TOO MANY CLICKS
TOO MANY CLICKS
(OP)
It seems in UG the click count is going up on simple tasks a few examples:
Reposition component if I want to copy it I have 2 clicks (one to open the pull down and once to click copy) if i go to move object i can decide move or copy with a single click. Same function doubles the click count.
Same thing in the most used box in ug....point dialog box....2 clicks 2 get absolute / wcs / wcs of current part. Old ug had it in one click with no pull-down.
Windows removed most of the pull-down menus and went to single click buttons for all of their commonly used tasks like 10-15 years ago. Why is ug using pull-down instead of buttons?
Many many more examples can be given anyone else have a problem with pull-downs in ug?
I know it wont be in the next release of ug but i would really really consider removing ALL pull-downs in commonly used functions.
Thanks
Future carpel tunnel patient!
Reposition component if I want to copy it I have 2 clicks (one to open the pull down and once to click copy) if i go to move object i can decide move or copy with a single click. Same function doubles the click count.
Same thing in the most used box in ug....point dialog box....2 clicks 2 get absolute / wcs / wcs of current part. Old ug had it in one click with no pull-down.
Windows removed most of the pull-down menus and went to single click buttons for all of their commonly used tasks like 10-15 years ago. Why is ug using pull-down instead of buttons?
Many many more examples can be given anyone else have a problem with pull-downs in ug?
I know it wont be in the next release of ug but i would really really consider removing ALL pull-downs in commonly used functions.
Thanks
Future carpel tunnel patient!





RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
Also, there should be a button for just about everything. If you cannot find it then you need to toggled it on.
The pull-downs are there for those who like them, not as the primary way to execute something.
Roles could also be an issue here, and you need to be utilizing the one that suits you best.
What version of NX are you on?
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
Who likes pulldowns for the wcs in the point box? Anyone??? Not only 2 clicks but I have to move my mouse to get what I want. Remember nx3? With one click & no extra movements I could decide abs. or current wsc in a flash.
If I understand Jerry I should be making a button for absolute wcs when I go into the point box? Another for the current wcs? This is inside a ug function that went from the best productivity (NX3) to the worst (pulldowns). Common knowledge is: Clicks = time/productivity = $. Am I wrong?
I currently have 100-120 of my own buttons for time saving tasks. Pulldowns are for people that like to click twice as much in a day. I am talking about the puldowns within ug commands not the ones at the top of your screen. I use those very rarely as I have mostly buttons to save time & clicks!
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
This is an answer but a poor one. Your space saving rule of 2 / 3 needs to be reconsidered for the commonly used areas.
Wcs Absolute Abs work part
They can be fit all in one line with a "bullet" click...disagree?
New rule: if we can fit them we will at least try, not wash it away on a 2/3 rule. This is very counterproductive on the daily use of ug, which needs to be considered more!!
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
To a designer, the glass is twice as hard to use….lol
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
Do you see where the 2/3 rule is a BAD rule?
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
And before you start offering examples where we COULD have used better terminology to have at least changed some of the THREE option 'pulldowns', please keep THIS in mind. NX currently can be run using TEN different languages (this goes up to 12 with NX 10.0), some of which are not as 'compact' as is English (ever look at an 'English to German' dictionary for example?). We have to have a single set of dialog designs which will be suitable for whatever language was set when NX was launched. We do NOT have the option of using different rules for dialog layouts using a different languages. We have only one set of code and where the words used are being provided for WHILE NX is running. In other words, there is NO English ONLY version of NX just like there is NO Germany only or Spanish ONLY version or for that matter, any other unique vesions. Rather there is ONLY a single version of NX where the words used in the dialogs and the UI are read from a 'translation' file WHILE NX IS ACTUALLY RUNNING. Even the English version of NX is utilizing this 'translation on-the-fly' scheme (actually more of a 'text substitution on-the-fly' scheme as all of the text strings are pre-defined, just that they're being read from different look-up files as NX is running).
Anyway, I hope you see that this is not as simple an issue as it might seem at first glance.
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
How long have you been on NX?
What kind of training did you get for NX?
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
Very valid points on the English / German translations. And therefore the room holds water until you look at the point dialog box and the copy / move box as previously noted. The point box is the most used box in all of ug correct? All kinds of room no matter what language, that is all I am saying. You need to stay away from the 2/3 rule as a whole and make it as a “do we have room rule”. You must agree the radio buttons are much more efficient than the pulldowns on my end of the game.
Jerry,
I think almost 16 years on ug & a few years prior using it sparingly to cut sections & measure things in a 3-d world. When we took classes it didn’t take long to know more than the prof. (16 yrs ago) Ug used to be very picky back then. It would work one day & you could do the same thing the next day & ug wouldn’t like it.
We don’t keep parameterized solids on anything & pretty much stick to making 1-out dumb solid tooling.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
In the old days we allowed the individual developers to create whatever style of dialogs that they liked and we ended-up with a product that looked like ir was 'designed' by 500 people, which in essence it was.
However, starting with NX 5.0 we created a toolkit based on what we called the 'Lego Block' approach, where a dialog is broken up into sections, each designed for a specific type of task or purpose, and these would be stacked on top of each other, like a stack of 'Lego blocks'. Each 'block' was designed based on it doing one simple task, such as pick a 'Type/Mode' from a drop-down or list of Icons, select something with the cursor, enter some text, enter a parameter, show a list of ON/OFF toggles, show two mutually exclusive options (i.e. 'radio buttons'), show a 'drop-down' of three or more options, etc. They were designed INDEPENDENT of where they might used so as to assure consistency from one function to the next.
For too manmy years we were accused of being inconsistent and making nearly identical functions totally different in both appearance and behavior simply because each developer was on his own when it came to the user interface. If you've been using UG/NX for 16 years then you've certainly experienced what I mean here. This meant that we had to train people or they had to learn on their on with separate efforts to be familiar with, even if it was a similar function, because there was little or nothing common between the UI of the functions.
Well, all that changed starting with NX 5.0 so now a developer simply chooses the appropriate 'block', following a style-guide of course, but one that's a lot easier to adhere to when all the pieces and parts have been pre-engineered for you, based on what he needs the user to do.
So for example, when the guy responsible for the Point function needed to have a 'block' where the user could choose from one of three options, that is the block that he got, the one with the 'pulldown'. That's the rules and the size of the dialog played no role in that choice. If it had, this could and would lead to eventual inconsistencies again creeping back into the User Interface.
I'm sorry, but consistency is virtue onto itself.
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
I understand why it is what it is. I don’t really care why. I just am suggesting the developers take a look at some of these issues. How about even a “show shortcuts” in the point dialog? That would really be more consistent than just a pulldown?
First there was a two/three rule. Then it was a space / language rule. Now it is a consistency is virtue rule? Not once in this forum have you put any concern on the click count your “rules” have passed down to the user. From a long time user standpoint…that seems pretty sad!!
Think of all the extra clicks in 10 languages every day (12 languages in nx10)…adds up in the millions?? Per day…that’s just for one point dialog box to look / function like the rest? Really??? I don’t understand why you would completely defend why it will never be any different.
Granted the “consistency is virtue “ is another reasonable reason why it is that way, that doesn’t have to be that way!
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
Note that wee are constantly tweaking the UI based on feedback both from the Beta testers when we're finishing up a new version of NX (we start NX 10.0 beta testing in May) and from user feedback after the software has been released. We also conduct focused one-on-one 'usability' sessions with the key person responsible for the 'style-guide' used to develop our UI tools. Theses sessions are held both during the beta period and at the national Users Conference. These sessions focus on exactly the sorts of things that's been commented on here including better accessibility to functions/options, mouse clicks, mouse travel (almost as important an issue), something called 'discovability', etc. So if you really would like to influence how the NX user interface is evolving, perhaps you might want to volunteer to come out to California for beta testing or attend the national conference coming up in Orlando and take advantage of the opportunity to participate in one of the these one-on-one sessions.
BTW, when you start using NX 8.5 or NX 9.0 you will see one of those recent 'tweaks' and that's something called the 'shortcut toolbar' which makes typical tasks and operations that you are most likely to perform on a selected item immediately available right at your cursor without the need to spend any EXTRA CLICKS (or wasting time moving the mouse) to get to where you could select that function. And this feature is fully customizable in that you can decide what functions are the ones that you would want to perform when you've selected some specific object or just clicked anywhere on the screen to bring up whatever functions that you might wish to launch without opening a menu or going to a toolbar/ribbon tab.
So, if you've keeping 'score', be sure to account for those places where we've REMOVED mouse clicks, OK
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
Perfect! Cal & Orlando are great solutions & I would love to put these concerns with “clicks & mouse movement” to the test. Nx3 we could really fly just doing simple tasks. We have really enjoyed most all of the new tools like direct modeling, repeat last command, & my favorite is the addition of shortcut keys. Example… In nx3 we used <alt>f…m…p…. to import a part. It was much faster than the mouse movements. While the plane box takes 3-4 times longer now to pick a point plane. We used to pick a point then change x value then <tab><tab> change the z and you had a plane in space in less than a second.
I will contact GTAC as I have in the past over the mirror display not working on solids & the “entire assy” issue resetting.
Thanks John & we will battle again…lol
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
Some other very popular cad packages cannot even do the some of the things that NX is capable of, and this from a very seasoned user of this other cad system sitting just one cube away.
I don't use NX the same in 8.5 as even 8.0, that would be a waste of effort. The same work is easier and simpler because of new features, such as choosing which areas to keep with the new unite. Previous versions required these ares to be trimmed off before or simplify after the unite to remove artifacts, and that could be a real high click count.
That's not to say there aren't more clicks to accomplish some things, but it's human nature to resist change, and what you focus on has a great deal to do with how you preceve things.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
I don’t remember saying the overall click count went up. It did on a few things but more than made up for it on others. I do like the nx8 that we are currently using. It is much faster & smarter than most of the other systems. No arguments on that stuff at all!! All i am saying is it could be even better with a few minor tweaks.
The changes are on some of the most common boxs used in all of ug. The change from 2 radio buttons to a pulldown is tremendously slower. This box is used all day every day! It has nothing to do with change or how it is perceived. I focus on quality, accuracy & speed. I am not an hourly worker who doesn’t mind the extra clicks / time. Ill race anyone…picking a box vs. picking a box, moving the mouse, and then picking again. Common sense, not resisting change!
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
That still works in NX 9.0. There has been NO changes the use of so-called 'shortcut keys' in NX.
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
Plane is way way more clicks for sure. In nx3 we used to click a point in space, change x, tab tab change z and u could trim or split a solid in a second. Now it’s go find plane 3 points, pick a point, go into point dialog box change x, go into point dialog box , change z. Or you now can go to the pulldown, go to y, find the little arrow, drag it to where you want. Any way to make a simple plane in space since nx5 is a very tiring pulldown process.
Again ill race anyone anytime doing this in nx3!!!
Do you agree even a “show shortcuts” box (one that would actually save its settings) would be an even better solution to all of the continuous pulldowns? Nx has buttons & even keystrokes for everything in the menubar (pulldowns) at the top. It always seemed funny that they saved time only to revert back to what they knew years ago took too much time.
Any more click happy functions?
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
Have you tried the inferred option?
www.nxjournaling.com
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
Could you provide a picture or perhaps even a video of what it is that you're talking about here?
Could you expand on this? I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about here or what it is that you're suggesting should be done.
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
Now let's get this clear. First, the general issue with the 'point' function, is this when you're creating a simple point using the Curve -> Point function (not a Datum Point)? And second, it appears that you wish to always (or at least most of the time) create this point using the WCS method even though you know that this will NOT create an associative point, correct? And your primary compliant is that you always have to go to the 'Reference' drop-down to set it back to 'WCS' because it's always defaulting back to 'Absolute - Work Part', correct?
OK, what if we were able to change the behavior of Curve -> Point so that once you had selected the 'WCS' reference option that it would remain set to 'WCS' until you changed it to one of the 'Absolute' options, even if you were to exit NX and start a new session. Would this help? If so, I can get this done for the next version of NX.
Now the other example you specifically mentioned, that is defining a 'Plane' thru-three points, like when performing a Trim Body operation. I assume that your complaint is again related to the idea that you prefer to work using the WCS reference method for entering the three points which now you have to open the 'Reference' drop-down THREE times to set the THREE points to WCS when entering the values. Am I correct with respect to THIS issue being one that you wished worked better?
PK, what if you only had to change the 'Reference' setting to WCS ONCE, when you defined the first point, and it would still be set to WCS when you opened the dialogs to pick the other two points, would this help? Again, if this is something that would help you, I can get that change done for the next full release of NX. For now, that's about the best that I can offer.
If these two changes will help, I can get them going. Now before you ask, at the moment there is NO way that I can get anything more complicated or comprehensive done. As I said, if you wish to open an ER requesting that either we turn some of these THREE-option drop-downs into 'radio buttons' (if it's three buttons they would have to be arranged vertically, which wouldn't be a big deal for the Point dialog so that might be a future enhancement) or that we need to come-up with some other approach that would not force users to constantly open dialog drop-downs, that's up to you.
Anyway, if you want me to get at least one or both of the issues outlined above done for the next release of NX, I need to know ASAP.
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
i will try to get you more pics/info on some of these later this week or mid next week. deadlines!!!!
i apologize for any inconvenience
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
Heck, to trim a curve you had to press the keys 11-2-2-1-2 and could do that in approximately one second.
Can you image how fast it would be when used with the speed of today's computers?
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
I could click 15 or 20 buttons and go out and have a cigarett.
I had to quit though, you took my PFK away
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
When I first started to use Unigraphics (AKA 'UG') back in 1977, there was a strict limit of 14 keystrokes that you could enter into the buffer before it would stop taking entries and if you hit that limit, you'd have to stop and wait until it cleared before you could start entering any new selections and so you had to pace yourself so as not to lose any entries. A couple of releases later they increased the buffer size since too many people were hitting it (it took me about 3 months to get to where that would happen to me, something I thought would be impossible when I first heard that you could go 14 keystrokes ahead).
For anyone who is not familiar with a PFK, which BTW was NOT used exclusively by UG as several other CAD systems used something along those lines, and in the case of some, the exact same physical button layout although each system used their own unique button designations, the hardware itself was common; 32 back-lighted buttons arranged in rows of 4, 6, 6, 6, 6, 4 buttons. If anyone is interested in a bit more of the history of the PFK and some explanation of how the UI worked back then, please go to (sorry but none of the imbedded links on this page appear to be working at the moment):
http://www.plmworld.org/index.php?mo=cm&op=ld&...
Here's an image of the UGI PFK overlay from about 1979:
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
I this entire post i am talking about the "point" box used to move a component/translate an object from point to point or any other time the "point" box comes up. (PLANE,BLOCK,LINE ECT…..) Http://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=3...
I don’t want or need any associativity to move something from point to point in space. The dropdown for wcs should be buttons not pulldowns. The default is very hard to predict. On many commands it “resets” itself after a save as well.
To save the wcs setting is really irrelevant to me. I use each one back and forth all day in the “point” box.
Now the other example you specifically mentioned, that is defining a 'plane' thru-three points, like when performing a trim body operation. I assume that your complaint is again related to the idea that you prefer to work using the wcs reference method for entering the three points which now you have to open the 'reference' drop-down three times to set the three points to wcs when entering the values. Am i correct with respect to this issue being one that you wished worked better?
In nx3 if i was useing a plane i could pick a point immediately after choosing the plane option from, lets say split solid. The “point” box would open and show me in xyz where that point was in space. I could then the change the “x” value, <enter> then change the “z” value <enter> to split a solid in the “y” plane in space. All the xyz values stayed in the “point” box. This is no longer the case for the “plane” function. Not making a plane but using one to split, trim, mirror.
There is many ways to get the same result now but i need a predetermined plane or point to do so quickly. By using the ”xc-zc” option (after several clicks) i can choose abs or wcs with buttons but without either one near my solid it is difficult to find the plane most of the time as the plane is not created on the screen.
Now if i want three points in space i have to click each time i want the “point” box open.
Quote (filbbb)
do you agree even a “show shortcuts” box (one that would actually save its settings) would be an even better solution to all of the continuous pulldowns? Nx has buttons & even keystrokes for everything in the menubar (pulldowns) at the top. It always seemed funny that they saved time only to revert back to what they knew years ago took too much time.
Could you expand on this? I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about here or what it is that you're suggesting should be done.
In most of your commands there is a “show shortcuts” option to remove the pulldowns & displays a “button” arrangement. Obviously the “show shortcuts” option would have to remain buttons to make this functional.
http://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=5...
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
I have used the inferred option. Works well if you have something to split it to. A line point or solid has to be where you want it.
Lets say i want to split something at a slight angle. Not a measured angle but a place to split a panel between surface transitions. In nx3 i could pick 2 points on the "z" plane then tab tab down to the "z" value and make it 200. A perfect plane thru 3 points. Done in 1.5 sec. Try to do it now. Really ug cannot do it without points or lines. Here’s the click count now
Go into split
Choose from the pulldown to curves and points
Click the "specify plane" button
Goto the subtype pulldown" and click 3 points
Pick a point in space
Pick a point in space
(so now we have our 2 points on the "z=0" plane)
Click on the "specify point" box all of the values are 0,0,0 i have no way of picking the same point in space so there is no way to make the desired plane in the perpendicular z.
So now we try 2 points. When this is done it is about the same clicks to get there. Pick a point and the second point selected is actually perpendicular to the desired plane. I would assume that the plane would be created thru those 2 points. Its not...it is perpendicular to the second point??? Really? Instead of it being called "2 points" it should be perpendicular points!
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
have you tried to make a plane in space? it cant be done without curves or points.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
Not true!
Just rotate the WCS into any orientation that you wish and then you can create a Datum Plane on any of the three principle planes of the WCS or for that matter, a Datum Axis along any of the three principle axis.
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
then i have to move the wcs back to my actual working wcs?
again not 3 points in space
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
try to split something in a perfect plane no matter what orientation the wcs is......this cannot be done in ug currently without these points/objects/wcs.
in nx3 it was a 1.5 second operation.
do you have nx3? try it there and notice the selection points retain themselves. see how much faster it is without ref objects.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
"it's not going to result in one line of NX code being changed. " real nice john. i cannot believe you don't see the problem here.
you really put a damper on what i thought this forum was for! if you are frustrated with my comments then think of how frustrating it is on this end to make a 1 second job turn into 15 clicks & lots of pulldowns and still not get what i could in nx3. your frustration proves that this cannot be done in ug right?
pulldowns are a problem & it is everywhere in ug now.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
So, you have NOT yet answered my question: Have you contacted GTAC with this issue and have you asked them to open a PR/ER requesting that the workflow be improved? If not, WHY NOT?
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
We are very fortunate that John is here to give valuable advice from the "corporate" side on how the sofware was intended to be used.
“Know the rules well, so you can break them effectively.”
-Dalai Lama XIV
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
I am a machine designer and in no way do I come close to taking advantage of all the power that NX8.5 has to offer. I believe it is overkill for the type of designing I do. Most of my models have straight lines and flat surfaces. However, it is what my company uses and therefore it is what I use. In terms of "more clicks" I think NX definitely requires more clicks than other CAD software packages. I do see that overall NX is way more powerful in terms of what you can draw model design, etc. However, If I'm being frank and tactful, the UI in NX has a lot of room for improvement and definitely requires far more clicks. For me, as a machine designer, I am far more efficient in Solidworks or Inventor. I'll take the pepsi challange with anybody, anyday, limited to machine design, competitor on NX and me on Inventor and I bet you my next paycheck+theirs...I WILL absolutely annihilate them.
John,
What day jobs do most of the beta testers hold? Are they daily CAD users or just occasional users or never used CAD before in their life? Are they engineers or at least drafters? I have also wondered this many times but have yet to ask. Do the coders at NX look at other software packages like, Solid works and Inventor to see how they are doing things? I only ask because it seems that you would definitely be looking at other CAD packages to see what the competition is doing...so you can keep up...right? I mean, why re-invent the wheel? However, as one who has used Solid works and Inventor it's easy to see that their user interfaces are far more intuitive. NX is way more powerful, yes! But also way less user friendly. So the question is, why are many commands in NX so cumbersome?
Here are a few examples:
(0)I'm surprised that no one in this thread mentioned how many clicks is required to change the color of an object. In other software packages (even non-cad software) There is a max of 3 clicks required. (1) Select object, (2) Open the color changing dialog box (3) Select "color" and done! In some software packages, those that use separate part and assembly files, the first click may or may not be necessary, so no we are talking only 2 clicks...Bam!...Color changed. In NX, I count 7 clicks. This seems extremely excessive to me. Am I doing something wrong? If so, please advise. Best case, NX requires 2.33 times as many clicks as others and worst case, NX requires 3.5 times as many clicks to accomplish this simple, yet often used task.
(1) What about the fact that the extremely common windows key board shortcut Ctrl+tab does not work in NX. Let's say I've got 10 files open, instead of being able to quickly toggle through them by using Ctrl+tab...tab...tab....tab until I see the one I want, I am forced to (1) remember the file name of the file that I want to show on screen and/or (2) go click crazy until I find the one I'm looking for under the "Window" drop down.
(2)Why can't I change windows while in sketch mode...more clicks here, because now I have to finish the sketch before I can change windows, go click crazy changing widows, then flip back to my original file and re-open the sketch.
(3) Why do Have to manually select modeling or drafting when switching from a model to a drawing? I'm in a drawing file, therefore I want to draft, so why not automatically swap to drafting mode. ...more clicks.
(4) Why can’t I click and drag to move parts in an assembly that are not constrained. I must use the “move” command...more clicks.
(5)Measure command could be more intuitive. It is over complicated...and requires more clicks that your competition. Other CAD packages have few measure commands vs the 10+ found in NX, that accomplish the same thing. Take a look at Inventor. It is so simple and intuitive.
(6)Why aren't the assembly constraints nested/shown under their associated parts in the Assy Navigator. In order to see what constraints are associated with a particular item, I have to select the item, expand Dependencies, then click the magnifying glass to see the associated constraints. Plus the process becomes very cumbersome of I want to delete any of the constraints because when I do the selected part magically becomes unselected and I have to start the process all over again. ...more clicks.
(7)Why are menu lists in random order instead of alphabetical forcing the user to constantly search for commands. Imagine a Library with no card catalog. Yes, I know there's a search command.
(8)Why doesn't NX use accepted rounding practices in drafting dimensions. When going from 3 to 2 places after a decimal the rounding practice isn't the norm i.e. 0.125 goes to .12 and it should go to .13. Yes...I know, there's some rounding rule... something to do with evens and odds...but it's not the norm!
(9)In drafting mode, Calling out a feature requires way too much input and thought from the user. There should be a button called “hole note” click the button, click the hole you want to call out, place the call out, 3 clicks...done! The model should NOT have to be open to use this feature. ...more clicks.
(10)Why can't I drag out on iso view from a projected view? ...more clicks.
(11)Why doesn’t the scale of my projected view change when I change the scale of my base view? ...more clicks.
(12) When adding a component to an assembly and locating by placing constraints, the part being constrained should be located based on where the user clicks on the assembly when selecting the constraints. Currently the part being constrained is located randomly, forcing the user to have to search for the part just added.
(13) Why can't I "undo" past the last save. This is absurd and ridiculously frustrating!
(14) If I implement the "save as" command while in an assembly NX replaces the file that I am "saving as" with the new file. This is also extremely frustrating.
I pulled most of these items from a list I made back when I first started using NX about 2 years ago. I was pleasantly surprised to see that, since I wrote the list, many of my issues had been resolved. It is nice to know that NX realizes they do have room for improvement and are doing something about it.
These are all issues that are, in my opinion, very counterproductive. Like filbbb said, I couldn't give a rats furry ass about why something is that way it is. All I know is that the competition is doing it more efficiently. I'm probalby going to get railed in someway, form or fashion for bragging, venting, bitching, complaining here...so bring it on. Yes...I know GTAC...right!
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
(0) I'll admit that this needs improvement but since it's based on an old dialog scheme which is slowing being replaced with the new 'Block Style' dialogs, it to will get reworked one of these days, so just bear with us.
(1) This has been addressed before:
http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=345519
http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=360794
(2) This is only a constraint when working in the Sketch 'Task' mode (BTW, this a common restriction for all 'task' modes, such as Assembly Sequencing, Studio Rendering, Realize Shape, anywhere you see a checkered-flag 'Finish Task' icon). If you use the more recently introduced 'Direct Sketch' approach, then the 'Window' option will be available while creating and editing a Sketch.
(3) That depends on what you're doing and when. For example, if the first file you open in a new session is a Drawing then NX will automatically start in Drafting. If it's a Part model, NX will start in Modeling. Also, if you use Drawing Templates to create a new Drawing of the model you're currently working on, you will automatically be placed in Drafting. However, since we are technically changing modules, that is checking in and out licenses on the license server, it was felt that simply changing from one Part file to another, say a Part Model to a Drawing file, that that would not be a good time to also be doing license management.
(4) I suspect that if we did allow this that we would be getting lots of complaints from people who were constantly moving Components in ways that they had no intensions of doing. That being said, even in NX 8.5, it only takes a single gesture, after selecting a Component, to bring up the move dialog which always defaults to 'Dynamic' so that if the Component is truly under-constrained it can be instantly moved. Just pick the Component and the 'Move' icon will be on the 'short-cut toolbar' that you see on your screen. BTW, if you go into the 'Assembly Constraints' function, even if you don't intend on assigning any constraints, you'll be free to move any Component you select that is under- or non-constrained without having to use any gesture other then simply picking and dragging your cursor.
(5) Simply go to the 'Utility' toolbar and you'll find an icon titled 'Simply Measure Drop-Down' where you will find FIVE of the most common measurement functions optimized to only one or two dialog items. These include 'Simple Distance', 'Simple Angle', 'Simple Length', 'Simple Radius' and 'Simply Diameter'. And if you don't like the 'drop-down' there's also a 'Measurement' toolbar with most of these some simplified measurement functions. Just toggle it ON.
(6) Have you looked at what you can do in terms of seeing the relationships between Components and Assembly Constraints using the 'Constraint Navigator' located on the next tab down from the 'Assembly Navigator' on the Resource Bar?
(7) Well since there are no more, or at least not nearly as many, Menu lists in NX 9.0, that's something that we'll need to wait on before hashing over, OK? But I can say this, the one place where it DOES make total sense to have an alphabetical list of ALL the commands inside of NX, that would be when you're using Customize to modify the content of the UI, for NX 10.0 there is just that, an full alphabetical listing of evey command in NX (along with a search field) when you open the Customize dialog.
(8) I'm sorry but NX DOES USE the standard engineering best practice (there's even an ASME standard covering this) when it comes to rounding numbers. I will admit that it's very likely that this was NOT how you were taught to round numbers in grade school but then I'll bet you weren't designing complex machinery in first or second grade either. And this is another topic which has been addressed on numerous occasions before:
http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=197969
(9) In NX 9.0 there is now an option when creating a 'Radial' dimension to create a 'Hole Callout' instead, so once in the dialog with this option set, you simply select the hole and place the callout, 2 gestures per instance.
(10) Projected Views are based on a 'hinge line' which is not how one goes about defining so-called 'Isometric' or pictorial views. In this situation, you would simply place another 'Base' view which could be either the default Isometric or Trimetric view orientation or once placed you could edit the orientation of that new 'Base' view using 'Orient View Tool' found on the edit view dialog.
(11) Once a base view and any projected views have been placed on a Drawing, the Drawing is tagged as to having a certain scale, so if you wish to change what in essence would be the scale of the Drawing itself, then that is what you would do, select the Drawing view itself and change the scale there. Granted, you can 'override' the scale of one or more views on a Drawing sheet, but if you wanted to change them all, then you really should be changing the scale of the Drawing and NOT the individual views themselves, even if you could have edited the base view and the projected views had changed, it would still be an incorrect workflow since when asked, the drawing scale would no longer be consistent with the scale of the views. You should only edit the scale of view for special cases and only when some but not all the views are being overridden.
(12) You do realize of course that if you've turned on the 'Positioning' 'By Constraints' Placement method that you would be given TWO 'windows', one showing the Assembly and the other showing your Component being added and that you would have been able to select the relevant references on both the Component and the Assembly to indicate where you wanted to place the Component. And there's also a preview option which will allow you to see the not-yet-fully-positioned part in the context of the Assembly while you're still defining the constraints.
(13) Trust me, YOU DO WANT TO UNDO PAST A SAVE since that save could have an impact other other people's work if they were referencing that same part (even if it was in read-only mode) and they had updated their sessions, which could incldude WAVE and other interpart references, between your Save operation and when you decided to perform your Undo and then they saved their work. This is a 'stone tablet' issue which will never change, PERIOD!
(14) Why are you surprised by this? Virtually all other Windows-based programs do the same thing. Try doing a 'Save-As' with Word or Excel. What exactly did you expect to happen?
Well, it looks like I did almost respond to every item on your list, not that I've given you help with all of them, but if you read what I've written and actually follow-up and look at the things which are relevant even with NX 8.5 and wait until NX 9.0 to further comment on some of the others, I think you will find the NX is a more usable tool than you seem be making it out to be.
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
Thanks for your response and thanks for being tolerant of my venting. Definitely some good info here. Given your responses, I am really looking forward to 9.0. I've heard that we are supposed to upgrade near the end of the year...super excited to see the ribbon toolbar.
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
(3) I would bet a few bucks on that the desired action as described by Trent5791 would be very high up on most users wishlist, IF this would be available as an option "automatically switch application depending on part yes/no" in the customer defaults it would be a decision that we could do and it would relieve Siemens from this heavy burden. :- )
Creating models and drawings is often an iterative work, not sequential, one has to jump back and fourth between the model and drawing.
Regards,
Tomas
RE: TOO MANY CLICKS
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.