Wildfire 2: Any reactions?

David Janes wrote:
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

 

: David Janes wrote:
: 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

 

: Oh... I did notice that it used to be difficult

http://www.ptc.com/support/support.htm

about 2/3 of the way down the page.

 

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

 

: > : 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.
:
: http://www.ptc.com/support/support.htm
:
: 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

 

....................................

....................................

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.

===================================

 

According to this TPI, this is intended functionality:

http://www.ptc.com/cs/tpi/113258.htm

"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

 

: > 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

 

: Jeff Howard wrote:
: >>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:
:
: http://www.ptc.com/cs/tpi/113258.htm
:
: "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

 

...... the "dims won't stay locked"
-------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------

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~)

======================

 

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

 

I thought that PTC used to have a TPI on this, saying it would be

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
-Meld

 

: > : > : > 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

 

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 :-(

 

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

 

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.

 

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

 

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

 

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,

 

: ...................................
: > > 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