Concrete Documentation Suggestions

You STILL think SolidWorks is a CAM program !!!!
Now, about those free demos ... LOL ...

 

Well if Matt had any doubt about you Jon, your clueless rant settled
it.

http://blog.novedge.com/2007/07/an-interview-wi.html

quote from the author of the blog you link to in your signature;

[
Jon didn't respect our agreement, posting comments under fake names.
Jon's authentic and fake comments are all posted from the same IP
address, 72.199.251.224. I can now see that my trust in Jon was
misplaced.
]

Tom

 

Wow, another benchmark set by the ranting, raving, lunatic who has no
idea how to even use the software he's speaking about.

 

well matt was generous enough to publish another ALF entry so as a
bonus here is another few thoughts for him re help.
I didnt think this would fit on his blog comment

At 600,000 users SW has well and truly arrived in its own right so
forget about catering to Autodesk 2d laggards
It doesnt actually help them make a transition anyway.They need to
learn to think SW style from the outset.
Cleanse the notes of redundant references and terminology.
If absolutely necessary put in a chapter recounting the history and
evolution of engineering drawing with a nod to Autodesk

Just as you can't achieve everything relying on intuition you can't
expect to describe everything with simplicity.
Without bogging in thesis detail you need to describe the tool in
entirety and in relation to the others available.
I can't think of any better recipe for content than everyones old
friends WHO,WHAT,WHERE,HOW,WHEN,WHY,IF.
To say "this is a spline try pulling on the handle to see the effect"
misses the requirement completely.
Explain a spline, talk about CV's ,knots, continuity and the effects,
shortcomings and merits and what happens to curvature combs etc.
Show how me to use it best to achieve a common real task.
Give me sufficient hints so I can confidently tackle something
difficult.
Tell me if there is a better tool for the situation or an alternative
way of getting there.
Point out the underlying attributes so I can plan or anticpate the
outcome of extreme missions
Give me a heads up if what i'm doing doesnt migrate to other programs
or formats well...
its all sensible stuff if you actually want to help people use what
they invested in

Engineers are not stupid people.Dont underestimate them. They buy this
program to achieve intelligent things and they expect they will get
the full goods on it out of the box. They want to be informed about
exactly what their tool is capable of or not.
Clarity and directness are not the same as removing big words and
keeping sentences short.
If its well indexed and has links there is not such a need to keep it
concise esp in electronic form cos it doesnt matter if there are 3000
pages
What worked well in the circumstances of early SW and with a printed
manual in mind may not be the best style to perpetuate.
I find some documents very hard to read and take in in PDF form on a
screen.
Think about how the user has to learn the content.
Sitting down under a tree with a book isnt the same experience as
doing a relational search and following links,seeing a short demo or
listening to a mp3 caption.
In the future electronic paper may allow you to sit again under the
tree but for now you are tied to a pc screen so you may as well have a
bonafide multimedia approach from go not an adapted one.
Actually I have confidence that SW guys given an opportunity to
innovate can come up with something just as effective today as the
original wired manual was in its day.
Really the time has come to cast off old technology and use the new to
even better complete effect.
Although it has taken a while to get to the point where SW recognise
the existing doesnt work as well as it needs to
or perhaps they imagined it did this is an opportunity to empower
users as never before with the potential already at their fingertips
and they should embrace it enthusiastically.
Please don't forget to check out your proposal with users before you
actually commit to it though ;o)

I thank you please leave a tip in the case by the door...

 

<GAK>

They were late to the game.
If you want to do history (not a bad idea) start with
Dr. Hanratty, 3D systems of various sorts that grew
out of his work & APT (which his work sort of grew
out of).

 

Explain the limits imposed on things by *being* a history-based
parametric solids modeler.

And someone explain why you cannot unfold anything but
developable surfaces. Someone is ALWAYS trying!!!

 

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=190207

Haywood JaBlowme

 

Pehaps Franco will add the comments back <VBG>.

 

I was hoping he'd interview you next. Perhaps you fellas could chit chat
about two-axis lathe programming and your C-CRAP methodology.

 

You really should keep up with things.

BTW, I think Franco sells shrink-wraped graphics software.

 

Dan,

http://www.gibbscam.com/news_events/press_releases/2007/pr_070626.shtml

Thought this might interest you. Seems like they are trying for a non-
cad oriented approach (The bottom screen appears to be the add-in to
Gibbs)

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA
http://blog.novedge.com/2007/07/an-interview-wi.html

 

Well he did mention you in his "interview".

Slap that on your resume.

 

Thanks for the thought. I looked into it a couple of years ago, maybe I'll
take another look.

Why they wasted their time working with Tornos on a Deco programming system
is beyond me. Their US sales are next to nothing and based on their recent
moves I'll be very surprised if they get any better.

Maybe they want to sell more systems in Switzerland?

 

You do have such a knack for being utterly clueless.

Keep up the good work.

 

Not of interest, sorry.

Let's see jb's <VBG>.

 

Perhaps such things actually work?

Probably expanding capabilities & it's a start with a market.

So they developed it abroad it looks like.

Or abroad.

 

I was talking about Tornos. Sheesh, if you only had the slightest clue...

Well if they want more sales here, they picked the wrong tree to start
baking up.

 

I should add that it's not the CAD part that I have a problem with, it's
the whole "can't generate a complete working program" thing.