’t see it anymore. And I wasn’t really THAT zoomed in. It obviously can do that precision since I can move that vertex by amount I want, but it first jumps.

I went to Vista because my XP 64 had several issues, MP had overlay problems, everytime I used MAX MP was screwed - the picture in it that is. Logitech drivers for G9 were having problems, no need to explain, but a lot of things weren’t the way they should be. As I gathered, Vista was supposed to be better in using all my 4 cores of my two Opterons 275, and my 4GB of RAM. One day I got tired of XP and bought Vista. A part of me regrets it, but other part doesn’t.

2xAMD Opteron 275, 4GB RAM, Tyan K8WE, 8800 GTX, MAX 2009 64 bit on Vista Ultimate 64

Yup, I see what your saying Don, I was agreeing it doesn’t work on open splines, and taking it a step further by saying it shouldn’t work on open splines, because open splines don’t represent volume. After watching your vid I understand what you mean though, but as far as I know, its never worked like that.

Max 2009, 2010 32/64
VistaP 64 SP1
Intel Q9550 8GB
ATI 4870x2
Patriot 128GB SSD

I agree with Steve about precision in Max vs AutoCAD.  Unlike AutoCAD, Max and other 3D programs’ precision is effected by th overall extents of the scene.  The origin point (0,0,0) is also considered a part of the scene’s extents.

I think of this “bug” as a sign that I am zoomed in too close for the scale of my scene.  To maintain precision I zoom out relying on snaps and the isolate objects command if needed.