Continue to Site

Welcome to MCAD Central

Join our MCAD Central community forums, the largest resource for MCAD (Mechanical Computer-Aided Design) professionals, including files, forums, jobs, articles, calendar, and more.

Register Log in

Solidworks & ProE, which is most usable?

Jelston,


Maybe if I counted up the number of clicks it takes me to do something then yes, it may annoy me but as I already pointed out I do move the mouse around and click it in activites that aren't realted to modelling and more to just viewing so I wouldn't do that. As I also said, I love using ProE and SW and am always busy and hate my time being wasted, I just obviouslydon't get as rattled as a lot of other people about mouse clicks.
 
Man, this discussion is getting all steamed up. Let's bring it down to earth again. Software is inherently connected to ergonomics, meaning man-machine-interface. It is the responsability of the programmer to make this interface as streamlined as possible. RSI is Repetitive Strain Injury, which makes it much broader than just the number of clicks. It has already been mentioned that holding a mouse button down involves more strain than just a simple click. There is also the fact that other muscles and tendons are involved when just moving fingers than when the whole of the arm has to move.


Writing macros and mapkeys is no excuse for bad software, it simply is shifting the job of the programmer to the user.


3D pointing devices surely have their merits but is again not to be considered a normal remedy for bad software.


Man was created with 2 hands, lots of programmers tend to forget about that. If pressing "L" and "A" can let me switch between sketching Lines and Arcs then this gets my sketch done quicker than when I have to go and click in a menu. When holding down CTRL lets me draw a square instead of a rectangle and a circle instead of an ellipse then again this is interface streamlining.


It's the man-machine-interface that is not as good in ProE as in other software. It is precisely one of the points which make the difference in usability. That was the point of the discussion. Not how one can remedy it. Not whether or not you can live with it.


Alex
 
michael3130 said:
Jelston,


Maybe if I counted up the number of clicks it takes me to do something then yes, it may annoy me but as I already pointed out I do move the mouse around and click it in activites that aren't realted to modelling and more to just viewing so I wouldn't do that. As I also said, I love using ProE and SW and am always busy and hate my time being wasted, I just obviouslydon't get as rattled as a lot of other people about mouse clicks.
Click to expand...


I have to agree, mouse clicks do not appear to effect me physically, professionally or emotionally at this time. In the future maybe an electrode will be attached to the users head and his modeling intentions will automatically appear on the screen without mouse clicks or key strokes. However, at this time I am using what software I have been given and it gets the job done.


"I would rather find out how many licks it takes to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop than how many mouse clicks to model one."
 
I think there needs to be more money thrown into tools development. I'm board with the tools I get to learn. There is so much room for improvement that i am a bit mad.Solidworks as underdogs should spend more money first so the hi-range tools follow suit.
Edited by: design-engine
 
> Let's bring it down to earth again.


Uh huh.


> Writing macros and mapkeys is no excuse for bad software ...
> 3D pointing devices surely have their merits but is again not
> to be considered a normal remedy for bad software.


1) What is "bad software"?
2) "3D pointing devices surely have their merits" is an understatement.
Working in 3D with a sequential 2D interface, e.g. zoom, pan, rotate,
causes me to question the validity of anyone complaining about usability
while doing so. I don't expect everyone to agree with me on that but
we'll have to agree to disagree.

> > It is the responsability


Yes, let's bring this to earth.

What is the "use" of the software that this "usability" is a parameter of?
UI is a biggie but it is only one usability parameter and the importance of
the particular parameter will vary with software usage. Every discussion
in this vein shares a common assumption: the usage is sufficiently 'low end'
that UI is the most important factor involved and if Alibre or TurboCAD
developed a superior UI it would be a hands down winner. Almost invariably
these discussions say more about users and usage than they do about software.


I'm all for UI improvements but ...


You (any 'you') and I will not agree upon what constitutes "improvement".
Never happen. I, in fact, resent any change that doesn't bring with it
a Really Significant benefit. There's too much 'button repainting' and
UI shell gaming being passed off as CAD "development" as it is. If you're
going to mess with my rhythm there'd better be a good reason.

My two hands are already occupied. I'd prefer (in agreement with Harman)
to see a customizable RMB menu to pressing "L" and "A". Maybe. As it is
moving the mouse about an inch (cursor center of screen to Arc button)
just doesn't bother me.


No UI will make everyone happier. It seems, from following discussions,
that SE has a new UI. It'll be interesting to see if it causes the same
amount of fuss the 2001 - WF transition did.


Forum discussions won't influence change. Dropping sales will. I
sincerely hope forum discussions won't influence the nature of change.
I'd prefer to think that usability issues are being hashed out in much
'higher places'.

Dropping sales will ... Don't waste time thinking about suing PTC.
Sue the employer that makes you use the software. You might actually
get somewhere and influence change. Yeah. Right. Following that
thought; how many people own the software being discussed? I can
complain but I've already put my money where my mouth is, so to speak.
Fact is, where I see cause for complaint I don't usually see a clear
solution and doubt I can see far enough to see all the ramifications
of implementing it (thinking of Ledo's Sketch offset thread) nor do I
expect everyone to agree that it's cause for complaint, much less a
good solution. I should be upset because PTC won't spend the money
implementing it?.

(I also own another program that, if you agree with a lot of people,
is light years ahead of Pro/E in terms of "usability". You have to
pay me, specifically, to use it. I don't use it by choice even when
the job is well within its operating envelope. Different strokes.)

Dropping sales will ... well, maybe forum discussions do influence
new sales on a small scale. I'm sure there are some 'users' that
would like to think they can.
 
Concerning the comment about RSI or tendinitis of the wrist, vertical mice are available that are designed to help this problem. Evoluent offers both Right-Hand & Left-Hand vertical mice to relieve wrist & arm pain.

I have one currently on order. One issue of concern, however is that Evoluent does not offer native 64-bit drivers. The 64-bit drivers need to be downloaded from a 3rd party as indicated on the website.

So get yourself a more ergonomic mouse to avoid RSI. Some users I have spoken to have recommend the Logitech Trackman mice with the tracking ball as well.
 
jeff4136 said:
> Let's bring it down to earth again.


Uh huh.


> Writing macros and mapkeys is no excuse for bad software ...
> 3D pointing devices surely have their merits but is again not
> to be considered a normal remedy for bad software.


1) What is "bad software"?
Click to expand...


There is no mathematics in this except obvious counting of keystrokes, mouse clicks and mouse distance.


There is some structural observation possible. For instance : it's all about parametric design. So parameters should be close at hand. If one software offers editing by clicking a feature, one button to reveal all parameters and simple closing after editing then that software is better than an interface where you have to dig 3 levels deep to touch a parameter and confirm again 3 levels up.


There is measurable use of time and handling of errors. If making a sketch on a wrong plane throws you out of a feature and makes you sketch all over then that's less userfriendly than offering to copy the sketch to another plane.


There is a lot of personal taste to it. If you don't like function keys then WordPerfect (remember ?) was bad software. If you don't like to continuously get your hands of the keyboard to select, click and drag the mouse about then Word is bad software.


jeff4136 said:
2) "3D pointing devices surely have their merits" is an understatement.
Working in 3D with a sequential 2D interface, e.g. zoom, pan, rotate,
causes me to question the validity of anyone complaining about usability
while doing so. I don't expect everyone to agree with me on that but
we'll have to agree to disagree.
Click to expand...


It is not because a 3D pointing device is the logical tool to move around in 3D space that no value can be attached to the way software handles this with normal mouse interface. In this regard I have found Catia to be most advanced. Rotation, panning and zoomingis intuitive, clicking on a feature or partrecenters the point of orientation to that feature or part. Zooming in can automatically bring you inside the assembly so that objects in front disappear and do no longer block the view.

jeff4136 said:
What is the "use" of the software that this "usability" is a parameter of?
UI is a biggie but it is only one usability parameter and the importance of
the particular parameter will vary with software usage. Every discussion
in this vein shares a common assumption: the usage is sufficiently 'low end'
that UI is the most important factor involved and if Alibre or TurboCAD
developed a superior UI it would be a hands down winner. Almost invariably
these discussions say more about users and usage than they do about software.
Click to expand...


Of course a simple protrusion can go with a simple interface whereas a variable pitched helix will need more. This is obvious. It doesn't take away the fact that equal operations can be compared across different platforms.


Even within one software ergonomics can measure the amount of mistakes users make through inconsistent approaches of different features or measure a shortened learning curve when care has been taken to follow logical steps, offer clear choices, ...
Edited by: AHA-D
 
besides, user interface is only 1/5th of the issue.What weight would you want to give user interface in a software shootout? And can solidworks users create a mapkey to exit or check out of a sketch?

interface
mouse clicks
maturity of iconography
ease of customization (iconography)

functionality
maturity of tools
top down design surfacing sheet metal draft .....
checklist of tools (list each tool each other
does not have)
workarounds list (only experienced users could
comment on this category)

speed of code
calling up large assemblies
calling up large parts
calling up large iges files

Thats only three categories. What others?

Edited by: design-engine
 
I can think of some additional topics for the interface:

click-and-hold times (lots of static tension)
mouse travel
precision targeting of tiny buttons (source of static tension)
unnecessary scrolling

You could arguably combine the iconography & tool maturity categories into
maturity of workflow.

I would like to point out that the tools & functionality are also a part of the user interface. The tools are the methods or forms ProE presents to you to allow you to operate it - in other words, part of the interface. Everything you see on the screen, plus the mouse and keyboard, are the interface with the user - the way ProE (or SW) presents itself to the world to allow the user to input data that ends up as the 1's and 0's of a digital model. Within the interface, one could differentiate between tools and screen layout, etc.

To restrict the interface to button size & location is to prematurely limit the problem definition - and also possible solutions.
 
Anybody know anyone at www.toolinc.com ?


At risk of being a banquerite ...
http://www.ptc.com/WCMS/files/39981/en/32510en_file_1.pdf
... should provide some interesting jaw jacking material.
smiley4.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Sponsor

Articles From 3DCAD World

Back
Top