Solidity for SolidWorks?
in [SolidWorks]
|
From: jon_banquer on 26 Jan 2008 12:52 > Is there something to be learned here? Yup. Solidworks Feature Manager needs to be redesigned. Some how in all your Apple bullshit you missed this. Jon Banquer San Diego, CA
From: jon_banquer on 26 Jan 2008 13:28 >Yup. Solidworks Feature Manager needs to be redesigned. >Some how in all your Apple bullshit you missed this. http://dezignstuff.com/blog/2007/02/27/solidmap/ "SW Parent/Child functionality is pretty basic and very dated. For some people who just like to see the information in a different layout, SolidMap's approach may be fine, but the things I would look for would be more detailed and covering more types of relations. In particular, SolidMap would have value to me if it had stuff that is either difficult or impossible to get from SolidWorks currently: - detail about incontext relations (sketch, feature, part, assembly) - warnings about circular relations in assemblies - warnings about relations to things in assemblies that require multiple rebuilds (incontext features, component patterns, etc.) - the interface to be laid out so you can see more than a few features at a time - option to show the feature tree in a purely history based representation (not indented and reordered for parent/child) - identify orphan features (have no relatives in the tree, and also features with no children in the tree) - information about inserted parts, split parts, etc. - information about references as relating to configurations - possibly combine Feature Statistics, since that info is already available" Jon Banquer San Diego, CA
From: gk on 26 Jan 2008 13:49 jon_banquer wrote: >>Is there something to be learned here? > > > Yup. Solidworks Feature Manager needs to be redesigned. > > Some how in all your Apple bullshit you missed this. > > Jon Banquer > San Diego, CA > > Maybe it's only high school dropouts that have difficulty with SW's Feature Manager as I don't and there don't seem to be many (any?) complaints from the other *real* users. gk
From: jon_banquer on 26 Jan 2008 14:07 > What is your take on the news from SWW? Shows SolidWorks Corp. still doesn't get it. They are not even close to getting it. Jon Banquer San Diego, CA
From: brewertr on 26 Jan 2008 14:45
On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 10:28:39 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer <jon_banquer(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>Yup. Solidworks Feature Manager needs to be redesigned. > >>Some how in all your Apple bullshit you missed this. > >http://dezignstuff.com/blog/2007/02/27/solidmap/ > >"SW Parent/Child functionality is pretty basic and very dated. For >some people who just like to see the information in a different >layout, SolidMap's approach may be fine, but the things I would look >for would be more detailed and covering more types of relations. > >In particular, SolidMap would have value to me if it had stuff that is >either difficult or impossible to get from SolidWorks currently: > >- detail about incontext relations (sketch, feature, part, assembly) >- warnings about circular relations in assemblies >- warnings about relations to things in assemblies that require >multiple rebuilds (incontext features, component patterns, etc.) >- the interface to be laid out so you can see more than a few features >at a time >- option to show the feature tree in a purely history based >representation (not indented and reordered for parent/child) >- identify orphan features (have no relatives in the tree, and also >features with no children in the tree) >- information about inserted parts, split parts, etc. >- information about references as relating to configurations >- possibly combine Feature Statistics, since that info is already >available" > >Jon Banquer >San Diego Psychiatric Ward LOL....no original thought there Jon. You just posted your crib notes and will soon plagiarize, parrot and post it as your own. |