Homogeneous GUI...How hard can it be...??

[magnusod]

Well, as WF5 Preprod is only a week away time will tell....but so far I haven't seen any news on WF GUI in remaining areas of basic modeling and sheetmetal. I'm thinking of Blend, Helical Sweep and Extend Wall, Create Bend, Bend/Unbend/Flatten Part in sheetmetal, just to mention a few....

I played around with a dashboard. Started off with Flat Wall and adapted it to the Helical Sweep workflow. My goal was to NOT change any core programming of the Helical Sweep feature.....just make a new GUI...

What do you think....how many hours could that take...??



Number of turns does not exist in present Helical Sweep feature but as it's just a simple relation it should not be too hard to achieve. Of course one of the options Length, Pitch or Number of turns would have to be greyed out depending on which you start to fill in.
Through Axis or Normal to Trajectory could be selected under Placement similar to VSS.
The Sketch Profile tab should actually be placed before Sketch Section but I'm too lazy to change the image. Sketch Section will be greyed out until Sketch Profile is defined.

This is not a professional attempt but more to highlight my astonishment that PTC will not complete the WF GUI.


Edited by: magnusod

 

[jeff4136]

Axial length and diameter are defined by the Profile and Section.
How do we deal with the Pitch Graph interface?
I'm not so sure 'No of turns' is such a simple relation (variable pitch)?


I don't see any great benefit but keep working on it.

 

[dr_gallup]

As I under stand it, the main problem is supporting multiple operating systems. Nothing can be written in visual basic or use windows libraries or any other operating system specific calls. Everything has to be written in C or some variation there of. That's why it has been such a piecemeal approach. I think PTC have shot themselves in the foot. They should have made a big push & done it in one or at the most two releases.

 

[jeff4136]

> Nothing can be written in visual basic or use windows
> libraries or any other operating system specific calls.
> Everything has to be written in C or some variation
> there of.


I don't see it that way. Surely they have interface libraries written
that they can plug menu options and function calls into or otherwise
modify to serve the purpose.


My take on it; they first ported the most commonly used functions to
satisfy the 'masses' and attract new, mostly entry level or low end,
users. The rest, less frequently used (who uses Insert -> Blend?) to
be done later. It wouldn't surprise me (or bother me*) if some
functions were never Wildfirized.


*If I spent all day modeling springs I (never having taken the time
to learn UDFs) would definitely have a file of features to Copy,
Paste, Edit to suit on hand and would see the Helical Sweep
interface less frequently than I do now. If I'd already gone to the
trouble of doing that or creating mapkeys or in some other way
automating the process I'd be miffed if they screwed any of that up
with a different, not necessarily 'better', interface.


Of course, as I'm still sitting on WF2, I'm just arguing for the sake
of argument. Whatever they do; some people will like it and some won't.
_ _ _


If the new 'latest and greatest' version is so much better why don't
they give away the hand-me-downs?

 

[magnusod]

Ok Jeff, but then they shouldn't have changed the interface at all. Your objections that they could screw up someones mapkey on the other side of the world applies to the changes they have done so far too.
If I understand you right then it would be better if we would still be on R1....or...

AND I don't believe it's good working practice if you need to have a backup file for a feature just because the interface is so poor so that when you are executing it you can't figure it out even though you have done it before.....BUT if it's a complicated part I think it's a good idea....

I'll agree that PTC probably prioritized the most frequently used features and Insert Blend might not be that frequent but Bend/Unbend, Flat State definitely is and of course all the commands under Edit Setup.

As for variable pitch, there could be something similar to this....I guess some major gurus in the world managed to solve that......

 

[jeff4136]

> If I understand you


I don't believe you understand either me or complex systems.


Consider:


_ That Autodesk spent over three years and many million dollars
laying out and coding the architecture and interfaces for what
was a rudimentary post early '80s architecture low end mechanical
design environment built around core modules licensed from several
vendors.


_ The tedious process of reviewing proposed design changes, failure
analyses, etc. for any product with complex interdependent systems.


_ That todays CAD 'development' is, in general, refinement and
repackaging of thirty-odd years worth of 'technology'.


_ That todays CAD market is saturated and stabilizing. Increasingly
vendors rely on maintenance vs. sales for revenue.


I suspect there's a lot more involved in the redesign of a function
UI than a few hours assembling dialog box objects and populating
input parameter fields.


It does not benefit a software vendor to finish anything. If my
guess is right though, drag their feet as they may; in CAD the end
is so close that the end of pertetual licensing, as a common
practice, lurks just over the horizon.
_ _ _


Now I like to chew the fat as much as anyone but I have to wonder;
do you think that anything posted on this forum is likely to
influence PTC? Or, maybe someone else? The topic does have a 'help
me sue PTC because they gave me RSI' flavor about it and you have
gone to a lot of trouble when you could have just said; I sure wish
they'd redo the Helical Sweep UI so it looks like a Coil.
_ _ _


Doodling with models is more gratifying, for me, than doodling with
Paint. Here's a height & turns variable pitch spring for you. I
recommend you Edit Def the Graph, rather than going straight to
sketcher relations, so you can watch the curve. The curve chain
constraint solution is ambiguous and you don't want to try to regen
with the wrong solution. (Which illustrates two or three enhancement
prospects I'd value much more than some function UI 'modernizations'.)


2008-11-14_114628_prt0001--wf2--.prt.zip



- Cheers

 

[jeff4136]

> Whatever they do; some people will like it and some won't.


Sorta like...
[url]http://discussion.autodesk.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=7 04003&tstart=0[/url]
... which brings to mind a curiosity question.
Menu: Applications -> Legacy
Is that a 'verbatim' fully functional pre-WF UI?
If it is; did / does anyone use it as such?

 

[mgnt8]

When you select Legacy, some of the old fly-out menus come up on the right. Selecting one of the 'Features' brings up the old dialog box in the right corner that they still have for helical sweep.

 

[jeff4136]

> some of the old fly-out menus come up on the right


Thanks. I've never seen pre-WF and was wondering if it was a full
2001 (or whatever ... pre-dashboard) interface. Just a curiosity
thing.