Examples of good UI

Discussion in 'SolidWorks' started by mbiasotti, Aug 28, 2007.

  1. mbiasotti

    mbiasotti Guest

    I would like to solicit your opinions of great GUI (graphical User
    Interface) of programs that you've had exposure to, or even use on a
    regular basis. It doesn't have to be CAD but anything that you think
    does an exceptional job in presenting an extremely easy-to-use and
    well thought-out workflow. For instance, the iPhone, in my opinion, is
    a great example of this. Other programs that come to mind, again in my
    humble opinion, MOI (Moment of Inspiration), Alias Image Studio,
    Bryce3D, iMovie, etc just to name a few.

    Thanks

    Mark
     
    mbiasotti, Aug 28, 2007
    #1
  2. mbiasotti

    jon_banquer Guest

    I happen to like the "Pallet Well" that Adobe Photoshop uses.

    Is there some reason SolidWorks Corp. can't do something like Ironcad
    does with their Tri-Ball UI? I really like it and think others would
    as well.

    The right mouse button being able to be customized in SolidWorks 2008
    is something I will enjoy.

    I see very little in SolidWorks 2008 that really excites me. Cretainly
    nothing to make it easier to figure out someone else's design intent
    by giving the user an easy to use tool that shows a full overview of
    how the model was constructed.

    I guess the best thing about the new SolidWorks 2008 UI is that
    SolidWorks VAR's will probably use it to sell more seats with less
    resistance.

    The direct benefit of more SolidWorks users is the possibility of
    advanced hands on video tutorials being done by users since SolidWorks
    Corp. has no real interest in it's users just it's VAR's.
     
    jon_banquer, Aug 29, 2007
    #2
  3. mbiasotti

    jon_banquer Guest

    "Speaking as someone with 14+ years in DCC (Max, Maya, Truespace) the
    way Solidworks currently handles colors/textures/materials is truly
    horrid (2007)."

    Agree.

    How about the eyedropper icon in the Properties Manager. It seems to
    me to be just a little bit lacking in functionality.
     
    jon_banquer, Aug 29, 2007
    #3
  4. mbiasotti

    neilscad Guest

    I am pleasantly surprised to see you ask for peoples opinions about
    this Mark - good stuff ;o)
    I would like to think that means there is some possibility for a
    revisit in the near future and that you are not just asking for your
    own interest.
    I am perhaps a little more surprised not to see more replies already
    given the controversy over the 08 UI changes..
    This would seem like a nice opportunity to express preferences rather
    than straight rejection of the 'regrettable'.
    I am not sure I can really nominate something outstanding but I might
    talk a little about things I find frustrating and the reasons I think
    that some approaches work better than others..
    Its actually quite hard to write a thoughtful reply to this in a short
    time..I might break it up into parts..keep tuned in..

    There is something I think to be said for not having programmers
    prepare the UI unless they are one man bands or very small teams with
    a unique vision of what they want to achieve as in the case of MOI.
    The reason for this is that they are too close to the code to be able
    to see it objectively or at least how the user sees or experiences it.
    An example of this from my own experience is a makeover I did for the
    Blender-Indigo python script a while ago.
    Really I only know enough python to hack around but the thing was the
    coding progress of both Indigo and the script were leaving people who
    weren't expert technical users or coders themselves behind.
    All the functions were being incorporated as they emerged but it
    really didnt make sense or the layout was a bit mangled/ad hoc and the
    tooltips were not providing enough clues for the uniniatiated to pick
    up on..also the documentation was/is lagging the development and at
    times quickly superceded- a situation perhaps similar to SW.
    Anyway to cut the story short it needed someone to come along and
    restate/rearrange things if you like with a foot in either camp -
    having a reasonable understanding what was being done technically but
    also being a learner and therefore able to comprehend what was not
    explained well or in the correct order, place etc.
    In doing this it is ought to be possible to go back to the programmer
    therefore and explain that what they are doing in the analysis isnt
    quite the way it needs to work...which is most likely what they dont
    appreciate hearing.
    In the past we have had some things incorporated into SW that fit into
    this scenario. Yes they work but you wonder why it was done like that
    if only they had...or why is that here? or why cant I do that? Stuff
    seems unfinished or half baked and it never seems to be reexamined or
    completed and you suspect there is little comprehension that people
    dont actually work like that or it is almost there but not quite.
    Which brings me on to point 2..
     
    neilscad, Aug 29, 2007
    #4
  5. mbiasotti

    neilscad Guest

    the iPhone...dont have one myself ,not available here yet and too
    pricey for me ...also I admit I am a person who hates cellular
    phones ;o)
    but ok why is this good? putting aside the Apple golden halo and the
    battery issue...
    answer: because it works the way you do.
    to my mind this is not the same as being intuitive - something I have
    already made comments about as being an unuseful pursuit in itself..
    Someone definitely spent some time asking fundamental questions of the
    nature 'what do I want to do' and then they made the device conform as
    best as possible to that using the technology or said 'hey wouldnt it
    be cool if' and developed and refined to achieve that it as they went.
    Also they didnt rush. They took time to get it right. The big word
    QUALITY.
    In SW ID terms this would be like a jump forward to subdivision
    surfaces so that people have a dynamic entity to work with rather than
    construct a surface here loft there cut there...borrow a sketch there
    reopen it redo it....
    In some ways although it is progressive SW fails to make the big jumps
    ahead and gives us noble clunk like 'Deform'
    Part of this of course is you guys feel compelled to have something
    showy every 9 months and you dont understand the real market or give
    your customers what they want..you are pink Zune makers ;o)
     
    neilscad, Aug 29, 2007
    #5
  6. mbiasotti

    neilscad Guest

    ok MOI as an example...
    Why do this sit well with people?
    answer: because it sets out to work the way you do..its like Rhino
    stripped of the Autocad command baggage
    If you look at the UI it seems natural and uncluttered..
    The tools are immediately to hand and it is apparent what they are for
    and they are a reasonable size so as not to be cryptic or need to
    pause over tooltips.
    The icons dont set out to win art competitions or conform to a
    fashionable OS style they are functional and directly representative
    of what it does. It has a sketchbook simplicity to it.
    It stays with same symbols you see in the working window so your mind
    doesnt do a jump just interpreting the icon.
    This is what I have said before about SW icons you guys try to do too
    much with them in the belief the appearance is important to make a
    sale. This product is for technical people.
    I dont know about you but I tend to go into another mental zone when I
    am creating stuff.
    I can imagine whole projects in my minds eye and then sorta translate/
    project that into symbols or I am thinking in terms of maths or
    chemistry or.... really the colour of the interface is of little
    actual importance because I dont notice it. What you do want is to
    spontaneously recognise the symbol and use it or its related function.
    Imagine Einstein trying to solve relativity equations that are done in
    multiple colours with perspective and shading...does it help? the
    language is symbols not impressionist paintings I think

    ah anyway Im about done this evening - might come back with more
    thoughts tomorrow
     
    neilscad, Aug 29, 2007
    #6
  7. mbiasotti

    Bo Guest

    User Interfaces are the one thing which is the bane of bad products.
    It is easy to cite the bad ones. In hardware they come with 50+keys
    like remote controls and typical cell phones, with all the issues.

    Once I get used to a particular product, I forget about some of the UI
    features, as my mind goes into auto-pilot, but I offer the following.

    iPhone is not typical: I've had mine for exactly 2 months and it is
    the only cell phone I've owned on which I never read a manual. It is
    also the only phone where everything worked (I didn't try all sub
    options). The bi-directional synch is easy and works 100% and DOESN'T
    REQUIRE A USER INTERFACE.

    Again a Negative before a positive: This may seem initially like a
    trite or meaningless comparison, but here goes:

    MS Word (2004 on my Mac Book Pro mainly though I have it on my Dell):
    #1, as much as I use it, I am NOT a professional writer, nor have I or
    would I take training to learn every feature, as it wouldn't benefit
    me. It is not very easy to find what I want in MS Word when I'm not
    really sure of where the option is located. Help file is not so
    helpful many times. I have tried to use the Word's Outline function
    to do outlines for many reasons, but it is a nightmare for me as it is
    not simple, yet should be.

    Engineers & designers probably used outlines more than many other
    people. What to do? Go Simple!

    I bought Inspiration (www.inspiration.com = free demo online) for way
    less than $100, and the interface is clean, it runs on both Mac PC,
    and it is understandable and usable within less than 30 minutes
    without the manual (which is good). I can plan out a project (Tree
    chart or Outline) or summarize a book or article, or prep a new design
    or patent application...whatever I need. No manual, no training, no
    fuss, as Apple says "It Just Works". Most Icons for most work are on
    the screen edges and are easy to understand and use. Not magic.
    Maybe not the best, but very good for what it is.

    Granted that a very complex program can not be as simple as
    Inspiration, but I do wonder if a user can have things to be hidden
    which can be easily "found" or "tipped open" or "brought to the front"
    or "flipped out" when needed.

    I use PowerCADD (www.engsw.com) on the Mac for 2D layout and Adv.
    work, because it is precise and competent and the interface has
    remained fairly clean, and it is fast. They allow tools to be put on
    screen to suit the user or not and offer "popout" lines of similar
    tools. I find that good for me, but then I've used it for a long
    time. I must say their interface has not changed much over time.

    So for both Inspiration & PowerCADD, I find their small toolbars along
    the edges very usable and understandable and efficient. For
    consistently high output, I rely on command keys so I don't have to
    hit icons or menus, as in SolidWorks.

    iPhone's interface has something to teach us in a couple ways that
    were obvious to me:

    1. Icons are large: Most prior phones had stupid icons probably 1/8"
    square. Apple only uses things that small for signal strength and
    Bluetooth icons, which are not accessed by a click

    2. Black background works in the icon selection arena to enhance
    visibility

    3. Color in the Icons: Very useful for quick recognition.

    4. Master "Back" button: Getting Home is easy.

    For SolidWorks is there a Hidden Interface Element that has been
    totally ignored?: in the case of the iPhone, Bluetooth is one thing
    that makes the iPhone great, as answering calls means I don't interact
    with the iPhone to do a major task.

    I think a BlueTooth headset keyed into SolidWorks might be a useful,
    option. Warnings about memory, errors, file name collision, broken
    Refs, Mates, or who knows could be delivered via audio as appropriate
    and at the user's wish. I would rather get a BT headset audio warning
    in some cases than a dialog box.

    Is there also the ability then to do audio annotations to my
    SolidWorks files, such that I can say, "God I have to clean up this
    feature's draft and blend radii before it goes into production, but
    it's OK for the first design review." Text annotations for things
    like this take way too long, and at times are intrusive, considering I
    don't usually want to leave design comments there on screen and have
    to then turn off the visibility to continue work cleanly.

    Or: Maybe SolidWorks can have its own internal Outliner for keeping
    user commentary. There are a lot of design decisions and options that
    get kept on scraps of paper.

    I have heard rumors that the next Laptops from Apple are going to have
    a more interactive "trackpad" possibly like the iPhone. I believe it
    is inevitable that the trackpad, like a Wacom tablet, may eventually
    become more of a part of the User Interface in a number of ways.

    I wouldn't be surprised to see custom keyboards for desktops start to
    appear with these advanced trackpads. If I could get one for use with
    SolidWorks, I'ld probably try it.

    Bo
     
    Bo, Aug 29, 2007
    #7
  8. mbiasotti

    Bo Guest

    A prime example of an Ideal User Interface by my viewpoint, would be
    one where I could go to an outline of the principals of Consistent
    User Interface Methods & Options. I for one didn't know I could take
    the red dot on an "on edge" line with a broken reference and reattach
    it. I just missed that until someone showed me.

    A second example of a good User Interface would be a Manual/Help File
    with boolean search terms that allows us to get 3-5 hits rather than
    50 when we search, and (no less important), some real PROFESSIONAL
    tech writers who KNOW Swks, to write and keep up the Manual/Help File.

    Some will say, "Let the VARs do it". My VAR didn't have time for me
    when I bought SolidWorks. I plunked down $5k, and said when can I
    take my introductory class, and the answer was "we are booked up for
    about 6 weeks." to which I replied, my first project is due out in
    less than a month. Well, I did my project successfully by going
    through the tutorial/easy start booklet that came with SWks 2000.

    Good built-in manuals, help, examples, UI standards and such could
    make it a lot easier for users. We users can't spend time learning
    everything as we just don't use it all, but when we suddenly need to
    do it to finish by 5pm (or 10pm), we should be able to figure it out
    without scheduling a training session weeks downstream.

    Resolution independence in the menu sizing might be helpful for people
    using the wrong screen (1900 pixel laptop screens), or poorer vision
    than 20-20, such that the user can scale up or down his toolbar & menu
    sizes. Apple has taken a lead on this issue.

    I do not know about setting contrast in the toolbars, but sometimes I
    have wondered if it would help reduce the feeling of clutter. I use
    "Menu Shade on my Mac Book Pro" because I don't need that bright line
    of items highlighted all the time. I got it from VersionTracker.com.

    I find that when doing more complex assemblies with 10-20 files open
    at once that picking the right file, with the shortened file names of
    the hidden files that are open to be useless. If I could hit a button
    and see a preview image of all open files like you see in pdf or photo
    browsers, I could INSTANTLY pick the file I know I need by look, not
    by a foreshortened file name.

    Bo
     
    Bo, Aug 29, 2007
    #8
  9. mbiasotti

    Dale Dunn Guest

    I hear World or Warcraft talked about for a good interface. Looking over
    my little brother's shoulder, I can see that it is very customizeable,
    and it honestly reminds me of how I have SW set up. The main thing that I
    can see it has over SW is that major UI elements can be floated or
    docked. Apart from the task pane, SW is completely lacking this common UI
    functionality. Text in a transparent window in WoW is still readable over
    the game graphics, which SW cannot reliably do with the flyount FMT.
    Perhaps the game graphics have a palette that is easy for text to
    contrast with.

    WoW also sometimes incroporates popular UI elements that were created by
    users as plug-ins. This seems like a good idea. I can think of a few
    candidates for custom property management, mate hotkeys, etc.

    Other games with good UI features: Battlefield 2 and 2142 have a feature
    called "commo rose" which seems like the next step past the context menu
    enhencements in 2008. Some of the LucasArts games that I saw had a
    similar thing. I think Full Throttle was the first to implement this for
    LucasArts, as the primary feature of the UI.

    I wonder how useful some examples will be for CAD UI. iPhone is designed
    to be used with fingers, not keyboard and mouse. MoI is designed for
    tablets. Both of these examples have to simplify the UI because of lack
    of hardware to interface with the user. It seems to me that a unique
    problem of CAD UI is the enormous number object types and operations and
    combinations of those that have to be dealt with. On top of that, CAD has
    selection requirements that nothing else does (BTW, SW selection filters
    need a way to select on object properties, as well as object type. I
    recently wanted to select all the balloons where the custom property
    referenced in the lower half had a certain value. It can't be done). Good
    examples of non-CAD UI may be limited to serving as illustrations of the
    fact that a clear, efficient UI for the task at hand is a good thing.

    It might be important to ask people why the cited examples are a good UI.
    What is important in each case? Is the iPhone discoverable? Is Photoshop
    consistent so that uncommon tools still make sense? Do games have a UI
    that transports the user into the game world?

    To answer my own question: The commo rose in Battlefield is a very fast
    and efficient way to select which operation to perform on a selected
    object. Floating, transparent UI elements in WoW are a great way to
    present information and controls to the user while still allowing enough
    graphics to come though to give the user visual context for the graphical
    content that is the actual focus of attention. SW is already doing some
    of this well, but could do much more.

    Some of the best UI out there has simply discarded the MS playbook. MS
    does a workable job of handling files and office tasks (possibly
    excepting the ribbon of Office 2007). For most other tasks MS interface
    guidelines seem useless.

    Possibly OT rant: View manipulation (and possibly other manipulation)
    needs to be exposed to the game controller interfaces of Windows, instead
    of relying on 3DConnexion's plug-ins and expensive hardware. Windows is
    perfectly able to handle 6 DoF input devices, and I believe that they
    would get a lot cheaper if plug-ins didn't have to be developed. Right
    now, 3DConnexion has an effective monopoly on 3D controllers, and it just
    doesn' need to be that way. If controllers could use standard Windows
    interfaces, more and better controllers could be developed because of the
    decreased cost of software development. There have been 6 DoF game
    controllers that were far less expensive than Spaceballs (Spaceballs™ the
    monopoly!), and I'm sure they were precise and reliable enough for CAD
    work. Seriously, just hire Z-XYS or DiMonte Group (or both) to design one
    to ship with SW. I wonder if it would cost less than implementing DFM
    Express. I'm sure it would be used more. Maybe even put the dongle in it.
    Make it so cool that it becomes an icon for SW. Take that Inventor! Take
    that SolidEdge! Many users are missing out because of the cost of these
    things, and they do bring a real benefit to the UI.
     
    Dale Dunn, Aug 29, 2007
    #9
  10. Just have to say that basic manipulation (rotate, pan, zoom) in SW is
    excellent. For example, I don't know any other package that can rotate
    models with single button mouse action.
     
    Markku Lehtola, Aug 29, 2007
    #10
  11. mbiasotti

    Richard Guest




    I would like to comment on RSI problems that I got from
    intensively using Solidworks which has a lot to do
    with inefficiencies in the userinterface.

    Solidworks needs much more scrolling and precise mousemovents
    than most other Cad systems and it is getting worse almost
    every release with trees and propertymangagers getting bigger
    showing more and more (often useless) information that needs
    to be scrolled away in so many basic operations.
    The precise mouse movements and scrolling caused me RSI problems.
    I know there are many types of RSI problems caused by several
    types of repetitive work and it is different for anybody but a
    typical
    "mouse hand" injury is often caused by the excessive use of the
    mouse.

    One of the things that causes the precise mousemovements are the lack
    of selection adjustments like aperture or pickbox like in Autocad
    and other CAD systems which really eases the selection and avoids
    the precise mousemovements and that really is a shame for RSI
    problems in Solidworks.

    I found solutions in making as much as possible shortcuts on the
    left hand with alt, shift, ctrl and a combination of these.
    Further I have reprogrammed some often used functions to avoid
    the endless mousemovements to and from the tree and property
    managers.
    The idea is to have as much as possible small popups invoked by
    shortkeys on the left hand that allow the right hand mouse input
    almost without moving the mouse.

    Further, Solidworks is really inefficient when using a couple
    of windows open at the same time because the size of the
    propertymanagers and therefore the commands you can see are
    restricted to the size of the window and number of open windows.
    You have to scroll or windows maximize all the time only to see
    your command options. This is really a pain, liturally.

    The property manager user interface of Solidworks is restricted
    to the size of your window and number of open windows and this
    is a real Solidworks problem, no other CAD software I know has
    this problem and limitation.
    It keeps you scrolling on end or windows minimize/maximize, it
    is a serious userinterface problem.
    Solidworks also needs so much area for the for the property
    manager so that effective cad area is seriously restricted.

    This propertymanager userinterface is easy to learn but hard to drive
    as it needs a lot of additional scrolling or windows maximize
    commands
    only to see your commands when working with multiple windows,
    something Windows was desigined for. It is really dissappointing to
    see
    the first Windows solidmodeller chooses this userinterface that
    causes a lot of unnecessairy mouse interaction when working
    with multiple windows.
     
    Richard, Aug 29, 2007
    #11
  12. mbiasotti

    neilscad Guest

    It might be important to ask people why the cited examples are a good UI.
    Agreed and actually what type of task they are doing in SW when they
    say they favour hotkeys for example
    My guess is someone using hotkeys is actually engaged in a different
    type of work and mental process to someone who wants radial menus or
    perhaps a spaceball type device with 15 buttons or perhaps it is just
    a personal preference? Personally I dont feel I need a spaceball the
    mouse works fine but...
    If you have a job that requires you to pump out say structural steel
    or sheetmetal you probably dont want tools presented in the same
    fashion as someone playing with shapes or trying to imagine how to
    integrate conceptual art.
    Perhaps this would alleviatate complaints from some people who arent
    at all into ID stuff for example and balk at realview
    'improvements'..so.. not only can you nominate say to have an icon set
    set for your most likely purpose but the UI changes somewhat to mirror
    how people want to/feel happiest functioning.
    Although say the iPhone UI may be a great soln for that purpose
    transposing the same thing into CAD would be much less useful - about
    as much use as MS Office in SW ;o)
     
    neilscad, Aug 29, 2007
    #12
  13. mbiasotti

    neilscad Guest

    ok more random thoughts...
    it occurs to me this is not the first time opinion has been given by
    the community about the UI
    My question for Mark is: What happened to all the previous suggestions
    made that SW borked the changes they made in 08? How did they arrive
    at the solution they did? Perhaps if we understand what the thinking
    was behind this we can point out where it went off course with
    people...
    I think people have made requests for dual monitor support for a few
    years and that hasn't surfaced..
    Richard has made comment on scrolling and clicking for a while his
    awareness heightened by his RSI experience..was that considered at
    all? are we just not giving the feedback in a useful form?
    Come to think of it I am sure I tried to get some enthusiasm going to
    discuss radial menus or radical solutions a while ago - did anyone at
    SW appraise that?
    Perhaps people can submit sketches or cut and paste mockups or videos
    to SW if there is a real interest inside SW.
    Would you guys pay a modest amount for some real thinking to be done
    and presented by people out here?
    a small prize for the best 5 ideas or something?..
    Would you allow early criticism/hacks of your next concepts?
    What worries me is that you guys will again be open to some input but
    then go away and do something the marketing dept want or make a wrong
    call based on your own 'better judgement'.
    I admit people arent going to give as much time to this as your own
    full time staff and hopefully you guys have experts in their feild to
    articulate and analayse things better than we can but somehow we have
    to get this grounded in the real world well before someone puts it in
    the release pipeline
     
    neilscad, Aug 29, 2007
    #13
  14. mbiasotti

    neilscad Guest

    ok one more contribution...
    http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/131

    I already gave this one a while ago..
    http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/129

    Now I know this is going to be unpopular with traditionalists but I
    think it is actually time to make a big jump forward or at least
    consider how CAD could be done much better unburdened by extending
    familiar methods to try to accommodate the new...
    To me the CAD UI is still rooted in 2d circa 1975...and perhaps this
    is why it struggles to accommodate todays 3d tools and work
    flow...when we output today are we printing on pen plotters or making
    PDF ,rapid prototypes and exchanging 3d files?...
    SW could do themselves and us a favour by stepping back from rehashing
    the various arrangements of icons and menus and look at what graphics
    are capable of these days...if you like to free ourselves of the
    physical cell phone keypad.
    People don't really move their mouse pointer or their eyes in straight
    lines so perhaps those nice linear layouts can be done away with?
    Icons that magnify when you roll over them?...
    There must be many ways to interact with the CAD process that have not
    been considered because it is inside the box of the familiar.
    A lot of PC development these days is driven not by say scientific or
    commercial use but by gaming.
    I personally don't have a problem if CAD latches on to the coat tails
    of that and utilises new ideas from there.
    I don't see why CAD shouldn't be as immersive and entertaining
    provided the process is productive.
    I realise that many people would be aghast to think that and throw up
    something like 'but we are professionals and this is an adolescents
    game' or 'how does this help me get the job done' but actually
    provided it is properly tuned to technical needs it might actually
    work better although differently from what you are used to. How many
    people would be happier to pay for a high end gaming card than a
    purpose made quadro for instance?
    Does it really matter that a calculator doesn't look like an abacus?

    anyway enough of my ramblings ;o)
    HTH mark
     
    neilscad, Aug 30, 2007
    #14
  15. mbiasotti

    Cliff Guest

    This has jb confused. He thinks it's a vdeogame.
     
    Cliff, Aug 30, 2007
    #15
  16. mbiasotti

    Bo Guest

    Interface issues are hard, otherwise we would be sitting in nirvana
    now. The current UI in 2006 is not what I would consider bad. I am
    productive with it. Assigning keys to functions and tools makes most
    things quick. I suspect there are good reasons based on the use of
    human habits & memory why screen based "choices" for CAD programs have
    become what they are.

    When we drive, we can actually get into an aware but hypnotic sort of
    state, because of the sameness of driving the same route everyday.
    That sometimes causes problems, but it happens to a lot of people, if
    not everyone. I think it may happen to me in some forms of
    constructions in SolidWorks, though I can't prove it. If it happens
    as I think, the interface and my repetitive tasks are well linked to
    allow these simple things to proceed without as much effort or thought
    in just "cruising" through routine items.

    Given that when we are doing sketches, we are not needing menus or
    toolbars much, is it possible or desirable to minimize the tool bars
    to give more room to sketch? Then when a key is hit or cursor heads
    toward a screen edge the toolbar can expand to usable width as opposed
    to hogging real estate ALL THE TIME.

    Likewise when we finish with a sketch, there are a half dozen or so
    most common extrude or cut tools, so why shouldn't those be available
    at the cursor in some well done method?

    And then after writing the above, I am not convinced that I would save
    much time. I can see you have to prototype and use an idea long
    enough to be able to understand what could work and if so really how
    well.

    Bo
     
    Bo, Aug 30, 2007
    #16
  17. mbiasotti

    jon_banquer Guest

    "A lot of PC development these days is driven not by say scientific or
    commercial use but by gaming."

    How soon before CADCAM applications make use of Direct X instead of
    Open GL? I see the advantage being in lower priced more powerful video
    cards.

    "anyway enough of my ramblings ;o)"

    It's not like Mark Biasotti really wants to make a change... hell he
    won't even provide sample files or the starting Photoshop files for
    that Razor video so someone can much more easily follow along.

    What I really want is FX CAD Solutions to fill in the gap on this kind
    of advanced tutorial. FX CAD Solutions is the guy from Canada making a
    killing on E-Bay selling SolidWorks video tutorials to those desperate
    for the kind of video tutorial I prefer and that SolidWorks Corp.
    doesn't / won't provide. He's suppose to be working on some advanced
    stuff rather on the intermediate stuff he has now.
     
    jon_banquer, Aug 30, 2007
    #17
  18. mbiasotti

    Dale Dunn Guest

    I get that all the time. When I'm in the groove with a design, I rarely
    think at all about the tools. Everything just flows. However, I used to
    do this with AutoCAD and MDT, mostly using the CLI. So, I think we can
    conclude that an experienced user can get in the zone with any reasonably
    consistent interface, regardless of perceived efficiency. (Perceived
    efficiency: I sometimes miss the command line.)
    I like this idea of menus that automatically expand. Some of the new pop-
    ups in 2008 are behaving something like this. This would be a great way
    to maximize graphics area.

    One of the utilities I use is called MouseImp. It enhances scrolling
    behavior, but what important to this discussion is that it can
    automatically roll a window into "window shade mode" when the pointer is
    not over the window. So, to use the window, move the pointer over the
    window and it expands. This used to work on floating toolbaars too.
    (something broke this several releases ago.) I used to stack rolled up
    toolbars, then mouse over them until the correct toolbar was unrolled. In
    concept, this wasn't much different from the command manager, except you
    activated the desired toolbar by rolling over it. It was a quick way to
    access command buttons, and very compact on screen. And it didn't waste
    horizontal space like the command manager.

    I just tried this again for the first time in years, and it's working
    again! Time to go crush my toolbars...
     
    Dale Dunn, Aug 30, 2007
    #18
  19. mbiasotti

    brewertr Guest

    Hardly a killing, a quick look at FX CAD sales on eBay seem to be near
    100 units and maybe $5,000.00 gross sales over the past couple years.

    Tom
     
    brewertr, Aug 30, 2007
    #19
  20. 5K in two years sounds like a death sentence to me.


    J
     
    John R. Carroll, Aug 30, 2007
    #20
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.