Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
John Burrill
Is this you? Claim Profile »
1 year ago
in All About SolidWorks Tags Plus 2 Quick Ways To Add Them on SolidSmack
No Damnit, no!
It's another piece of arbitrary information that has to be maintained. Tell me, if you copy the IB256 assembly to create the IB297 assembly using Solidworks explorer, is anything besides my tired widdle typing finger going to change the tag that say's PPAP item to Non-PPAP item? Is anything besides my admittedly spotty memory going to prompt me to change the tag definition? Is anyone besides me-who slaved and agonized and and ran up a bunch of unbillable hours implementing tags going to use the things?
Can I link a tag to a dimension value, a folder name, a revision attribute. Can I make a tag say 'blue' instead of 'red' when I change the part colour to one of my hundreds of unnamed, yet vastly re-usable color swatches?
Crap, it's like having another line on your 1040 that only says 'additional information here'.
No, I say, No, until Solidworks integrates the technology into it's core data structure and allows it's internal information to propogate to these input points, I think they're less useful than a postit note. I refuse to indulge another pointless populating control when I still can't get an annotation with a drawing view scale or a file extension.
I have said horrible things, here.
It's another piece of arbitrary information that has to be maintained. Tell me, if you copy the IB256 assembly to create the IB297 assembly using Solidworks explorer, is anything besides my tired widdle typing finger going to change the tag that say's PPAP item to Non-PPAP item? Is anything besides my admittedly spotty memory going to prompt me to change the tag definition? Is anyone besides me-who slaved and agonized and and ran up a bunch of unbillable hours implementing tags going to use the things?
Can I link a tag to a dimension value, a folder name, a revision attribute. Can I make a tag say 'blue' instead of 'red' when I change the part colour to one of my hundreds of unnamed, yet vastly re-usable color swatches?
Crap, it's like having another line on your 1040 that only says 'additional information here'.
No, I say, No, until Solidworks integrates the technology into it's core data structure and allows it's internal information to propogate to these input points, I think they're less useful than a postit note. I refuse to indulge another pointless populating control when I still can't get an annotation with a drawing view scale or a file extension.
I have said horrible things, here.
1 year ago
in My Top 10 SolidWorks Wish List on SolidSmack
Native format attachments: Insert a Pro-E model into a Solidworks assembly without having to translate it. I'd be tickled pink if I could get the brep, material and meta data. I don't need the features. As long as it updates when it's supposed to, I'm jolly. Yeah, OK, no hole series or propogated assembly cuts unless.
Demand linking: You know how when you insert a block into a part or a model, or a library feature, you can populate a checkbox and have it link to an external file? Why can't you do that wit model components? Virtual components is getting there, but once you save the part externally there's no going back. I think this would solve the portablity problem. This was kind of what they were going for with detached drawings, excepting that you couldn't open and edit the model.
Remove the distinction between multi-body parts and assemlbies. It's barely there right now. You can pull a BOM from a weldment, you can pull a wire-list from a route, you can save a body as a seperate part, you can insert a part into another part. You can store a new part in an assembly (as long as you don't save it while you're editing it.) So really, what difference-apart from semantics-is there between a part and an assembly? It's all a list of mutual exclusions. Fine, get rid of the exclusions and have one file extension: sldmdl.
Assembly driven parameter support: This is for your spring that needs to stretch. Basically, any parameter or dimension would have a checkbox to allow an assembly to override it. So you model your helix in it's free state and then take the pitch/height parameter and check 'allow assembly to override' (we won't call it adaptivity for obvious reasons) Insert the spring into an assembly, position and mate it as you normally and when you drag a non-fixed component pitch value changes and the spring expands or collapses Maybe allow a range of values the assembly could solve. This could also be useful for crimping terminals
Assembly driven deforms: have the ability to apply body modifiers at the assembly level-stuff like flex, deform, freeform
OK, I've ranted enough
Demand linking: You know how when you insert a block into a part or a model, or a library feature, you can populate a checkbox and have it link to an external file? Why can't you do that wit model components? Virtual components is getting there, but once you save the part externally there's no going back. I think this would solve the portablity problem. This was kind of what they were going for with detached drawings, excepting that you couldn't open and edit the model.
Remove the distinction between multi-body parts and assemlbies. It's barely there right now. You can pull a BOM from a weldment, you can pull a wire-list from a route, you can save a body as a seperate part, you can insert a part into another part. You can store a new part in an assembly (as long as you don't save it while you're editing it.) So really, what difference-apart from semantics-is there between a part and an assembly? It's all a list of mutual exclusions. Fine, get rid of the exclusions and have one file extension: sldmdl.
Assembly driven parameter support: This is for your spring that needs to stretch. Basically, any parameter or dimension would have a checkbox to allow an assembly to override it. So you model your helix in it's free state and then take the pitch/height parameter and check 'allow assembly to override' (we won't call it adaptivity for obvious reasons) Insert the spring into an assembly, position and mate it as you normally and when you drag a non-fixed component pitch value changes and the spring expands or collapses Maybe allow a range of values the assembly could solve. This could also be useful for crimping terminals
Assembly driven deforms: have the ability to apply body modifiers at the assembly level-stuff like flex, deform, freeform
OK, I've ranted enough
1 year ago
in 6 Major Factors Before Upgrading to Vista and SolidWorks 2008 on SolidSmack
Does anyone know if the DRM-lowest-rating-standard issue is still there? To summarize, there was some kvetching over Vista (mainly voiced by ATI) that it's certified driver requirements in concert with the DRM policy of degrading output to video and audio devices based on the contents of the harddrive. One concern was that having a rights-managed movie on your harddisk would automatically degrade the output of the video card to 648x480 or 256 colors or something horrendous like that.
All of this was going around while Vista was still in pre-release. Are those concerns still valid?
All of this was going around while Vista was still in pre-release. Are those concerns still valid?
