SolidWorks World 2007 - Call for Papers

I am never likely to talk to one being 6000km or more away. I get my impressions from the info available on the outside and it isn't inspiring. There may well be applied employees in there somewhere but they are well and truly cloaked by sales and marketing bs and legal advisors.. Sorry your recommendation doesn't reassure me :o)

It is pretty bloody obvious what the thrust of Ed's content was matt. I appreciate his presentation and I am sure others do as well. Why you need to be a clingon on the starboard bow escapes me. :o)

Oops, set up this PC a month or so back and forgot to filter this idiot.

Why would anyone take Mr Banquer seriously when he uses terms like "SaladWorks", I don't know.

John Layne

Nope.

People use Rhino because after all these years SaladWorks still can't get the job done in an efficient manner... no matter how many SaladWorks seminars people take / sit through.

Please let me know who makes a tutorial for SaladWork like is shown in the following link:

Do you really think SaladWorks can produce this kind of model in an efficient manner?

Obviously I don't think SaladWorks can.

Obviously I think SaladWorks fails in many areas besides this one.

Jon Banquer Phoenix, Arizona

"Wilkinsons "Inside SW" of yore was the great inspiration that got me into really examining what goes on inside SW."

Hear, Hear! Great session, and please read the end if you want more great sessions like that (you can skip the middle of this post if you want)

I saw Jim presentation in New Orleans, and I see Jims session as a model of what a SWx World presentation ought to be (along with Keith Pedersons stuff. Everything I do tries in some way to meet those two standards, and if I fall short its my own damn fault. My comparison of shelling problems to lawn mowing in CSV-partII was a direct tribute to Keith - the simile is true, understandable, and (I hope) helps people analyze problems in an attempt to parallel his GREAT comparison to C1 and C2 tangecy to driving a car through an intersection).

"Push-the-button demos" aren't nearly as good to my ears as "you should push this button instead of another because of X background process that you might not know about and here's why" demos (like Wilkenson's presentation of yore). Are they as easy to embrace? No (just take a look at the run-on sentence I had to write to introduce the concept - when you go into background processes it feels like a run-on sentence and you lose people). However, they are the sorts of presentations that allow folks to really UNDERSTAND how SWx works, and come up with their own solutions when they get home. The cliche' is" If you give a man a fish...if you teach a man to fish..."

Dammit, teach me how to fish already.

Is Richard Doyle listening? Paul brings up a GREAT standard for SWx World. But, of course, Richard is likely reading this... he's a good egg, and its a good credit to Swx for hiring him BECAUSE he's from the outside. Becaus of some wierd twists of fate, I have contact with and have worked with a lot of SWx employees, and (except for a few who I won't mention - due to a lesson I recently learned through constructive criticisism:) ) they gorge on divergent views, evaluate them critically, and change their course right away when they learn they could do things better in another way. And I DO mean right away - I have presonally had things changed in the next week if I made a compelling, broad-based case for it (and I make sure its not just for me, but applies to experience with 80+ clients, numerous contacts, and the folks in the user groups I have attended). However, I have weird access that I feel uncomfortable about (alpha tester and all) because not everybody gets the same shake. With that kind of access comes responsibility, and I try real hard not to get selfish (sure there's stuff I would like, but I keep Mum in case they consider that equally important to the stuff I see that numerous people are yearning for).

That was my little detour to explain that, even though you might not see evidence of it, SWx actually pays attention. You may doubt it, but I can personally vouch that its true.

Now, back to topic:

TO THE END_____________________________________________________

Bottom line for this thread - PLEASE say whether you prioritise tips and tricks (give a man a fish) or would rather a focus on tips/tricks/strategies with background understanding of why you would do one thing over the other in a given situation (teach a man to fish).

Because SWx is going to get a number of papers and have to decide what to allow into the show based on what YOU want. If all they hear is 'more advanced stuff' or 'tips and tricks', that is what they are going to respond to becasue they really are trying to work to make you happy. And if that's what you want, that's totally cool - ask for want you want and you will get it (in the context of SWx World - please consider starting another thread if you want to do software 'enhancement requests'). I personally want more 'teach the man to fish' stuff becasue that's where I feel my greatest personal and professional growth. But I am just one in a sea of somewhere north of a hundred-thousand potential attendees. Let Richard know what you want more of, and (because i know what a great guy he really is) he will listen when it comes time to evaluating the papers to select the final agenda.

Please take this opportunity to speak up, even you lurkers

-it could matter Ed

Why? So, one of us can show you some hints in how to use SW or develop a similar demo as James shows??

Native SW does not offer freeform modeling or a direct nurbs manipulation/workflow as James is showing. But, you or anyone can buy one of the add-on's to do this.

Rhino is a very good tool,... are you finally realizing it is a useful tool or finally applying yourself?

..

Neil, Thank you.

Since matt, always a great guy with lots to add, seems to have gotten lost on a tangent, and an often unfortunately personal tangent devoid of ideas (hey, where the heck does that 'my inability to accept criticism' thing come from when I was asking for criticism, over and over again in this DOCUMENTED thread???(look it up) And I am actually dying to find out how he fits in that conclusion with my DOCUMENTED acceptance and invitation of criticism, my response to criticism, and comittment to change my ways in this thread? This is almost like dealing with my ex-wife, where she would make shit up and try to believe it even though contrary facts were in print. I wish I could laugh at it, but its hard to get passed being a little peeved when someone of his gravitas writes stuff contrary to hard-written facts realtng to criticism).

But let's be fair - maybe he's on to something about the ID/Engineering collaboration model that we can all gain from, and that would help everyone out. Or maybe there's a blind spot in my vision that I can gain from (matt, notice self-doubt... maybe attempt to understand how to incorporate that into your own life... be a better person).

So, back to the PUBLIC forum: All I ask from the rest of everyone EXCEPT matt is the following:

If ANYTHING I ever presented at any SWx World is innacuate or flat out wrong please email me (eeaton - at - dimontegroup, and you know the rest if it ends with a dot com) or post to this forum under a new thread 'wrath of scotty is bad because...' (my preference, let's keep it open) and I will correct it... with the understanding that the Kirk thing was an introductory joke that was thrown away for the rest of the presentation (you all got that, right?).

That has always been my policy - open critique of anything I write about SWx because open critique of ideas is the only way we ALL learn. ALWAYS. Thats one of the best things about this forum, and why I have participated here for so many years!

Also, just for the record, contrary to matts last post, I have never presented myself as an 'authority' (matts words, definately never mine

- not once have I ever claimed 'authority' when it comes to SWx, and every time someone tried to foist that on me I backed away from it. I'm just a user who has some ideas to share) For example, at every SWx World or user group session I give, I tell people who I am and what kind of work I do so they can evaluate my credentials and decide if I am even worth listening to. Then, at some point during the presentation, I encourage the audience to test out everything I say to be sure its true and to evaluate with the kind of work they (the people in the audience) do. THAT'S IT. Where matt came up with that 'setting yourslef up as an authority' thing, I don't know... and after reading one untrue and out-of-line thing after another, I've gotten to the point where I can no longer understand this guy that I used to respect. But thats between me and him (matt, what gives?), and is of no informative value to the user base, so...

PROPOSAL FOR NEW THREAD....

If ID and Engineering collaboration is an interesting and maybe controversial topic, and I suspect it is, lets start a brand new thread so we can hash it out there. I will contribute, but I don't want to start the thread because it would just be more of me and matt, and how boring would that be? He, according to his posts, apparently thinks I work in a 'rarefied' little corner of the world, and if anyone was interested I would like to discuss that, talk about what the real world is really like, and, let's face it, who knows which way the ball will drop (plus I know I have absolutely nothing to fear here,,, reserve snide comment because I am trying to show just a sliver of class, though its pretty hard after a few days of trying to softpeddle against some pretty weird statements).

Any of you who think its something important to talk about, just start a new thread. That would be a terrific forum (outside of the SWx world call for papers thread) to hash out this topic.... it would be useful for anyone for instance, who can't get the point that 80% of ID concepts are thrown out becasue they don't seem to understand that both design and Engineering repsond to outside forces - marketing, sales, vagaries of management, Starfleet comand, etc.

It could be interesting, Ed

Ed,

Here's the deal. This really started out being about what is appropriate and what is not appropriate in a SWW presentation. I contend that criticising people by name from the stage is over the line. You don't recognize that what you did was at all unseemly. So be it. This would better be handled in an email, but your comments were public, so I deal with it in that way.

But it doesn't stop at Mark Biasotti. I could give a half dozen examples off the top of my head where you take other people's work and use it as a bad example, not limited to the Scotty presentation. Or take a direct quote from someone, insert a NOT and imply that other people have it all wrong. Or invent a cute phrase over someone elses model such as "This is what I call the 'I-don't-give-a-shit' technique". Training parts, my parts, direct quotes from me, Mark's parts, those are only the things I recognize, I'm sure there are several others represented...

Bashing a technique is one thing. I do enough of that, but I would just ask that you don't have to detract from what other people do to put your ideas forward. We're not here as competing researchers, we're all trying to help one another and we don't get much reward for what we do.

And now you're casting aspersions on two more phrases I mentioned, being "more advanced stuff" and "tips and tricks". I just don't get it, Ed. You can't get a seat in Phil Sluder's Tips and Tricks presentations, and my tips presentation this year was standing room only too. Tips presentations are valid, useful, and very popular. What pleasure or use do you find in slamming what guys like Phil have been doing for a long time?

In your next SWW presentation, I would like to see you put aside the criticism, or at least remove the personal references. If you show bad examples, make them your own. And try to accept that there are points of view that don't agree with yours which are entirely valid.

Matt

"I know what I am talking about and despise any inference to the contrary"

"please lay off the slams on my professional perspective" (there were no slams)

" I will not accept without response any slight on my professionalism or experience"

For not presenting yourself as an authority, you've spent a fair amount of typing in the past couple of days trying to convince someone of just that, with the "decade of experience" bit and all.

I think if you have a specific gripe/grudge about what was said or implied at SWW matt you should contact Ed in pm.Honestly I am not interested in reading your petty slagging and sniping over 'professionalism'. Let those other folks Ed apparently slighted speak for themselves if it is an issue for them. Personally I think you have a bit of envy and arrogance mixed in there leaking out as passive aggression but it is not for me to say is it :o) I like to see Ed's presentations and this years is no different.

You wrote - " Tips presentations are valid, useful, and very popular. What pleasure or use do you find in slamming what guys like Phil have been doing for a long time"

On tips and tricks, I wrote: "And if that's what you want, that's totally cool"

It looks to me like we agree - if that's what folks want, they should get it. No big deal there. I like something different and made a case for why I like it, but also URGED people with different views to go ahead and make themselves heard. SWx world is for everyone - tell Richard what you like and he will listen.

You wrote: "I do enough of that, but I would just ask that you don't have to detract from what other people do to put your ideas forward."

I wrote several days ago: "Those are the only two things I can think about that could be seen as potshots. But i hear you - correct the misconceptions, communicate that it is my experience that things go better with the approach I suggest, AND GO HOME AND TEST IT to find their own conclusions, all without mentioning someone else by name

Again, the record shows that I agreed.

Seems simple to me.

Me, too! Me, too!

Jerry Steiger Tripod Data Systems "take the garbage out, dear"