Wildfire 2: Any reactions?

this thread which is turning out pretty lively, don't you think!?!
Yep... I was looking forward to that too..
OK, I was wrong... you are mostly just negative about PTC...I think you have said things like "their programers couldn't program their way out of a paper bag" My point still stands, have you written every last issue up into an enhancement request?? I haven't, and I figure we probably could all benefit from some folks writing some really well thought out ones.
Well, we got an answer, but not the feeling. Infinite undo per session. Wonder if that means it doesn't reset with each save? Can't be... Maybe the old time Pro/E folks didn't need this feature, and the Mechanica converts haven't used it yet. (Mechanica has always had undo for those unfamiliar)
More snips...
The enhancement process is not that bad, and I'm told that the product manager HAS to respond to all of them eventually. I've had them come back and ask whether I think it still is needed years after I wrote them. OK, I admit it's been a while since I've written one, and I need to get on top of that! I agree PTC probably should be watching this but I think their focus is their own sites and hotline. Oh... I did notice that it used to be difficult to browse to the enhancement site, you had to know what it is. I'll have to dig that up.
Thanks, that's the beauty of NGs you can ignore it and just pick up when you get time.
-Meld
Reply to
meld_b
Loading thread data ...
: this thread which is turning out pretty lively, don't you think!?! : : Yep... I was looking forward to that too.. : : > : Still, I think you are being WAY too negative about Wildfire. Of course, : > : seemingly unlike you, I never LIKED the incredible number of clicks that : > : you used to have to use to get a part on the screen. : > : > Where do you get crap like this, I'm way too negative about WF? When have I said : > one thing against the software except that wherever it's going, it's not getting : > there fast enough. I love the changes they are making but is it going to take : > another leap? two more? is there a timetable and when is it scheduled to be : > finished. I'd love to see everything go Dashboard, or at least some *consistent* : > interface. Is *that* even going to happen!?! I hope so, even if their only : > motivation is that SW is spankin' their fannies pretty good. But, I haven't found : > anyone yet who knows if and when. I don't want to rush them, just to get some kind : > of ideas what's going on. But, I'm sure the migration to the Dashboard is taking : > some time, it's a huge undertaking and more so because they're actually improving : > functionality as they migrate. For instance, the draft function has been vastly : > improved. So has the rib function. If you haven't tried these in WF, do so, : > they're a treat. I've created drafted ribs in WF that I wouldn't have given a : > snowballs chance in hell of succeeding in an earlier version. Variable section : > sweeps, the same. And if you're at all familiar with SW, I'm sure you'll agree : > that the WF VSS beats the pants of their 'Sweep with guide curves': it's easier, : > faster and produces a better surface. Is that un-negative enough for ya, huh? : : OK, I was wrong... you are mostly just negative about PTC...I think you : have said things like "their programers couldn't program their way out : of a paper bag" My point still stands, have you written every last issue : up into an enhancement request?? I haven't, and I figure we probably : could all benefit from some folks writing some really well thought out ones. : Point well taken. I agree, there's not one tenth enough participation by average users in the enhancement process. Griping here that isn't followed up with, as you say, well thought out proposals. Question, then, is what's holding people back from participating? Opinion? Anyone who hasn't written one, why not. Does anyone know what the enhancement process is?
: > Supposed to be infite undo/redo. Hey, that's why I started this thread, to find : > stuff like that out! Seriously, I expected that to be one of the first things out : > of anyone's mouth. Okay, guys, now once more, *with feeling* 'Hey, this Undo/Redo : > is GREAT'. Yeah, something like that. : : Well, we got an answer, but not the feeling. Infinite undo per session. : Wonder if that means it doesn't reset with each save? Can't be... Maybe : the old time Pro/E folks didn't need this feature, and the Mechanica : converts haven't used it yet. (Mechanica has always had undo for those : unfamiliar) : : More snips... : > Unfortunately, I don't know anything about making enhancement requests and it's : > turned into a little bit of a vicious circle: don't know because I haven't tried : > it, haven't tried it because I'm unfamiliar with it. At the same time, I keep : > thinking that if I were in the business of writing software, I'd be everywhere : > that people were discussing it or try to be. I'd open all the doors and windows, : > let a fresh breeze in. People bitching in a NG is definitely something I'd pay : > attention to. I don't think that's outside of the process of getting problems : > fixed, it just may not be the most direct route. : : The enhancement process is not that bad, and I'm told that the product : manager HAS to respond to : all of them eventually. I've had them come back and ask whether I think : it still is needed years after I wrote them. OK, I admit it's been a : while since I've written one, and I need to get on top of that! I agree : PTC probably should be watching this but I think their focus is their : own sites and hotline.
I've seen PTC's focus. It's on the 3000 seats at Caterpillar, the 1000 at Motorola, big corporations, big sales. And on their PTC/USER technical committees which have the participation of precisely those big corporations and their sysadmin/managerial type users. Is there any room in that picture for 'little guys' like me? Where do we fit in and how? Then there's the perennial question, as in any romance, of who makes the first move: should they be opening doors, making us and our opinions feel welcomed, or should we be knocking, saying open the door. The latter seems a little hostile, aggressive and confrontational. But it's only a reaction to the appearance of closed doors, feeling left out.
: Oh... I did notice that it used to be difficult : to browse to the enhancement site, you had to know what it is. I'll have : to dig that up. : If you find it, could you post it here. It could help and maybe whatever you know about who qualifies to submit enhancement requests.
DJ
Reply to
David Janes
PTC has a new enhancement process, in which you can track the state of your enhancement. It's available on the Support page on the right - 'Help Improve our Products'. After you file it you receive an 'E' number (like a C number for a call) that allows you to follow through the enhancement and determine if it is being implemented or rejected; you can also add comments to it.
Regards
Reply to
Pete
: > : Oh... I did notice that it used to be difficult : > : to browse to the enhancement site, you had to know what it is. I'll have : > : to dig that up. : > : : > If you find it, could you post it here. It could help and maybe whatever : you know : > about who qualifies to submit enhancement requests. : :
formatting link
: about 2/3 of the way down the page. : : Frequently Asked Questions
1.. Who can use the new PTC Enhancement Process system? Any person who has an active PTC maintenance contract can access the new Enhancement Process system to submit and track enhancements. Active PTC VARs and PTC employees can also use this system.
[Ooops, I guess this leaves me out, no enhancement requests from moi. And somehow, I just can't see paying them to listen if only because I don't have enough money to make them take me seriously. Sour grapes, huh.]
Thanks, Jeff, for trying to open a door. And just knowing how and why the way is blocked is, perhaps cold comfort but, still of some use.
DJ
Reply to
David Janes
...................................
...................................
...................................
Well, guess you can just keep voicing them and maybe someone else that feels strongly enough about similar issues will take the time to actually submit the request. 8~)
I think they should make pending and progress stats available to the public at large, myself, but it's such a cutthroat business that's probably not really a viable way to do things.
===================================
Reply to
Jeff Howard
According to this TPI, this is intended functionality:
formatting link
"This is intended behavior. Locked Dimension functionality was implemented only for dragging section entities in Sketcher. This information is not preserved when exiting the Sketcher session, as it would limit redefining or modifying a dimension in Part mode."
I thought that PTC used to have a TPI on this, saying it would be resolved in a future version... maybe a change in intended behavior was the resolution!
- Wallace
Reply to
Wallace White
: > Hmmm... funny. I switched from SW to ProE and I find I prefer the SW : > sketcher. Intent manager is always adding stuff I don't want and : > sometmes it fails to delete the proper weak constraint when I add : > another costraint. : : If it's any help.... : You can ctrl or shift RMB to pre-approve (not a real good term, but...) or : disallow a constraint before it's placed (as you "rubber band" around). : With a constraint active, RMB (no shift or Ctrl required) and it temporarily deactivates it then select 'Deactivate' from the menu; contraint icon appears with a slash through it.
If you get several deactivated constraints for a sketch entity, Tab cycle through them to select a constraint and RMB again to reactivate.
If you don't like a constraint, highlight it in red and press the Delete key, it's gone. If you're having difficulty telling if you've selected a coincident constraints or a reference entity or a vertex, RMB 'Select from list' and pick the constraint that way.
It's actually pretty handy when you can do it all with RMB and hardly ever have to leave the graphics screen.
: Believe you can also modify the constraint 'selection set' in an environment : dialog. : : > SW sketches can be tweaked by dragging the underconstrained elements. : > In ProE, dragging will override both weak and strong dimensions...you : > can lock dims, but they don't stay locked. : : : DOES ANYONE KNOW if the "dims won't stay locked" has been fixed in WF2 (or : is there an option setting I'm missing, it supposed to be that way, etc.)? : This one bothers me. :
I'm not sure I know what you mean by locking but not staying locked. If I select a dimension, RMB and pick Lock, I can drag sketcher geometry around and the geometry with the locked dimension doesn't move. I can even pick and try to drag it, won't budge. Only way to move that geometry is to modify the dimension or unlock it. If it didn't stay locked, it was broken. If it was broken, it's fixed in 2003490. Don't call the Orkin man, just get the latest build.
David Janes
Reply to
David Janes
: >>SW sketches can be tweaked by dragging the underconstrained elements. : >>In ProE, dragging will override both weak and strong dimensions...you : >>can lock dims, but they don't stay locked. : > : > DOES ANYONE KNOW if the "dims won't stay locked" has been fixed in WF2 (or : > is there an option setting I'm missing, it supposed to be that way, etc.)? : > This one bothers me. : : According to this TPI, this is intended functionality: : :
formatting link
: "This is intended behavior. Locked Dimension functionality was : implemented only for dragging section entities in Sketcher. This : information is not preserved when exiting the Sketcher session, as it : would limit redefining or modifying a dimension in Part mode." : : I thought that PTC used to have a TPI on this, saying it would be : resolved in a future version... maybe a change in intended behavior was : the resolution! : Well, I see now what Jeff meant by 'won't stay locked', meaning as permanent condition of the sketch. I'd have to think about it, but I'm not sure if I'd want it to anyway. The only thing in config.pro that I see that governs locking behavior is sketcher_lock_modified where the default is NO, don't lock modified dimensions, YES to enable lock of modified/strong dimensions. Don't know if this has any long term effect. You'd think though with WF2 supporting a sketch feature, independent of a solid and replacing sketched curves, would make it mandatory to continue the effect of locking dimensions. Other functionality might work against it, though. The feature drag capability, for instance: how could you drag or drag copy features with locked dimensions, particularly if the dimension was to reference geometry.
DJ
Reply to
David Janes
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
Thanks, Wallace, (don't shoot the messenger) even though I think it sux. I had looked for something like that some time back, but missed it.
Guess I'll just keep setting up relations for the ones I'm really paranoid about.
There's still hope...... 8~)
======================
Reply to
Jeff Howard
Well, as the site says, the enhancement pick is NEW! Glad to see you can track them. As far as maintenance, I don't think you can blame PTC for wanting to protect their revenue stream. And if you are talking about Wildfire 2.0 you must be on some sort of maintenance at least as you acquire it right?
Enhancements used to be handled by Pro/User NOT PTC... And I don't think this used to be the policy. Still, I'm on the "paying maintenance" because I think it's worth it side of the fence.
-Meld
Reply to
meld_b
All we need is someone who understands this willing to call the hotline, with running WF 2.0, and paid up maintenance ... pretty much the null set it seems 8-) -Meld
Reply to
meld_b
: > : > I've just tried some basic stuff. When creating a protrusion/cut they have : > : > moved the sketch definition so you first have to press 'Placement' and then : > : > 'Define' before you can start to sketch. An extra mouse click every time. : > : > In WF you had the 'Define' directly as an icon when you where going to : > : > create a protrusion/cut. : > : > : > : > This is great. NOT! : > : > : > : > /Bjorn : > : : > : Bjorn, : > : : > : new Sketch feature : > : and then select the finished sketch and hit the Extrude Tool icon. : > : : > New sketch feature? That should be interesting. And, yeah, easier, maybe. Depends : > on how much monkeying around you have to do to create the sketch feature, doesn't : > it? Could just be borrowing trouble. : > : > DJ : : The Sketch feature replaces the Sketched Datum Curve. It is similar, : but has a few important differences. First, it autohides after you : use it to create a feature. Also, it disappears from the model tree : after you create a feature with it so you don't have a cluttered mess : of 'Sketch' followed by 'Extrude' all the way down the tree (if you : set the tree filter correctly) - it reappears if you delete the : feature so you can re-use it. It remains associative to the feature : unlike WF 1 (this association can be broken if desired). : I'm certainly curious to see how this will work. Sounds a lot like SW's use of sketches. Now, they are also picking up on the use of curves and other datum type features. Some convergence going on? Or just randomly copying form each other.
In any case, I've used sketched curves a lot for trajectories. Will the sketch feature take over that function, as well. And, for trajectories, would you be able to mix sketches with datum curves? How about the use of sketched curves for trimming surfaces, for identifying areas to offset and any of their other uses, will these new sketches function as a substitute here, too?
David Janes
Reply to
David Janes
the program doesn't have to run on Solaris. There is no reason for the license server and the client to be on the same platform at all. As long as they are networked, no problems whatsoever. Get the license for WF-2 and run the license server on Plan 9, the program on BeOS if you like,
Okay, that was extreme - PTC doesn't make BeOS binaries & FlexLM probbaly doesn't run on Plan 9, but FlexLM certainly does run on Solaris while WF runs on Windows or Linux, sooooo ....
(Boy do I wish they'd come out with a Mac version so i could buy a decent notebook :-(
Reply to
hamei
Thanks - I realize this...although it's probably good to get a reminder... The way we have this chunk of the world set up it has always been a bit easier to be on our Sun servers. That might be changing.
Oooo a Mac version!! Hey the amount of memory addressable by MacOS isn't limited to 2G right? And it IS in Windows right?? Probably the PTC/Sun relations would be strained here... of course I thought that would happen with the Linix version, but now I see Sun sells Linux!!
-meld
hamei wrote:
Reply to
meld_b
do you run the Pro on your Suns ? Creator 3D ? How do you like it ? I've been looking at them ... plenty in love with SGI but a good Octane cpu costs more than my car, while you can get older Sun stuff for pennies. HP is the obvious choice but older Sun workstations are CHEAP!
I know ... I can live without a Mac desktop - too gooey for me - but it'd be real nice to get something decent in a laptop. Linux no longer counts ... don't know what happened to open source but now it's all about "th33mz" instead of quality programming. Fricking Thunderbird defaults to html email, for god's sake :-(
back to the thread topic to please David :-) - how does WF-II compare in cpu requirements for daily use ? (I've just messed with v-One a little on Intel.) Grafix and memory I'm fine, but cpu is somewhat lacking here.
Reply to
hamei
No... I left that world a while ago. Just licensing is left on Sun.
I like the Mac OSX desktop a lot...It's nice to have someone adding to the desktop functionality. OK, so it's not all new, but this Panther stuff makes life on a tiny screen bearable. But you're right that is pretty off topic.
Sadly, I've got no idea, since I haven't tried it. But I'm not sure I'm going to be able to tell CPU wise. CPU and Memory are fine on my machine, but graphics isn't great. After about 5-6 windows are opened things go weird and I have to shut some windows.
-meld
Reply to
meld_b
There is one remarkable thing: Every time a new release of pro has been released, we are very ancious about new and improved things. And every time they manage to make it the worst release ever!
One example. Since the "new" hole feature in R18 (or maybe 19), we (in the Netherlands, Europe) are waiting for proper DIN dimensioning this hole feature for our European style drawings. Now it's WF2 and they have placed the hole feature in the dashboard (a shitty thing btw, compared to the Solid Works equivalent), but it's still not DIN !!! It's not even an option. Fellas of PTC, look at Solid Works: It works! Ok, SW is lousy with assy's, but the features in SW are much much easier to handle. In SW the hole feature works great!
And then there is programming... I rest my case.
Gerard
Reply to
The NET
This is a big problem for me too. I've been complaining about the incomplete hole feature for a long time. How hard would it be to fix that? Instead we get stupid warp features or fill patterns but still can't place a simple standard hole with a parametric note.
In Pro/E one needs to use UDFs or struggle with this hole feature, and then you still don't get a parametric note. You have to manual add a note or use a library of predefined notes in your drawings with no guarantees that dimensions match.
SolidWorks holes are great (except you cannot redefine the placement surface).
Regards,
Reply to
Anonymous
: "Jeff Howard" wrote : ................................... : > > Any person who has an active PTC maintenance : > > contract can access the new Enhancement Process : > > system to submit and track enhancements : ................................... : > Ooops, I guess this leaves me out, : > no enhancement requests from moi. : ................................... : : Well, guess you can just keep voicing them and : maybe someone else that feels strongly enough : about similar issues will take the time to actually : submit the request. 8~) : : I think they should make pending and progress : stats available to the public at large, myself, but : it's such a cutthroat business that's probably not : really a viable way to do things. : I don't suppose SolidWorks or Catia would have thought of setting up some of their own people with a Pro/e license and maintenance so that they could get a peak at all the insider stuff. Probably never thought of getting some of their people hired on inside of PTC to spy. I don't want to give them any ideas, but when the crudest "industrial espionage" is nearly undetectable, it makes their restrictions on "public" (i.e. broadest user) access as useful for protecting company secrets as a screen door on a submarine.
What of the argument that maintenance contributes to income, helps their bottom line? Their annual report says something a little different. While the last I could find online was 2001, I don't expect the proportions to have changed. In it they report that they make the most money from selling licenced copies of the software, first because it was, for many years, the biggest part of their income and second, CODB on this income is less than 1%. Maintenance, however, costs over 30% and as sales dropped, maintenance increased as a percentage of income. So, not only did their income drop in the three years reviewed, but the service part of the income disproportionately pulled down their profits, to the point where it's caused them to lose money.
Thus, perhaps, a slightly more open approach, including a browser inside Wildfire that takes you straight to a new "Community" area of ptc.com which includes a lot of support type stuff (with or without maintenance). General, "public" access to this kind of help, this easily accessible, is unprecedented and most atypical of the everythings-a-secret, circles within circles corporate culture of PTC's past. Only thing I can figure is that it's an attempt to cut down on the overhead of providing service. In light of this, I was expecting more openness in the enhancement process. I think the formal structure stands in the way. This creates the high overhead and enforces restriction. But, yes, we should keep talking about making enhancements and hope someone picks up on them who has a voice. In that spirit, I'd add my voice to the thousands of others who've suggested adding a polygon tool to sketcher.
David Janes
Reply to
David Janes

Site Timeline

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.